Prejudice and Contact Hypothesis

• Two sides of a conflict differ on opinions and what one wants to do. Psychologists have been trying to reduce intergroup conflict due to prevalence throughout history (Russia & Ukraine).
• Prejudice is thinking ill of others without sufficient warrant (Allport, 1954).
• We have an assumption about people without having evidence to support it. People are likely to categorise things, we remember information when it conforms with a particular stereotype. They can be self-reinforcing and cause us to selectively interpret memories.
• Intergroup hostility is easy to initiate but harder to extinguish.
• Early studies have suggested hat any type of contact where there is no competition involved will help with increasing intergroup attraction (Williams, 1947).
• Contact may not always lead to bettering of attitudes. When a group is from a lower SES status or minority, these are much more likely for the majority group to have negative opinions (Watson, 1950).
• Contact hypothesis was introduced by Allport in 1954. Suggests that to reduce prejudice, you have to provide the opportunity for contact that must be a superordinate common goal.
• Hostility between groups happens when the groups are unfamiliar and separated, feeding prejudice and hostility.
• Common goals lead people to think and work beyond their own group, the situation can help with reducing hostility and prejudice among groups of the same status.
• Prejudice is more likely to be reduced if there is a social or institutional support for contact, this should come from a higher body like the gov or organisation in power.
• Acquaintance potential suggests that contact should be personalised and informal to be more beneficial for reducing prejudice, informal contact is less socially rewarding which could generalise to the whole group of positive experience.
• Groups must have equal status as any differences would make challenging stereotypes difficult.
• Cooperative action, there shouldn't be a competition as a highlighted element as it worsens things. There has to be some form of superordinate goal for both groups that they cannot achieve unless they work together.
• Pettigrew and Tropp (2006) performed a meta-analysis of 515 studies that found there is a highly significant relationship between contact and prejudice, the more contact the less prejudice. Effect of reduction was the strongest when the contact was structured to meet optimal conditions, especially the situation cooperative.
• Hewstone and Swart (2011) contact interaction can be seen differently depending on whether you are from a minority or majority group, because disadvantages groups expect discrimination and non-positive contact.
• Contact hypothesis has been suggested to be too unrealistic and that it may not be applicable to the real world.
• Individuals in one group may view individuals from the other group as an exception rather than a representation of the whole group.
• Contact may need to be longer, as people look at others from an individualistic perspective.
• Using cognitive boosters to connect negative affect of discrimination to liked group members, if there is something we like about an individual then thinking about them may help to not feel prejudiced towards the whole group.
• Indirect contact has been suggested when segregation or conflict is so strong that it would prevent direct contact.
• Indirect contact is when we use extended contact and are exposed to ingroup members that have outgroup friends. This has been linked to decreased prejudice and increased perception that the outgroup are variable and has been linked to a reduction in anxiety regarding the outgroup.
• Imagined contact is a form on contact hypothesis that individuals will think about a situation where they are with an outgroup member.
• Elliot Aronson's Jigsaw classroom stated that each student's part is essential for a final product. Each student is essential to obtaining a goal within the class, students began to listen and respect one another and also began to like one another.
• Mutual intergroup differentiation model suggests that it is important for contact between groups to be of equal status to reduce bias, but this won't happen if the groups are threatened by contact or differ in strength.
• To overcome you provide individuals with a transfer inclusion but also differentiation. They feel the group membership is important, but they also feel like an individual who is special. This allows them to see distinction without making negative comparisons.
• Not all categories that people can be split into are equally meaningful.
• There is not much clarity about what contact strategies to use.
• There is some discussion about the realism of getting different groups to be in contact in real volatile situations.
• It is not understood what mechanisms are behind the reduction in prejudice and hostility.
• People belonging to multiple groups may be useful to see whether this may help in the reduction of prejudice,.