Previous research has shown that (a) positive intergroup contact with an advantaged group can discourage collective action among disadvantaged-group members and (b) positive intergroup contact can encourage advantaged-group members to take action on behalf of disadvantaged outgroups. Two studies investigated the effects of negative as well as positive intergroup contact. Study 1 (n = 482) found that negative but not positive contact with heterosexual people was associated with sexual-minority students’ engagement in collective action (via group identification and perceived discrimination). Among heterosexual students, positive and negative contacts were associated with, respectively, more and less LGB (lesbian, gay, bisexual) activism. Study 2 (N = 1,469) found that only negative contact (via perceived discrimination) predicted LGBT (lesbian, gay, bisexual, and transgender) students’ collective action intentions longitudinally while only positive contact predicted heterosexual/cisgender students’ LGBT activism. Implications for the relationship between intergroup contact, collective action, and social change are discussed.
AllportG. (1954). The nature of prejudice. Reading, MA: Addison-Wesley.
2.
Al RamiahA.HewstoneM. (2013). Intergroup contact as a tool for reducing, resolving, and preventing intergroup conflict: Evidence, limitations, and potential. American Psychologist, 68, 527-542. doi:10.1037/a0032603
3.
BarlowF. K.PaoliniS.PedersenA.HornseyM. J.RadkeH. R. M.HarwoodJ.… SibleyC. G. (2012). The contact caveat: Negative contact predicts increased prejudice more than positive contact predicts reduced prejudice. Personality and Social Psychology Bulletin, 38, 1629-1643. doi:10.1177/0146167212457953
4.
BeckerJ. C.TauschN. (2015). A dynamic model of engagement in normative and non-normative collective action: Psychological antecedents, consequences, and barriers. European Review of Social Psychology, 26, 43-92. doi:10.1080/10463283.2015.1094265
5.
BeckerJ. C.WrightS. C.LubenskyM. E.ZhouS. (2013). Friend or ally: Whether cross-group contact undermines collective action depends on what advantaged group members say (or don’t say). Personality and Social Psychology Bulletin, 39, 442-455. doi:10.1177/0146167213477155
6.
BlumerG. (1958). Race prejudice as a sense of group position. The Pacific Sociological Review, 1, 3-7. doi:10.2307/1388607
7.
BrownR.HewstoneM. (2005). An integrative theory of intergroup contact. Advances in Experimental Social Psychology, 37, 255-343. doi:10.1016/S0065-2601(05)37005-5
8.
ByrneB. M. (2012). Structural equation modeling with Mplus: Basic concepts, applications, and programming. Hove, UK: Routledge.
9.
CakalH.HewstoneM.SchwärG.HeathA. (2011). An investigation of the social identity model of collective action and the “sedative” effect of intergroup contact among Black and White students in South Africa. British Journal of Social Psychology, 50, 606-627. doi:10.1111/j.2044-8309.2011.02075.x
10.
ConverseP. E.DotsonJ. D.HoagW. J.McGeeW. H. (1980). American social attitudes data sourcebook, 1947-1978. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press.
11.
CzoppA. M.MonteithM. J. (2003). Confronting prejudice (literally): Reactions to confrontations of racial and gender bias. Personality and Social Psychology Bulletin, 29, 532-544. doi:10.1177/0146167202250923
12.
DhontK.Van HielA. (2009). We must not be enemies: Interracial contact and the reduction of prejudice among authoritarians. Personality and Individual Differences, 46, 172-177. doi:10.1016/j.paid.2008.09.022
13.
DixonJ.DurrheimK.ThomaeM.TredouxC.KerrP.QuayleM. (2015). Divide and rule, unite and resist: Contact, collective action and policy attitudes among historically disadvantaged groups. Journal of Social Issues, 71, 576-596. doi:10.1111/josi.12129
14.
DixonJ.DurrheimK.TredouxC. (2007). Intergroup contact and attitudes toward the principle and practice of racial equality. Psychological Science, 18, 867-872. doi:10.1111/j.1467-9280.2007.01993.x
15.
