Positive intergroup contact, under some conditions, can undermine the interest of members of both socially disadvantaged and advantaged groups to act for equality. However, little is known about whether similar effects appear in a unique form of intergroup relations, gender relations. In two correlational studies and two experiments, we investigated the relationships among quality of contact, perceived discrimination, fusion with the feminist movement, and willingness to engage in collective action for women’s rights. For women (Study 1a), positive contact with men was associated with less perceived discrimination, less fusion, and less collective action. For men (Study 1b), the relationships were in the opposite direction. Studies 2a and 2b revealed that recalling experiences of gender discrimination nullified the effects of contact for both women and men as compared to a control condition. Thus, when discrimination is not explicitly recognized, positive contact might have sedative effects on women, but mobilizing effects on men.
AshokkumarA.TalaifarS.FraserW. T.LandaburR.BuhrmesterM.GómezÁ.… SwannW. B.Jr. (2020). Censoring political opposition online: Who does it and why. Journal of Experimental Social Psychology, 91, Article 104031.
2.
BeckerJ. C.WrightS. C. (2011). Yet another dark side of chivalry: Benevolent sexism undermines and hostile sexism motivates collective action for social change. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 101, 62–77.
3.
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.
4.
BestaT.JaśkiewiczM.Kosakowska-BerezeckaN.LawendowskiR.ZawadzkaA. M. (2018). What do I gain from joining crowds? Does self-expansion help to explain the relationship between identity fusion, group efficacy and collective action?European Journal of Social Psychology, 48, O152–O167.
5.
BinderJ.ZagefkaH.BrownR.FunkeF.KesslerT.MummendeyA.… LeyensJ.-P. (2009). Does contact reduce prejudice or does prejudice reduce contact? A longitudinal test of the contact hypothesis among majority and minority groups in three European countries. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 96, 843–856.
6.
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.
7.
CarneyD. R.BanajiM. R.KriegerN. (2010). Implicit measures reveal evidence of personal discrimination. Self and Identity, 9, 162–176.
8.
CislakA.FormanowiczM.SaguyT. (2018). Bias against research on gender bias. Scientometrics, 115, 189–200.
9.
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.
10.
DixonJ.LevineM.ReicherS.DurrheimK. (2012). Beyond prejudice: Relational inequality, collective action, and social change revisited. Behavioral and Brain Sciences, 35, 451–466.
11.
DovidioJ. F.LoveA.SchellhaasF. M. H.HewstoneM. (2017). Reducing intergroup bias through intergroup contact: Twenty years of progress and future directions. Group Processes & Intergroup Behavior, 20, 606–620.
12.
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.
DuncanL. E. (1999). Motivation for collective action: Group consciousness as mediator of personality, life experiences, and women’s rights activism. Political Psychology, 20, 611–635.
GlickP.FiskeS. T. (1996). The ambivalent sexism inventory: Differentiating hostile and benevolent sexism. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 70, 491–512.
18.
GlickP.LameirasM.FiskeS. T.EckesT.MasserB.VolpatoC.… CastroY. R. (2004). Bad but bold: Ambivalent attitudes toward men predict gender inequality in 16 nations. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 86, 713–728.
19.
GómezÁ.BrooksM. L.BuhrmesterM. D.VázquezA.JettenJ.SwannW. B.Jr. (2011). On the nature of identity fusion: Insights into the construct and a new measure. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 100, 918–933.
20.
GómezÁ.ChinchillaJ.VázquezA.López-RodríguezL.ParedesB.MartínezM. (2020). Recent advances, misconceptions, untested assumptions, and future research agenda for identity fusion theory. Social and Personality Psychology Compass, 14, Article e12531.
21.
GómezÁ.TroppL. R.VázquezA.VociA.HewstoneM. (2018). Depersonalized extended contact and injunctive norms about cross-group friendship impact intergroup orientations. Journal of Experimental Social Psychology, 76, 356–370.
22.
HaddockG.ZannaM. P.EssesV. M. (1993). Assessing the structure of prejudicial attitudes: The case of attitudes toward homosexuals. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 65, 1105–1118.
23.
HaywardL. E.TroppL. R.HornseyM. J.BarlowF. K. (2017). Toward a comprehensive understanding of intergroup contact: Descriptions and mediators of positive and negative contact among majority and minority groups. Personality and Social Psychology Bulletin, 43, 347–364.
24.
HewstoneM.LolliotS.SwartH.MyersE.VociA.Al RamiahA.CairnsE. (2014). Intergroup contact and intergroup conflict. Peace and Conflict: Journal of Peace Psychology, 20, 39–53.
25.
IyerA.RyanM. K. (2009). Why do men and women challenge gender discrimination in the workplace? The role of group status and in-group identification in predicting pathways to collective action. Journal of Social Issues, 65, 791–814.
26.
JackmanM. R. (1994). The velvet glove: Paternalism and conflict in gender, class, and race relations. University of California Press.
27.
JostJ. T.BeckerJ.OsborneD.BadaanV. (2017). Missing in (collective) action: Ideology, system justification, and the motivational antecedents of two types of protest behavior. Current Directions in Psychological Science, 26, 99–108.
28.
KunstJ. R.DovidioJ. F.ThomsenL. (2019). Fusion with political leaders predicts willingness to persecute immigrants and political opponents. Nature Human Behaviour, 3, 1180–1189.
29.
LenchH. C.TaylorA. B.BenchS. W. (2014). An alternative approach to analysis of mental states in experimental social cognition research. Behavior Research Methods, 46, 215–228.
