The dynamic relationship between contact opportunities, positive and negative intergroup contact, and prejudice: A longitudinal investigation.

Abstract

We investigated the dynamics of naturally increasing contact opportunities, frequencies of positive and negative intergroup contact experiences, and prejudice toward forced migrants, in 2 three-wave longitudinal studies (Study 1, N ϭ 183, adult community sample; Study 2, N ϭ 758, nation-wide adult probability sample) in Germany using latent growth curve and parallel process analyses. We examined (research question 1) whether prejudice increases or decreases with increased contact opportunities; (research question 2) whether the rate of change in prejudice is related to the rate of change of positive/negative contact; (research question 3) whether the trajectories of change in prejudice shift as a function of the histories of prior positive/negative contact; and (research question 4) whether the rate of change in positive/negative contact frequencies depends on prior prejudice levels. Across both studies, prejudice increased with increased contact opportunities, as did positive and negative contact frequencies (ad research question 1). Whereas changes in negative contact were significantly related to changes in prejudice in both studies, no such relationships emerged as significant for positive contact (ad research question 2). We did not find any supportive evidence for our research questions 3 and 4. Overall, our results demonstrate that increased contact opportunities can contribute to increases in prejudice. Moreover, they indicate that the trajectories of negative contact and prejudice may be more substantially intertwined than the trajectories of positive contact and prejudice.

Stigma hurts: exploring employer and employee perceptions of tattoos and body piercings in Nigeria

“…This finding demonstrates the psychological implications associated with individuals who experience prejudice, which has also been echoed by Kotzur and Wagner (2020).…”

Technological and analytical advancements in intergroup contact research

“…For example, identifying time-invariant, individual factors that alter the speed at which contact is effective over time (e.g., conservatism, Bohmert & De Maris, 2015) may lead to targeted and personalized interventions aimed specifically at individuals who may benefit from additional attention. Alternatively, parallel growth suggesting that increasing trajectories of contact co-occur with decreasing trajectories of prejudice (e.g., Cernat, 2017; c.f., Kotzur & Wagner, 2020) would provide decision makers with evidence that investments into contact-based approaches should be associated with reduced prejudice over time.…”

“…Alternatively, researchers can model parallel growth , which is when two slope coefficients are covaried denoting that the rate of change in one variable is correlated with the rate of change in another. Detailed accounts of how latent growth curves can advance intergroup contact research have previously been published (Christ & Wagner, 2013), initiating a positive trajectory of applied contact research employing this analytical technique (e.g., Bohmert & De Maris, 2015; Cernat, 2017; Kotzur & Wagner, 2020; Wölfer & Hewstone, 2018; Wölfer et al., 2016).…”

“…Understanding how public opinion is swayed during public debates can have large implications for how marginalized groups are viewed by themselves and others and how that may ultimately impact social integration process, like contact. For example, the mass migration of refugees into Europe (Kotzur & Wagner, 2020), the global financial crisis (Becker et al., 2011), the legalization of same sex marriage in the United States (Fingerhut et al., 2011), and terror attacks in the UK (Abrams et al., 2017) all involve contextual shifts that may impact intergroup relations. Worthy of special mention are the informational wars associated with the 2020 presidential election in the United States and the subsequent attack on the Capitol, Brexit in the United Kingdom, and the election of Bolsonaro in Brazil, phenomena that still need to be extensively studied.…”

A revised framework for the investigation of expectation update versus maintenance in the context of expectation violations: the ViolEx 2.0 model

“…On the one hand, such expectation maintenance can be advantageous, for example, when disregarding probable noise (Hohwy, 2017), avoiding or attenuating negative affect after worse-than-expected experiences , or protecting expectations that are relevant for values, goals, and positive beliefs that individuals hold about themselves or about the world (Greve & Wentura, 2010;Pinquart & Block, 2020). On the other hand, the maintenance or even stabilization of expectations despite disconfirming evidence -in other words, not adjusting one's internal model of the world to reality -can have negative consequences for oneself (e.g., psychopathology; Craske et al, 2014;Kube et al, 2019Kube et al, , 2020 or others (e.g., stereotypes; Dort et al, 2020aDort et al, , 2020bKotzur & Wagner, 2021). Given the relevance of expectations and expectation violations for understanding human perception, affect, cognition, and behaviour across basic and applied psychological fields, interdisciplinary accounts of predictors and mechanisms expectation update versus maintenance are needed.…”