DixonJ.DurrheimK.TredouxC.TroppL.ClackB.EatonL. (2010). A paradox of integration? Interracial contact, prejudice reduction, and perceptions of racial discrimination. Journal of Social Issues, 66, 401-416. doi:10.1111/j.1540-4560.2010.01652.x
16.
DixonJ.LevineM.ReicherS.DurrheimK. (2012). Beyond prejudice: Are negative evaluations the problem and is getting to like one another more the solution?Behavioral and Brain Sciences, 35, 411-466. doi:10.1017/S0140525X11002214
17.
DoosjeB.BranscombeN. R.SpearsR.MansteadA. S. R. (1998). Guilty by association: When one’s group has a negative history. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 75, 872-886. doi:10.1037/0022-3514.75.4.872
18.
DovidioJ. F.SaguyT.GaertnerS. L.ThomasE. L. (2012). From attitudes to (in)action: The darker side of “we.” In DixonJ.LevineM. (Eds.), Beyond prejudice: Extending the social psychology of conflict, inequality and social change (pp. 248-268). Cambridge, UK: Cambridge University Press.
19.
DroogendykL.WrightS. C.LubenskyM.LouisW. R. (2016). Acting in solidarity: Cross-group contact between disadvantaged group members and advantaged group allies. Journal of Social Issues, 72, 315-334. doi:10.1111/josi.12168
20.
Falomir-PichastorJ. M.HegartyP. (2014). Maintaining distinctions under threat: Heterosexual men endorse the biological theory of sexuality when equality is the norm. British Journal of Social Psychology, 53, 731-751. doi:10.1111/bjso.12051
21.
FellB.LolliotS.SchmidK.BiroM.ChristO.HewstoneM. (2016). Interaction of positive and negative contact. Manuscript submitted for publication.
22.
FingerhutA. W. (2011). Straight allies: What predicts heterosexuals’ alliance with the LGBT community?Journal of Applied Social Psychology, 41, 2230-2248. doi:10.1111/j.1559-1816.2011.00807.x
23.
FriedmanC.LeaperC. (2010). Sexual-minority college women’s experiences with discrimination: Relations with identity and collective action. Psychology of Women Quarterly, 34, 152-164. doi:10.1111/j.1471-6402.2010.01558.x
24.
GaertnerS. L.DovidioJ. F.HouletteM. A. (2013). Social categorization. In DovidioJ. F.HewstoneM.GlickP.EssesV. M. (Eds.), The SAGE handbook of prejudice, stereotyping and discrimination (pp. 526-543). London, England: SAGE.
25.
GarstkaT. A.SchmittM. T.BranscombeN. R.HummertM. L. (2004). How young and older adults differ in their responses to perceived age discrimination. Psychology and Aging, 19, 326-335. doi:10.1037/0882-7974.19.2.326
26.
GrafS.PaoliniS.RubinM. (2014). Negative intergroup contact is more influential, but positive intergroup contact is more common: Assessing contact prominence and contact prevalence in five Central European countries. European Journal of Social Psychology, 44, 536-547. doi:10.1002/ejsp.2052
27.
HewstoneM. (2009). Living apart, living together? The role of intergroup contact in social integration. Proceedings of the British Academy, 162, 243-300.
28.
JostJ. T.BanajiM. R.NosekB. A. (2004). A decade of system justification theory: Accumulated evidence of conscious and unconscious bolstering of the status quo. Political Psychology, 25, 881-919. doi:10.1111/j.1467-9221.2004.00402.x
29.
LeachC. W.SniderN.IyerA. (2007). “Poisoning the conscience of the fortunate”: The experience of relative advantage and support for social equality. In WalkerI.SmithH. J. (Eds.), Relative deprivation: Specification, development, and integration (pp. 136-163). Cambridge, UK: Cambridge University Press.
30.
LeachC. W.van ZomerenM.ZebelS.VliekM. L.PennekampS. F.DoosjeB.… SpearsR. (2008). Group-level self-definition and self-investment: A hierarchical (multicomponent) model of in-group identification. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 95, 144-165. doi:10.1037/0022-3514.95.1.144
31.
