Two studies examined the role of temporal-based social categorizations for attitude change during intergroup contact between Polish and Jewish students. In Study 1 (N = 190 Polish students), a cross-sectional analysis showed that contact focused on contemporary issues had positive effects on both outgroup attitudes and perceived similarity to the outgroup. No such effects were observed when groups talked about past issues. Study 2 (N = 97 Jewish students) demonstrated this effect experimentally when `historical' and `contemporary' issues were discussed during contact. Contact about the present generated more positive attitudes toward contact partners and (unlike contact about the past) toward the generalized outgroup. The present findings are discussed in the context of common ingroup identity model and collective guilt research.
Aberson, C.L., & Howanski, L.M. (2002). Effects of self-esteem, status, and identification on two forms of ingroup bias. Current Research in Social Psychology, 13, 225—243.
2.
Allport, G.W. (1954). The nature of prejudice. Reading, MA: Addison-Wesley.
3.
Arendt, H. (1994). Eichmann in Jerusalem. A report on the banality of evil. Revised and enlarged edition. New York: Penguin.
4.
Bar-Tal, D., & Antebi, D. (1992). Siege mentality in Israel. International Journal of Intercultural Relations, 16, 251—275.
5.
Bilewicz, M. (2004) Wyjasnianie Jedwabnego: antysemityzm i postrzeganie trudnej przeszlosci [Explaining Jedwabne: Anti-semitism and the perception of difficult past]. In I. Krzemiński (Ed.), Antysemityzm w Polsce i na Ukrainie. Raport z badań , (pp. 248—269). Warszawa: Scholar .
6.
Branscombe, N.R., Doosje, B., & McGarty, C. (2002). Antecedents and consequences of collective guilt . In D. M. Mackie & E. R. Smith (Eds.), From prejudice to intergroup emotions (pp. 49—67). New York: Psychology Press.
7.
Branscombe, N.R., & Miron, A.M. (2004). Interpreting the ingroup's negative actions toward another group: Emotional reactions to appraised harm. In L. Z. Tiedens & C. W. Leach (Eds.), The social life of emotions (pp. 314—335). New York: Cambridge University Press.
8.
Branscombe, N.R., Schmitt, M.T., & Harvey, R.D. (1999). Perceiving pervasive discrimination among African Americans: Implications for group identification and well-being. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 77, 135—149.
9.
Branscombe, N.R., Slugoski, B., & Kappen, D.M. (2004). The measurement of collective guilt: What it is and what it is not. In N.R. Branscombe & B. Doosje (Eds.), Collective guilt: International perspectives (pp. 16—34). New York: Cambridge University Press.
10.
Brewer, M.B., & Miller, N. (1988). Contact and co-operation: When do they work? In P. Katz & D. Taylor (Eds.), Eliminating racism: Profiles in controversy (pp. 315—326). New York: Plenum Press.
11.
Brown, R., Vivian, J., & Hewstone, M. (1999). Changing attitudes through intergroup contact: The effects of group membership salience. European Journal of Social Psychology, 29, 741—764.
12.
Doosje, B., & Branscombe, N.R. (2003). Attributions for the negative historical actions of a group. European Journal of Social Psychology, 33, 235—248.
13.
Doosje, B., Branscombe, N., Spears, R., & Manstead, A.S.R. (1998). Guilty by association: When one's group has a negative history. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 75, 872—886.
14.
Dovidio, J.F., Gaertner, S.L., & Kafati G. (2000). Group identity and intergroup relations: The Common InGroup Identity Model. In S. R. Thye , E. J. Lawler, M. W. Macy, & H. A. Walker (Eds.), Advances in group processes (Vol. 17, pp. 1—34). Stamford, CT: JAI.
15.
Dovidio, J.F., Gaertner, S.L., & Kawakami, K. (2003). Intergroup contact: The past, present, and the future. Group Processes & Intergroup Relations,6, 5—21.
16.
Ellers, A., & Abrams, D. (2004). Come together: Longitudinal comparisons of Pettigrew's Reformulated Intergroup Contact Model and the Common Ingroup Identity Model in Anglo-French and Mexican-American contexts. European Journal of Social Psychology, 34, 229—256.
17.
Haslam, S.A., Turner, J.C., Oakes, P.J., McGarty, C., & Reynolds, K.J. (1998). The group as a basis for emergent stereotype consensus. In W. Stroebe & M. Hewstone (Eds.), European Review of Social Psychology (Vol. 8, pp. 203—239). New York: Wiley.
18.
Hewstone, M. (1996). Contact and categorization: Social psychological interventions to change intergroup relations. In C. N. Macrae, C. Stangor, & M. Hewstone (Eds.), Stereotypes and stereotyping (pp. 323—368). New York: Guilford .