30.
LouisW. R.ThomasE.ChapmanC. M.AchiaT.WibisonoS.MirnajafiZ.DroogendykL. (2019). Emerging research on intergroup prosociality: Group members’ charitable giving, positive contact, allyship, and solidarity with others. Social and Personality Psychology Compass, 13, Article e12436.
31.
MacInnisC. C.HodsonG. (2019). Extending the benefits of intergroup contact beyond attitudes: When does intergroup contact predict greater collective action support?Journal of Theoretical Social Psychology, 3, 11–22.
32.
MacInnisC. C.Page-GouldE. (2015). How can intergroup interaction be bad if intergroup contact is good? Exploring and reconciling an apparent paradox in the science of intergroup relations. Perspectives on Psychological Science, 10, 307–327.
33.
MillerN. (2002). Personalization and the promise of contact theory. Journal of Social Issues, 58, 387–410.
34.
PaluckE. L.GreenS. A.GreenD. P. (2018). The contact hypothesis re-evaluated. Behavioural Public Policy, 3, 129–158.
35.
PettigrewT. F.TroppL. R. (2006). A meta-analytic test of intergroup contact theory. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 90, 751–783.
36.
PettigrewT. F.TroppL. R. (2011). When groups meet: The dynamics of intergroup contact. Psychology Press.
37.
QuinnK. A.RoeseN. J.PenningtonG. L.OlsonJ. M. (1999). The personal/group discrimination discrepancy: The role of informational complexity. Personality and Social Psychology Bulletin, 25, 1430–1440.
38.
RadkeH. R. M.HornseyM. J.BarlowF. K. (2016). Barriers to women engaging in collective action to overcome sexism. American Psychologist, 71, 863–874.
39.
ReimerN. K.BeckerJ. C.BenzA.ChristO.DhontK.KlockeU.… HewstoneM. (2017). Intergroup contact and social change: Implications of negative and positive contact for collective action in advantaged and disadvantaged groups. Personality and Social Psychology Bulletin, 43(1), 121–136.
40.
RemediosJ. D.ChasteenA. L.PaekJ. D. (2012). Not all prejudices are experienced equally: Comparing experiences of racism and sexism in female minorities. Group Processes & Intergroup Relations, 15, 273–287.
41.
SaguyT.Shchori-EyalN.Hasan-AslihS.SobolD.DovidioJ. F. (2016). The irony of harmony: Past and new development. In VezzaliL.StathiS. (Eds.), Intergroup contact theory: Recent developments and future directions (pp. 53–71). Routledge.
42.
SaguyT.TauschN.DovidioJ. F.PrattoF. (2009). The irony of harmony: Intergroup contact can produce false expectations for equality. Psychological Science, 20, 114–121.
43.
SchmittM. T.BranscombeN. R.KobrynowiczD.OwenS. (2002). Perceiving discrimination against one’s gender group has different implications for well-being in women and men. Personality and Social Psychology Bulletin, 28, 197–210.
44.
SelvanathanH. P.LickelB.DasguptaN. (2020). An integrative framework on the impact of allies: How identity-based needs influence intergroup solidarity and social movements. European Journal of Social Psychology. Advance online publication. https://doi.org/10.1002/ejsp.2697.
45.
SimonB.KlandermansB. (2001). Politicized collective identity: A social psychological analysis. American Psychologist, 56, 319–331.
46.
SobolD.Shchori-EyalN.SaguyT. (2016). Harmony in close-relationships contributes to the persistence of gender inequality. Cited in SaguyT.Shchori-EyalN.Hasan-AslihS.SobolD.DovidioJ. F. (2016). The irony of harmony: Past and new development. In VezzaliL.StathiS. (Eds.), Intergroup contact theory: Recent developments and future directions (pp. 53–71). Routledge.
47.
SpencerS. J.ZannaM. P.FongG. T. (2005). Establishing a causal chain: Why experiments are often more effective than mediational analyses in examining psychological processes. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 89, 845–851.
48.
StroebeK.DovidioJ. F.BarretoM.EllemersN.JohnM. S. (2011). Is the world a just place? Countering the negative consequences of pervasive discrimination by affirming the world as just. British Journal of Social Psychology, 50, 484–500.
49.
SwannW. B.Jr.JettenJ.GómezÁ.WhitehouseH.BastianB. (2012). When group membership gets personal: A theory of identity fusion. Psychological Review, 119, 441–456.
50.
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.
51.
TechakesariP.DroogendykL.WrightS. C.LouisW. R.BarlowF. K. (2017). Supportive contact and LGBT collective action: The moderating role of membership in specific groups. Peace and Conflict: Journal of Peace Psychology, 23, 307–316.
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.
53.
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.
54.
VezzaliL.AdrighettoL.CapozzaD.Di BernardoG. A.SaguyT. (2017). Discussing differences between groups: The content of intergroup encounters and motivation for social change among members of advantaged groups. Journal of Theoretical Social Psychology, 1, 52–59.
55.
WhitehouseH.JongJ.BuhrmesterM. D.GómezÁ.BastianB.KavanaghC. M.… GavriletsS. (2017). The evolution of extreme cooperation via shared dysphoric experiences. Scientific Reports, 7, Article 44292.
56.
WrightS. C. (2010). Collective action and social change. In DovidioJ. F.HewstoneM.GlickP.EssesV. M. (Eds.), Handbook of prejudice, stereotyping, and discrimination (pp. 577–595). SAGE.
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.