LittleT. D. (2013). Longitudinal structural equation modeling. New York, NY: Guilford Press.
32.
MajorB.KaiserC. R.McCoyS. K. (2003). It’s not my fault: When and why attributions to prejudice protect self-esteem. Personality and Social Psychology Bulletin, 29, 772-781. doi:10.1177/0146167203029006009
33.
MaysV. M.CochranS. D. (2001). Mental health correlates of perceived discrimination among lesbian, gay, and bisexual adults in the United States. American Journal of Public Health, 91, 1869-1876. doi:10.2105/AJPH.91.11.1869
34.
MuthénL. K.MuthénB. O. (1998-2015). Mplus user’s guide (7th ed.). Los Angeles, CA: Author.
35.
OperarioD.FiskeS. T. (1998). Racism equals power plus prejudice: A social psychological equation for racial oppression. In EberhardtJ. L.FiskeS. T. (Eds.), Confronting racism: The problem and the response (pp. 33-53). London, England: SAGE.
36.
PaoliniS.HarwoodJ.RubinM. (2010). Negative intergroup contact makes group memberships salient: Explaining why intergroup conflict endures. Personality and Social Psychology Bulletin, 36, 1723-1738. doi:10.1177/0146167210388667
37.
PettigrewT. F. (1997). Generalized intergroup contact effects on prejudice. Personality and Social Psychology Bulletin, 23, 173-185. doi:10.1177/0146167297232006
38.
PettigrewT. F.TroppL. R. (2006). A meta-analytic test of intergroup contact theory. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 90, 751-783. doi:10.1037/0022-3514.90.5.751.
39.
PettigrewT. F.TroppL. R. (2008). How does intergroup contact reduce prejudice? Meta-analytic tests of three mediators. European Journal of Social Psychology, 38, 922-934. doi:10.1002/ejsp.504
40.
PettigrewT. F.TroppL. R. (2011). When groups meet: The dynamics of intergroup contact. Hove, UK: Psychology Press.
41.
PittinskyT. L.MontoyaR. M. (2009). Is valuing equality enough? Equality values, allophilia, and social policy support for multiracial individuals. Journal of Social Issues, 65, 151-163. doi:10.1111/j.1540-4560.2008.01592.x
42.
PooreA. G.GagneF.BarlowK. M.LydonJ. E.TaylorD. M.WrightS. C. (2002). Contact and the personal/group discrimination discrepancy in an Inuit community. Journal of Psychology, 136, 371-382. doi:10.1080/00223980209604164
43.
PreacherK. J.HayesA. F. (2008). Asymptotic and resampling strategies for assessing and comparing indirect effects in multiple mediator models. Behavior Research Methods, 40, 879-891. doi:10.3758/BRM.40.3.879
44.
RasinskiH. M.CzoppA. M. (2010). The effect of target status on witnesses’ reactions to confrontations of bias. Basic and Applied Social Psychology, 32, 8-16. doi:10.1080/01973530903539754
45.
RussellG. M. (2011). Motives of heterosexual allies in collective action for equality. Journal of Social Issues, 67, 376-393. doi:10.1111/j.1540-4560.2011.01703.x
46.
SaguyT.TauschN.DovidioJ. F.PrattoF. (2009). The irony of harmony: Intergroup contact can produce false expectations for equality. Psychological Science, 20, 114-121. doi:10.1111/j.1467-9280.2008.02261.x
47.
SellR. L. (2007). Defining and measuring sexual orientation for research. In MeyerI. H.NorthridgeM. E. (Eds.), The health of sexual minorities: Public health perspectives on lesbian, gay, bisexual and transgender population (pp. 355-374). doi:10.1007/978-0-387-31334-4_14
48.
SimonB.KlandermansB. (2001). Politicized collective identity: A social psychological analysis. American Psychologist, 56, 319-331. doi:10.1037//0003-066X.56.4.319
49.
