This experiment examined the effectiveness of one-group and dual-identity recategorization strategies on reducing intergroup bias among 180 European Portuguese and African Portuguese 9- and 10-year-old children. Results revealed that each of these recategorization strategies, relative to one that emphasized separate group identities, was successful in producing positive attitudes toward the outgroup children present during the session, the outgroup as a whole, and the outgroup as a whole three weeks later. Consistent with a functional perspective regarding which representation would most effectively promote their group’s goals, a dual identity was more effective for the European Portuguese majority group, whereas a one-group identity was more effective for the African Portuguese minority group. Additional analyses explored a model of the process of generalization that formally links attitudes toward the outgroup as a whole to the attitudes toward outgroup members present during contact.
Aboud, F.E. ( 2003). The formation of in-group favoritism and out-group prejudice in young children: Are they distinct attitudes? Developmental Psychology, 39, 48-60.
2.
Allport, G.W. ( 1958). The nature of prejudice. Garden City, NY: Doubleday Anchor Books.
3.
Anderson, L.R., & Ager, J.W. ( 1978). Analysis of variance in small group research. Personality and Social Psychology Bulletin,4, 341-345.
4.
Batson, C.D., Chang, J., Orr, R., & Rowland, J. ( 2002). Empathy, attitudes, and action: Can feeling for a member of a stigmatized group motivate one to help the group?Personality and Social Psychology Bulletin,28, 1656-1666.
5.
Batson, C.D., Polycarpou, M.P., Haron-Jones, E., Imhoff, H.J., Mitchener, E.C., Bednar, L., et al. (1997). Empathy and attitudes: Can feeling for a member of a stigmatized group improve feelings toward the group? Journal of Personality and Social Psychology,72, 105-118.
6.
Berry, J.W. (1984). Cultural relations in plural societies: Alternatives to segregation and their sociopsychological implications. In N. Miller & M. Brewer (Eds.), Groups in contact: The psychology of desegregation (pp. 11-27). New York: Academic Press.
7.
Berry, J.W. ( 1997). Immigration, acculturation, and adaptation. Applied Psychology: An International Review,46, 5-34.
8.
Bigler, R.S. ( 1995). The role of classification skill in moderating environmental influences on children’s gender stereotyping: A study of the functional use of gender in the classroom. Child Development, 66, 1072-1087.
9.
Bigler, R.S., & Liben, L.S. ( 1992). Cognitive mechanisms in children’s gender stereotyping: Theoretical and educational implications of a cognitive-based intervention . Child Development,63, 1351-1363.
10.
Bourhis, R.Y., Moise, L.C., Perreault, S., & Senécal, S. (1997). Towards an interactive acculturation model: A social psychological approach. International Journal of Psychology, 32, 369-386.
11.
Brown, R.J., & Hewstone, M. ( 2005). An integrative theory of intergroup contact. In M. P. Zanna (Ed.), Advances in experimental social psychology (Vol. 37, pp. 255-343). San Diego, CA: Academic Press.
12.
Cameron, L., Rutland, A., & Brown, R. ( 2007). Promoting children’s positive intergroup attitudes towards stigmatized groups: Extended contact and multiple classification skills training. International Journal of Behavioral Development ,31, 454-466.
13.
Cameron, L., Rutland, A., Brown, R., & Douch, R. ( 2006). Changing children’s intergroup attitudes towards refugees: Testing different models of extended contact. Child Development,77, 1208-1219.
14.
Campbell, D.T. ( 1958). Common fate, similarity, and other indices of the status of aggregates of persons as social entities. Behavioral Science ,3, 14-25.
Dixon, J.A., Durrheim, K., & Tredoux, C. ( 2007). Intergroup contact and attitudes toward the principle and practice of racial equality. Psychological Science,18, 867-872.
17.
Dovidio, J.F., Gaertner, S.L., & Kafati, G. ( 2000). Group identity and intergroup relations: The common ingroup identity model. In S. R. Thye, E. Lawler, M. Macy, & H. Walker (Eds.), Advances in group processes(Vol. 17, pp. 1-35). Stamford, CT: JAI.
18.
Dovidio, J.F., Gaertner, S.L., Niemann, Y.F., & Snider, K. ( 2001). Racial, ethnic, and cultural differences in responding to distinctiveness and discrimination on campus: Stigma and common group identity . Journal of Social Issues, 57, 167-188.
