Differential relations between two types of contact and implicit and explicit racial attitudes

Abstract

Contact with outgroup members has been associated with more favourable explicit attitudes towards the outgroup in general, largely via the mediation of reduced intergroup anxiety. In addition, there is now a growing body of evidence suggesting that contact relates to automatically activated evaluations termed implicit attitudes. However, research has not fully illuminated the mechanisms through which contact with outgroup members impacts on implicit attitudes. A study investigating this issue assessed White participants" (N = 105) explicit attitudes, implicit attitudes, intergroup anxiety, and contact quantity and quality regarding Asians. Greater contact quality was related to more positive explicit attitudes, while contact quantity was associated with more positive implicit attitudes. Both effects were mediated by reduced intergroup anxiety.

Tracking Subtle Stereotypes of Children with Trisomy 21: From Facial-Feature-Based to Implicit Stereotyping

“…Consistent with this idea, the caregivers' overall IAT effect decreased significantly with years of professional experience (which ranged from 1 to 34 years), ß  = −.32, t (51) = −2.36, p <.03. This additional finding strengthens the conclusion of a few recent studies indicating a beneficial effect of intergroup contact on implicit evaluations (e.g., [33]). It offers a new reason to believe that even implicit stereotypes (not just explicit ones) can be reduced under the influence of repeated contact with the stigmatized.…”

Direct and extended intergenerational contact and young people's attitudes towards older adults

“…Finding that good quality contact is associated with less ageism but contact frequency is not is consistent with several previous intergenerational contact studies (Bousfield & Hutchison, 2010; Hutchison et al ., 2010; Schwartz & Simmons, 2001). Likewise, although there is some evidence in the contact literature of a link between contact frequency and prejudice (see Pettigrew & Tropp, 2006), good quality contact typically emerges as the stronger and more reliable predictor of reduced prejudice (e.g., Islam & Hewstone, 1993; Prestwich, Kenworthy, Wilson, & Kwan‐tat, 2008; Tawagi & Mak, 2015). Thus, the present results concur with those in the wider contact literature and suggest that frequent contact with older individuals may not be sufficient to reduce ageism; it is the perceived quality of intergenerational contact that has the greater potential to improve young people's attitudes towards older adults and therefore reduce ageism.…”

Measures of Intergroup Contact

“…An important distinction must be made between the opportunity for contact À the potential for intergroup contact to occur as a function of the degree of diversity within a given context (Wagner, Hewstone, & Machliet, 1989) À and actual direct intergroup encounters (Pettigrew & Tropp, 2006). While opportunities for contact are sometimes considered as an approximation of face-to-face intergroup contact (e.g., Prestwich, Kenworthy, Wilson, & Kwan-Tat, 2008), it cannot be assumed that because ingroup and outgroup members are in close proximity to one another that they are interacting with each other (e.g., Khmelkov & Hallinan, 1999). Any investigation into the relationship between intergroup contact and outgroup prejudice needs to include a measure of direct interactions between ingroup and outgroup members.…”