According to the extended contact hypothesis, knowing that in-group members have cross-group friends improves attitudes toward this out-group. This meta-analysis covers the 20 years of research that currently exists on the extended contact hypothesis, and consists of 248 effect sizes from 115 studies. The aggregate relationship between extended contact and intergroup attitudes was r = .25, 95% confidence interval (CI) = [.22, .27], which reduced to r = .17, 95% CI = [.14, .19] after removing direct friendship's contribution; these results suggest that extended contact's hypothesized relationship to intergroup attitudes is small-to-medium and exists independently of direct friendship. This relationship was larger when extended contact was perceived versus actual, highlighting the importance of perception in extended contact. Current results on extended contact mostly resembled their direct friendship counterparts, suggesting similarity between these contact types. These unique insights about extended contact and its relationship with direct friendship should enrich and spur growth within this literature.
Previous research shows that positive contact with members of advantaged groups can undermine collective action among the disadvantaged. The present work provides the first experimental evidence of this effect and introduces a moderator which highlights the fundamental role of communication about perceptions of the legitimacy of intergroup inequality. Study 1 (N = 267) focused on the lesbian/gay/bisexual/transgendered community's struggle for same-sex marriage in California. In Study 2 (N = 81), cross-group contact was initiated between members of two universities that differ in social status. Results revealed that positive cross-group contact undermined public collective action among the disadvantaged when the advantaged-group partner described their group's advantaged position as legitimate or when they did not communicate their feelings about intergroup inequality (leaving them ambiguous). In contrast, when the advantaged-group partner clearly described the intergroup inequality as illegitimate, cross-group contact did not undermine participation in public collective action.
Objective To explore the relationship between sensory processing sensitivity (SPS) and parental subjective experience (PSE). Background SPS is a temperament trait characterized by greater sensitivity to environmental and social stimuli; no previous research has examined the relation of SPS to PSE (e.g., how much parents feel parenting is difficult or feel connected to their child). Method In the first of two online studies, mothers were unaware of the study's relation to SPS (N = 92). In the second, mothers (n = 802) and fathers (n = 65) were recruited through an SPS‐related website. SPS was assessed by the short version of the Highly Sensitive Person Scale; PSE by 27 items with three components—Parenting Difficulties, Good Coparenting Relationship, and Attunement to Child. Results Controlling or not for external stressors, negative affectivity, children's age, and socioeconomic status, high‐SPS mothers in both studies scored meaningfully higher on Parenting Difficulties and Attunement to Child; high‐SPS fathers scored higher on Attunement to Child. SPS had little association with Coparenting Relationship. Conclusion Parents high in SPS report more attunement with child, although mothers found parenting more difficult. Implications This information could aid family researchers, particularly by considering the role of adult temperament. It also suggests that interventions focused on high‐SPS parents could improve their parenting experience and hence perhaps enhance child development. Thus, this research and what may follow from it could advance both theory and practice.
scite is a Brooklyn-based organization that helps researchers better discover and understand research articles through Smart Citations–citations that display the context of the citation and describe whether the article provides supporting or contrasting evidence. scite is used by students and researchers from around the world and is funded in part by the National Science Foundation and the National Institute on Drug Abuse of the National Institutes of Health.
customersupport@researchsolutions.com
10624 S. Eastern Ave., Ste. A-614
Henderson, NV 89052, USA
This site is protected by reCAPTCHA and the Google Privacy Policy and Terms of Service apply.
Copyright © 2024 scite LLC. All rights reserved.
Made with 💙 for researchers
Part of the Research Solutions Family.