Does intergroup contact reduce prejudice: Recent meta-analytic findings.

By T. Pettigrew, Linda R. Tropp. 2000

860 citations recorded by the source corpus.

Subfields: Ecology, Evolution, Behavior and Systematics, Plant Science, Sociology and Political Science

View Paper: https://www.semanticscholar.org/paper/02f3df6a2a8fc8add87f3cb07edc5e01a30d8260

How researchers see this paper

The researchers whose trusted networks rank it highest, strongest advocate first. Every researcher gets a different order.

In Ecology, Evolution, Behavior and Systematics

In Plant Science

In Sociology and Political Science

Citations in the corpus

The police officer's dilemma: using ethnicity to disambiguate potentially threatening individuals. (2002, result): “…as filler items designed to mask the questionnaire's focus on prejudice and stereotyping, but also because these constructs have been shown to be related to prejudice or stereotyping in previous research (Neuberg & Newson, 1993; Pettigrew & Tropp, 2000; Pratto, Sidanius, Stallworth, & Malle, 1994).”
Intergroup Contact and Prejudice Toward Immigrants in Italy: The Mediational Role of Anxiety and the Moderational Role of Group Salience (2003, background): “…impressed by the growing evidence that the strength of the effect from contact to attitudes is stronger than the reverse effect (Pettigrew, 1997; Pettigrew & Tropp, 2000).4 The second limitation of our research concerns our use of respondents from the majority group only (i.e. Italians and not…”
Contact, Perspective Taking, and Anxiety as Predictors of Stereotype Endorsement, Explicit Attitudes, and Implicit Attitudes (2007, background): “…examining over 200 studies provided convincing support for the value of contact, fi nding moderate to strong relationships between contact with outgroup members and more positive attitudes toward the outgroup as well as reduced endorsement of negative outgroup stereotypes (Pettigrew & Tropp, 2000).”
Intergroup Contact: The Past, Present, and the Future (2003, background): “Pettigrew and Tropp (2000) concluded from their meta-analysis that affective factors play a critical role, potentially as mediators, of the effect of contact for reducing bias.”
The Role of Threats in the Racial Attitudes of Blacks and Whites (2002, background): “Although contact under positive conditions can improve intergroup relations (Allport, 1954; Pettigrew & Tropp, 2000; W. G. Stephan & Stephan, 1996), contact under negative conditions can have deleterious effects on intergroup relations.”
African Americans' Implicit Racial Attitudes and the Depletion of Executive Function after Interracial Interactions. (2005, background): “In other words, dyadic interaction between members of different groups may be essential for interracial harmony (Pettigrew & Tropp, 2000).”
Intergroup Contact and Grandparent–Grandchild Communication: The Effects of Self-Disclosure on Implicit and Explicit Biases Against Older People (2006, background): “…research (e.g. Herek & Capitanio, 1996), comparisons of reciprocal pathways in cross-sectional research (e.g. Pettigrew, 1997), and a meta-analysis of contact (Pettigrew & Tropp, 2000) have supported the causal sequence stemming from contact to prejudice reduction, rather than the other way around.”
Do Curricular and Cocurricular Diversity Activities Influence Racial Bias? A Meta-Analysis (2009, background): “In fact, another recent meta-analysis found that intergroup contact reduces prejudice across a variety of samples and situations (Pettigrew & Tropp, 2000).”
Buddy, Can You Spare A Dime? (2003, positive): “…by relying on experimental or longitudinal designs, using statistical techniques to evaluate the strength of reciprocal paths, or examining situations in which the ability to choose contact is diminished) have generally found more support for contact than selection (Pettigrew and Tropp 2000).”
Improving Intergroup Relations in Higher Education: A Critical Examination of the Influence of Educational Interventions on Racial Bias (2004, background): “A long line of research on intergroup contact (see Allport, 1954; Pettigrew, 1998b; Pettigrew & Tropp, 2000) also suggests a number of factors that must be present for contact between groups to reduce bias: equal status between groups, cooperative as opposed to competitive intergroup interaction,…”
Cultural distance, mindfulness and passive xenophobia: using Integrated Threat Theory to explore home higher education students’ perspectives on ‘internationalisation at home’ (2009, background): “The contact hypothesis (Allport, 1954; Pettigrew & Tropp, 2000; Dovidio, Gaertner & Kawakami, 2003) predicts the need for (a) equal status; (b) a culture of egalitarianism; (c) shared goals promoting interdependence; and (d) opportunities for positive intergroup interaction and friendship.”
‘Gringos’ in Mexico: Cross-Sectional and Longitudinal Effects of Language School-Promoted Contact on Intergroup Bias (2003, background): “It is obvious how friendship can be interrelated with at least three of the other essential conditions: friendship would probably not develop or would terminate soon if it was not characterized by equality of status, common goals, and cooperation to some extent (also see Pettigrew & Tropp, 2000).”
Conflict resolution education: The field, the findings, and the future (2004, background): “Many people have argued convincingly that CRE does and should overlap with antibias education because prejudice is an underlying cause for conflict, and we need to realize the impact of prejudice on schools and communities (Lantieri and Patti, 1996; Oskamp, 2000).”
The Original Sin of Cognition: Fear, Prejudice, and Generalization (2017, background): “Whether all these conditions must be met, and whether there are additional necessary conditions has been a matter of some controversy over the ensuing decades, but the core idea has received considerable empirical support (Pettigrew and Tropp 2000).”
Interracial contact and racial constancy: A multi-site study of racial intergroup bias in 3-5 year old Anglo-British children (2005, neutral): “Extended contact allows participants to experience contact while avoiding any anxiety or negative feeling, which may be caused by direct contact (Paolini, Hewstone, Cairns & Voci, 2004; Pettigrew & Tropp, 2000; Stephan & Stephan, 1985).”
The Role of Emotions in Determining Willingness to Engage in Intergroup Contact (2002, methodology): “…contact under specified conditions (including equal status between the groups, cooperative intergroup interactions, opportunities for personal acquaintance, and supportive egalitarian norms) is a powerful technique for improving relations among groups (Pettigrew, 1998; Pettigrew & Tropp, 2000).”