The aim of this study was to test the effectiveness of imagined intergroup contact (Crisp & Turner, 2009) on elementary school children’s explicit and implicit intergroup attitudes. Italian 5th-graders participated in a 3-week intervention involving imagining meeting an unknown immigrant peer in various situations. Approximately 1 week after the last session, they completed measures of self-disclosure and behavioral intentions toward immigrants. Furthermore, they were administered a measure of implicit prejudice. Results showed that those taking part in the intervention, compared to participants in a control condition, revealed more positive behavioral intentions and implicit attitudes toward immigrants. Moreover, self-disclosure mediated the effect of imagined contact on outgroup behavioral intentions. Theoretical and practical implications of findings are discussed.
AbersonC. L.HaagS. C. (2007). Contact, perspective taking, and anxiety as predictors of stereotype endorsement, explicit atitudes, and implicit attitudes. Group Processes and Intergroup Relations, 10, 179–201.
2.
AboudF. E. (2008). A social-cognitive developmental theory of prejudice. In QuintanaS. E.McKnownC. (Eds.), Handbook of race, racism, and the developing child (pp. 55–71). Hoboken, NJ: Wiley.
3.
AbramsD.CrispR. J.MarquesS.FaggE.BedfordL.ProviasD. (2008). Threat inoculation: Experienced and imagined intergenerational contact prevents stereotype threat effects on older people’s math performance. Psychology and Aging, 23, 934–939.
4.
BaronA. S.BanajiM. R. (2006). The development of implicit attitudes: Evidence of race evaluations from ages 6 and 10 and adulthood. Psychological Science, 17, 53–58.
5.
BaronR. M.KennyD. A. (1986). The moderator-mediator variable distinction in social psychological research: Conceptual, strategic, and statistical considerations. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 51, 1173–1182.
6.
BergJ.Wright-BuckleyC. (1988). Effects of racial similarity and interviewer intimacy in a peer counseling analogue. Journal of Counseling Psychology, 35, 377–384.
7.
BiglerR. S.LibenL. S. (2007). Developmental intergroup theory. Current Directions in Psychological Science, 16, 162–166.
8.
CameronL.RutlandA. (2006). Extended contact through story reading in school: Reducing children’s prejudice toward the disabled. Journal of Social Issues, 62, 469–488.
9.
CameronL.RutlandA.TurnerR. N.Holman-NicolasR.PowellC. (2011). “Changing attitudes with a little imagination”: Imagined contact effects on young children’s intergroup bias. Anales de Psicologia, 27, 708–717.
10.
CrispR. J.AbramsD. (2008). Improving intergroup attitudes and reducing stereotype threat: An integrated contact model. European review of Social Psychology, 19, 242–284.
11.
CrispR. J.HusnuS.MeleadyR.StathiS.TurnerR. N. (2010). From imagery to intention: A dual-route model of imagined contact effects. European Review of Social Psychology, 21, 188–236.
12.
CrispR. J.StathiS.TurnerR. N.HusnuS. (2009). Imagined contact: Theory, paradigm and practice. Social and Personality Psychology Compass, 3, 1–18.
13.
CrispR. J.TurnerR. N. (2009). Can imagined contact interactions produce positive perceptions? Reducing prejudice through simulated social contact. American Psychologist, 64, 231–240.
14.
CrispR. J.TurnerR. N. (2010). Have confidence in contact. American Psychologist, 65, 133–135.
15.
DegnerJ.WenturaD. (2010). Automatic prejudice in childhood and early adolescence. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 98, 356–374.
16.
DovidioJ. F.KawakamiK.GaertnerS. L. (2002). Implicit and explicit prejudice and interracial interaction. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 82, 62–68.
17.
DovidioJ. F.KawakamiK.JohnsonC.JohnsonB.HowardA. (1997). On the nature of prejudice: Automatic and controlled processes. Journal of Experimental Social Psychology, 33, 510–540.
18.
DunhamY.BaronA. S.BanajiM. R. (2006). From American city to Japanese village: The omnipresence of implicit race attitudes. Child Development, 77, 1268–1281.
19.
EdmondsC.KillenM. (2009). Do adolescents’ perceptions of parental racial attitudes relate to their intergroup contact and cross-race relationships?Group Processes and Intergroup Relations, 12, 5–21.
20.
GawronskiB.BodenhausenG. V. (2006). Associative and propositional processes in evaluation: An integrative review of implicit and explicit attitude change. Psychological Bulletin, 132, 692–731.
21.
