Meta-analysis of the “ironic” effects of intergroup contact.

Abstract

Growing evidence suggests that intergroup contact, psychology’s most-researched paradigm for reducing prejudice, has the “ironic” effect of reducing support for social change in disadvantaged groups. We conducted a preregistered meta-analytic test of this effect across 98 studies with 140 samples of 213,085 disadvantaged-group members. As predicted, intergroup contact was, on average, associated with less perceived injustice (r = −.07), collective action (r = −.06), and support for reparative policies (r = −.07). However, these associations were small, variable, and consistent with alternative explanations. Across outcomes, 25%–36% of studies found positive associations with intergroup contact. Moderator analyses explained about a third of the between-sample variance, showing that, at least for perceived injustice, associations with intergroup contact were most consistently negative in studies that measured direct, qualitatively positive contact among adults. We also found evidence for an alternative explanation for the apparent “ironic” effects of intergroup contact as, after controlling for the positive association of negative contact with support for social change, positive contact was no longer associated with any of the outcomes. We close by discussing the strengths and limitations of the available evidence and by highlighting open questions about the relationship between intergroup contact and support for social change in disadvantaged groups.

The socialization of perceived discrimination in ethnic minority groups.

“…In contrast, we found no evidence, across three studies, that outgroup contact predicts reduced perceived discrimination in disadvantaged minority groups. On the one hand, our findings are consistent with a recent meta-analysis showing that the associations between outgroup contact and perceived discrimination are small and variable across studies (Reimer & Sengupta, 2023). In that sense, it is perhaps unsurprising that we did not find evidence for negative associations between intergroup contact and perceived discrimination.…”

“…Positive attitudes toward the advantaged outgroup may therefore be linked to perceiving less discrimination from the advantaged outgroup. Consistent with this expectation, meta-analytic evidence indicates an association, albeit weak, between positive outgroup attitudes and lower perceived discrimination among members of disadvantaged groups (r = −.10, [−.02, −.18]; Reimer & Sengupta, 2023). Meta-analytic evidence also indicates an association between perceived discrimination and collective action (r = .31, [.23, .38]; Reimer & Sengupta, 2023;r = .35, [.30, .39]; van Zomeren et al, 2008), such that disadvantagedgroup members who perceive greater discrimination are more likely to engage in collective action.…”

“…Consistent with this expectation, meta-analytic evidence indicates an association, albeit weak, between positive outgroup attitudes and lower perceived discrimination among members of disadvantaged groups (r = −.10, [−.02, −.18]; Reimer & Sengupta, 2023). Meta-analytic evidence also indicates an association between perceived discrimination and collective action (r = .31, [.23, .38]; Reimer & Sengupta, 2023;r = .35, [.30, .39]; van Zomeren et al, 2008), such that disadvantagedgroup members who perceive greater discrimination are more likely to engage in collective action. Meta-analytic evidence thus suggests that perceived discrimination, outgroup attitudes, and collective action are related, but distinct, constructs.…”

“…Contact can take many forms, ranging from short-term interactions to long-term relationships such as friendships (MacInnis & Page-Gould, 2015), and can be positive, negative, or relatively neutral in valence (Schäfer et al, 2021). We focus specifically on direct, qualitatively positive contact and friendship, as these forms of contact have been found most consistently associated with perceived discrimination (Reimer & Sengupta, 2023).…”

Does intergroup contact foster solidarity with the disadvantaged? A longitudinal analysis across 7 years.

“…There is also inequality in the distribution of resources between groups (Sidanius & Pratto, 1999). Theorists have long questioned the usefulness of the contact paradigm for addressing the problem of inequality (Dixon et al, 2005; Reicher, 1986; Saguy et al, 2008; see also Reimer & Sengupta, 2022). Indeed, early research suggested that despite fostering greater warmth toward disadvantaged groups, contact may not make advantaged groups any more supportive of policies aimed at reducing intergroup inequality (Jackman & Crane, 1986).…”