19.
Dovidio, J.F., Gaertner, S.L., & Saguy, T. (2009). Commonality and the complexity of "we": Social attitudes and social change. Personality and Social Psychology Review ,13, 3-20.
20.
Eller, A., & Abrams, D. ( 2003). "Gringos" in Mexico: Cross-sectional and longitudinal effects of language school promoted contact on intergroup bias. Group Processes & Intergroup Relations,6, 55-75.
21.
Eller, 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.
22.
Ensari, N., & Miller, N. ( 2003). The out-group must not be so bad after all: The effects of disclosure, typicality, and salience on intergroup bias. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology,83, 313-329.
23.
Esses, V.M., Wagner, U., Wolf, C., Preiser, M., & Wilbur, C.J. ( 2006). Perceptions of national identity and attitudes toward immigrants and immigration in Canada and Germany. International Journal of Intercultural Relations,30, 685-696.
24.
Gaertner, S.L., & Dovidio, J.F. ( 2000). Reducing intergroup bias: The common ingroup identity model. Philadelphia, PA: Psychology Press.
25.
Gaertner, S.L., Dovidio, J.F., Anastasio, P.A., Bachman, B.A., & Rust, M.C. ( 1993). The common ingroup identity model: Recategorization and the reduction of intergroup bias. European Review of Social Psychology, 4, 1-26.
26.
Gaertner, S.L., Dovidio, J.F., Guerra, R., Rebelo, M., Monteiro, M.B., Riek, B.M., et al. (2007). The common ingroup identity model: Applications to children and adults. In M. Killen & S. Levy (Eds.), Intergroup relations: An integrative developmental and social psychological perspective(pp. 204-219). New York: Psychology Press.
27.
Gaertner, S.L., Dovidio, J.F., Rust, M.C., Nier, J.A., Banker, B.S., Ward, C.M., et al. (1999). Reducing intergroup bias: Elements of intergroup cooperation. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology , 76, 388-402.
28.
Gaertner, S.L., Mann, J.A., Dovidio, J.F., Murrell, A.J., & Pomare, M. ( 1990). How does cooperation reduce intergroup bias? Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 59, 692-704.
29.
Gaertner, S.L., Mann, J.A., Murrell, A.J., & Dovidio, J.F. ( 1989). Reducing intergroup bias: The benefits of recategorization . Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 57, 239-249.
30.
Gaertner, S.L., Rust, M.C., Dovidio, J.F., Bachman, B.A., & Anastasio, P.A. (1994). The contact hypothesis: The role of a common ingroup identity on reducing intergroup bias. Small Group Research, 25, 224-249.
31.
González, R., & Brown, R. ( 2003). Generalization of positive attitude as a function of subgroup and superordinate group identifications in intergroup contact. European Journal of Social Psychology, 33, 195-214.
32.
González, R., & Brown, R. ( 2006). Dual identities in intergroup contact: Group status and size moderate the generalization of positive attitude change. Journal of Experimental Social Psychology, 42, 753-767.
33.
Guerra, R., Rebelo, M., & Monteiro, M.B. (2004). Changing intergroup relations: Effects of recategorization, decategorization and dual identity in the reduction of intergroup discrimination. Paper presented at the 7th Jena Workshop on Intergroup Processes, Jena, Germany.
34.
Hewstone, M., & Brown, R.J. ( 1986). Contact is not enough: An intergroup perspective on the contact hypothesis. In M. Hewstone & R. Brown (Eds.), Contact and conflict in intergroup encounters (pp. 1-44). Oxford, UK: Basil Blackwell.
35.
Houlette, M., Gaertner, S.L., Johnson, K.M., Banker, B.S., Riek, B.M., & Dovidio, J.F. ( 2004). Developing a more inclusive social identity: An elementary school intervention. Journal of Social Issues,60, 35-55.
36.
Johnson, D.W., & Johnson, F.P. ( 1975). Joining together: Group theory and group skills. Englewood Cliffs, NJ: Prentice-Hall.
37.
Kreft, I., & De Leeuw, J. ( 1998). Introducing multilevel modeling. London: Sage.
38.
MacKinnon, D.P., Lockwood, C.M., Hoffman, J.M., West, S.G., & Sheets, V. ( 2002). A comparison of methods to test mediation and other intervening variable effects. Psychological Methods,7, 83-104.
