Too Ideologically Extreme, Close-Minded, or Highly Identified for Prejudice Reduction? Testing the Unique Benefits of Intergroup Contract Across Different Types of Individual Differences
Recent research demonstrates that intergroup contact effectively reduces
prejudice even among prejudice-prone persons. But some assert that
evidence regarding the benefits of contact among prejudice-prone
individuals is “mixed”, particularly for those higher in social dominance
orientation (SDO), one of the field’s most important individual differences.
Problematically, person-variables are typically considered in isolation
despite being inter-correlated, leaving the question of which unique
psychological aspects of prejudice-proneness (e.g., authoritarianism, antiegalitarianism,
cognitive style) are responsive to intergroup contact
unresolved. To address this shortcoming, in a large sample of White
Americans (N = 465) we simultaneously examined the contact-attitude
association at varying levels of ideological (SDO, right-wing
authoritarianism), cognitive-style (need for closure), and identity-based
(group identification) indicators of prejudice-proneness. Examining a broad
range of intergroup criterion measures (e.g., racism, support for racial
profiling) we reveal that greater contact quality is associated with lower
levels of intergroup hostility for those both lower and higher on a variety of
indicators of prejudice-proneness, simultaneously considered.
Kteily, Nour, G. Hodson, K. Dhont and A. K. Ho. Forthcoming. Too Ideologically Extreme, Close-Minded, or Highly Identified for Prejudice Reduction? Testing the Unique Benefits of Intergroup Contract Across Different Types of Individual Differences. Group Processes & Intergroup Relations.