SmithS. J.AxeltonA. M.SaucierD. A. (2009). The effects of contact on sexual prejudice: A meta-analysis. Sex Roles, 61, 178-191. doi:10.1007/s11199-009-9627-3
50.
StephanW. G.BonieckiK. A.YbarraO.BettencourtA.ErvinK. S.JacksonL. A.… RenfroC. L. (2002). The role of threats in the racial attitudes of Blacks and Whites. Personality and Social Psychology Bulletin, 28, 1242-1254. doi:10.1177/01461672022812009
51.
TauschN.SaguyT.BrysonJ. (2015). How does intergroup contact affect social change? Its impact on collective action and individual mobility intentions among members of a disadvantaged group. Journal of Social Issues, 71, 536-553. doi:10.1111/josi.12127
52.
TroppL. R.HawiD. R.Van LaarC.LevinS. (2012). Cross-ethnic friendships, perceived discrimination, and their effects on ethnic activism over time: A longitudinal investigation of three ethnic minority groups. British Journal of Social Psychology, 51, 257-272. doi:10.1111/j.2044-8309.2011.02050.x
53.
UfkesE. G.CalcagnoJ.GlasfordD. E.DovidioJ. F. (2016). Understanding how common ingroup identity undermines collective action among disadvantaged-group members. Journal of Experimental Social Psychology, 63, 26-35. doi:10.1016/j.jesp.2015.11.006
54.
van ZomerenM.PostmesT.SpearsR. (2008). Toward an integrative social identity model of collective action: A quantitative research synthesis of three socio-psychological perspectives. Psychological Bulletin, 134, 504-535. doi:10.1037/0033 2909.134.4.504
55.
van ZomerenM.PostmesT.SpearsR.BettacheK. (2011). Can moral convictions motivate the advantaged to challenge social inequality? Extending the social identity model of collective action. Group Processes & Intergroup Relations, 14, 735-753. doi:10.1177/1368430210395637
56.
van ZomerenM.SpearsR.FischerA. H.LeachC. W. (2004). Put your money where your mouth is! Explaining collective action tendencies through group-based anger and group efficacy. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 87, 649-664. doi:10.1037/0022-3514.87.5.649
57.
VerkuytenM.ThijsJ.BekhuisH. (2010). Intergroup contact and ingroup reappraisal: Examining the deprovincialization thesis. Social Psychology Quarterly, 73, 398-416. doi:10.1177/0190272510389015
58.
WickhamH. (2009). ggplot2: Elegant graphics for data analysis. New York, NY: Springer-Verlag.
59.
WrightS. C. (2013). Collective action and social change. In DovidioJ. F.HewstoneM.GlickP.EssesV. M. (Eds.), The SAGE handbook of prejudice, stereotyping and discrimination (pp. 345-360). London, England: SAGE.
60.
WrightS. C.AronA.McLaughlin-VolpeT.RoppS. A. (1997). The extended contact effect: Knowledge of cross-group friendships and prejudice. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 73, 73-90. doi:10.1037/0022-3514.73.1.73
61.
WrightS. C.BarayG. (2012). Models of social change in social psychology: Collective action or prejudice reduction? Conflict or harmony? In DixonJ.LevineM. (Eds.), Beyond prejudice: Extending the social psychology of conflict, inequality and social change (pp. 225-247). Cambridge, UK: Cambridge University Press.
62.
WrightS. C.LubenskyM. E. (2009). The struggle for equality: Collective action versus prejudice reduction. In DemoulinS.LeyensJ.-P.DovidioJ. F. (Eds.), Intergroup misunderstandings: Impact of divergent social realities (pp. 291-310). Hove, UK: Psychology Press.
Supplementary Material
Please find the following supplemental material available below.
For Open Access articles published under a Creative Commons License, all supplemental material carries the same license as the article it is associated with.
For non-Open Access articles published, all supplemental material carries a non-exclusive license, and permission requests for re-use of supplemental material or any part of supplemental material shall be sent directly to the copyright owner as specified in the copyright notice associated with the article.