GawronskiB.BodenhausenG. V. (2007). Unraveling the processes underlying evaluation: Attitudes from the perspective of the APE model. Social Cognition, 25, 687–717.
22.
GreenwaldA. G.NosekB. A.BanajiM. R. (2003). Understanding and using the implicit association test: I. An improved scoring algorithm. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 85, 197–216.
23.
GreenwaldA. G.PoehlmanT. A.UhlmannE. L.BanajiM. R. (2009). Understanding and using the implicit association test: III. Meta-analysis of predictive validity. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 97, 17–41.
24.
HarwoodJ.PaoliniS.JoyceN.RubinM.ArroyoA. (2011). Secondary transfer effects from imagined contact: Group similarity affects the generalization gradient. British Journal of Social Psychology, 50, 180–189.
25.
HusnuS.CrispR. J. (2010a). Elaboration enhances the imagined contact effect. Journal of Experimental Social Psychology, 46, 943–950.
26.
HusnuS.CrispR. J. (2010b). Imagined intergroup contact: A new technique for encouraging greater inter-ethnic contact in Cyprus. Peace and Conflict: Journal of Peace Psychology, 16, 97–108.
27.
MillerN. (2002). Personalization and the promise of contact theory. Journal of Social Issues, 58, 387–410.
28.
PaluckE. L.GreenD. P. (2009). Prejudice reduction: What works? A critical look at evidence from the field and the laboratory. Annual Review of Psychology, 60, 339–367.
29.
PettigrewT. F.TroppL. R. (2006). A meta- analytic test of intergroup contact theory. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 90, 751–783.
30.
PreacherK. J.HayesA. F. (2008). Asymptotic and resampling strategies for assessing and comparing indirect effects in multiple mediator models. Behavior Research Methods, 40, 879–881.
31.
ReisH. T.ShaverP. (1988). Intimacy as an interpersonal process. In DuckS. (Ed.), Handbook of personal relationships (pp. 367–389). Chichester: Wiley.
32.
RutlandA.CameronL.MilneA.McGeorgeP. (2005). Social norms and self-presentation: Children’s implicit and explicit intergroup attitudes. Child Development, 76, 451–466.
33.
SinclairL.DunnE.LoweryB. S. (2005). The relationship between parental racial attitudes and children’s implicit prejudice. Journal of Experimental Social Psychology, 41, 283–289.
34.
StathiS.CameronL.BradfordS. (2011). Developing and evaluating imagined contact as a prejudice-reduction intervention for schools. Under review.
35.
StathiS.CrispR. J. (2008). Imagining intergroup contact promotes projection to outgroups. Journal of Experimental Social Psychology, 44, 943–957.
36.
StathiS.CrispR. J.HoggM. A. (2011). Imagining intergroup contact enables member-to-group generalization. Group Dynamics, 15, 275–284.
37.
Towles-SchwenT.FazioR. H. (2006). Automatically activated racial attitudes as predictors of the success of interracial roommate relationships. Journal of Experimental Social Psychology, 42, 698–705.
38.
TurnerR. N.CrispR. J. (2010). Imagining intergroup contact reduces implicit prejudice. British Journal of Social Psychology, 49, 129–142.
39.
TurnerR. N.CrispR. J.LambertE. (2007). Imagining intergroup contact can improve intergroup attitudes. Group Processes and Intergroup Relations, 10, 427–441.
40.
TurnerR. N.HewstoneM.VociA. (2007). Reducing explicit and implicit outgroup prejudice via direct and extended contact: The mediating role of self-disclosure and intergroup anxiety. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 93, 369–388.
41.
TurnerR. N.HewstoneM.VociA.PaoliniS.ChristO. (2007). Reducing prejudice via direct and extended cross-group friendship. European Review of Social Psychology, 18, 212–255.
42.
VezzaliL.CapozzaD.PasinA. (2009). Effetti del contatto tra normodotati e disabili in contesti di lavoro [Effects of contact between non-disabled and disabled in working contexts]. Rivista Sperimentale di Freniatria, 3, 143–160.
43.
VezzaliL.GiovanniniD. (2011). Intergroup contact and reduction of explicit and implicit prejudice towards immigrants: A study with Italian businessmen owning small and medium enterprises. Quality and Quantity, 45, 213–222.
44.
VezzaliL.StathiS.GiovanniniD. (in press). Improving adolescents’ attitudes and behavioral intentions toward immigrants. Psychology in the Schools.
45.
WestK.HolmesE.HewstoneM. (2011). Enhancing imagined contact to reduce prejudice against people with schizophrenia. Group Processes and Intergroup Relations, 14, 407–428.
46.
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.