39.
Maurício, I., & Monteiro, M.B. (2003). Cape-Verdean adolescents living in Portugal: Levels of national and ethnic identity and social integration . In A. Ross (Ed.), A Europe of many cultures (pp. 123-129). London: CiCe Publications.
40.
Miller, N. ( 2002). Personalization and the promise of contact theory. Journal of Social Issues,58, 387-410.
41.
Mouro, C. ( 2003). Estratégias de gestão da identidade e percepção de variabilidade intragrupal em adolescentes portugueses de origem cabo-verdiana [Identity management strategies and perceived intragroup variability among Portuguese adolescents of Cape Verdean origin]. Unpublished master’s thesis, Instituto Superior de Ciências do Trabalho e da Empresa(ISCTE), Lisbon.
42.
Noor, M., Brown, R., & Prentice, G. ( 2008). Prospects for intergroup reconciliation: Social psychological predictors of intergroup forgiveness and reparation in Northern Ireland and Chile. In A. Nadler, T. Malloy, & J. D. Fisher (Eds.), Social psychology of intergroup reconciliation: From violent conflict to peaceful co-existence-Going beyond victimization, guilt and distrust (pp. 97-114). Oxford, UK: Oxford University Press.
43.
Pettigrew, T.F., & Tropp, L. ( 2006).A meta-analytic test of intergroup contact theory. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 90,751-783.
44.
Pfafferott, I., & Brown, R. ( 2006). Acculturation preferences of majority and minority adolescents in Germany in the context of society and family. International Journal of Intercultural Relations,30, 703-717.
45.
Pinheiro, J.C., & Bates, D.M. ( 2000). Mixed-effects models in S and S-PLUS. New York: Springer-Verlag.
46.
R Development Core Team (2004). R: A Language and Environment for Statistical Computing (Version 1.9.1.) [Statistical software]. Vienna: R Foundation for Statistical Computing.
47.
Rebelo, M., Guerra, R., & Monteiro, M.B. (2005). Generalizing positive intergroup relations in realistic settings: A comparison among recategorization, decategorization and dual identity models. Paper presented at the General meeting of the European Association of Experimental Social Psychology, Wurzburg, Germany.
48.
Ryan, C.S., Hunt, J.S., Weible, J.A., Peterson, C.R., & Casas, J.F. ( 2007). Multicultural and colorblind ideology, stereotypes, and ethnocentrism among Black and White Americans. Group Processes & Intergroup Relations,10, 617-637.
49.
Saguy, T., Dovidio, J.F., & Pratto, F. ( 2008). Beyond contact: Intergroup contact in the context of power relations. Personality and Social Psychology Bulletin , 34, 432-445.
50.
Scheepers, D., Spears, R., Doosje, B., & Manstead, A.S.R. (2006). The social functions of ingroup bias: Creating, confirming, or changing social reality. In W. Stroebe & M. Hewstone (Eds.), European review of social psychology (pp. 359-396). New York: Psychology Press.
51.
Tropp, L.R., & Pettigrew, T.F. (2005). Relationships between intergroup contact and prejudice among minority and majority status groups. Psychological Science,16, 951-957.
52.
Tyler, T., & Blader, S.L. ( 2003). The group engagement model: Procedural justice, social identity, and cooperative behavior. Personality and Social Psychology Review,7, 349-361.
53.
Van Oudenhoven, J.P., Groenewoud, J.T., & Hewstone, M. ( 1996). Cooperation, ethnic salience and generalization of interethnic attitudes. European Journal of Social Psychology,26, 649-661.
54.
Verkuyten, M. ( 2006). Multicultural recognition and ethnic minority rights: A social identity perspective. European Review of Social Psychology ,17, 148-184.
55.
Vivian, J.E., Hewstone, M., & Brown, R.J. ( 1997). Intergroup contact: Theoretical and empirical developments . In R. Ben-Ari & Y. Rich (Eds.), Enhancing education in heterogeneous schools(pp. 13-46). Tel Aviv: Tel Aviv University Press.
56.
Wright, S., & Lubensky, M. ( 2009). The struggle for social equality: Collective action vs. prejudice reduction. In S. Demoulin, J. P. Leyens, & J. F. Dovidio (Eds.), Intergroup misunderstandings: Impact of divergent social realities (pp. 291-310). New York: Psychology Press.