19.
Hewstone, M., & Brown, R. (Eds.). (1986). Contact and conflict in intergroup encounters. Oxford, UK: Blackwell.
20.
Islam, M.R., & Hewstone, M. (1993). Dimensions of contact as predictors of intergroup anxiety, perceived outgroup variability, and outgroup attitude: An integrative model. Personality and Social Psychology Bulletin, 19, 700—710.
21.
Kofta, M. (1995). Stereotype of a group as-a-whole: The role of diabolic causation schema. Polish Psychological Bulletin,26, 83—96.
22.
Kofta, M., & Sedek, G. (2005). Conspiracy stereotypes of Jews during systemic transformation in Poland. International Journal of Sociology , 35, 40—64.
23.
Krzeminski, I. (1993). Anti-Semitism in today's Poland. Patterns of Prejudice, 27, 127—135.
24.
Lendvai, P. (1971). Anti-Semitism without Jews: Communist Eastern Europe. New York: Doubleday.
25.
Liebkind, K., Nyström, S., Honkanummi, E., & Lange, A. (2004). Group size, group status and dimensions of contact as predictors of intergroup attitudes. Group Processes and Intergroup Relations,7, 145—159.
26.
Liu, J.H., & Hilton D. (2005). How the past weighs on the present: Social representations of history and their role in identity politics. British Journal of Social Psychology, 44, 537—556.
27.
Liu, J.H., Wilson, M.W., McClure, J., & Higgins, T.R. (1999). Social identity and the perception of history: Cultural representations of Aotearoa/ New Zealand. European Journal of Social Psychology, 29, 1021—1047.
28.
Miller, N. (2002). Personalization and the promise of contact theory . Journal of Social Issues, 58, 387—410.
29.
Pettigrew, T.F. (1997). Generalized intergroup contact effects on prejudice . Personality and Social Psychology Bulletin, 23, 173—185.
Pettigrew, T.F., & Tropp, L.R. (2000). Does intergroup contact reduce prejudice? Recent meta-analytic findings. In S. Oskamp (Ed.), Reducing prejudice and discrimination: The Claremont symposium (pp. 93—114). Mahwah, NJ: Erlbaum .
32.
Roccas, S., Klar, Y., & Liviatan, I. (2004). Exonerating cognitions, group identification, and personal values as predictors of collective guilt among Jewish-Israelis . In N. R. Branscombe & B. Doosje (Eds.), Collective guilt: International perspectives (pp.130—147). New York: Cambridge University Press.
33.
Rose, T.L. (1981). Cognitive and dyadic processes in intergroup contact. In D. L. Hamilton (Ed.), Cognitive processes in stereotyping and intergroup behavior (pp. 259—302). Hillsdale, NJ: Erlbaum.
34.
Schmitt, M.T., Silvia, P., & Branscombe, N.R. (2000). The intersection of self-evaluation maintenance and social identity theories: Intragroup judgment in interpersonal and intergroup contexts. Personality and Social Psychology Bulletin, 26, 1598—1606.
35.
Steinlauf, M.C. (1997). Bondage to the dead: Poland and the memory of the Holocaust. Syracuse: Syracuse University Press.
36.
van Dick, R., Wagner, U., Pettigrew, T.F., Christ, O., Wolf, C., Petzel, T. et al. (2004). Role of perceived importance in intergroup contact. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 87, 211—227.
37.
Voci, A., & Hewstone, M. (2003). Intergroup contact and prejudice toward immigrants in Italy: The mediational role of anxiety and the moderational role of group salience. Group Processes & Intergroup Relations,6, 37—54.
38.
Wilder, D.A. (1986). Cognitive factors affecting the success of intergroup contact. In S. Worchel & W. G. Austin (Eds.), Psychology of intergroup relations (pp. 49—66). Chicago: Nelson-Hall .
39.
Wohl, M.J.A., & Branscombe, N.R. (2004). Importance of social categorization for forgiveness and collective guilt assignment for the Holocaust. In N. R. Branscombe & B. Doosje (Eds.), Collective guilt: International perspectives (pp. 284—305). New York: Cambridge University Press.
40.
Wohl, M.J.A., & Branscombe, N.R. (2005). Forgiveness and collective guilt assignment to historical perpetrator groups depend on level of social category inclusiveness. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 88, 288—303.
41.
Wohl, M.J.A., Branscombe, N.R., & Klar, Y. (2006). Collective guilt: Emotional reactions when one's group has done wrong or been wronged, European Review of Social Psychology, 17, 1—37.
