Come together: longitudinal comparisons of Pettigrew's reformulated intergroup contact model and the Common Ingroup Identity Model in Anglo-French and Mexican-American contexts

By Anja Eller, Dominic Abrams. 2004

283 citations recorded by the source corpus.

Subfields: Social Psychology, Sociology and Political Science

View Paper: https://www.semanticscholar.org/paper/ad1dce1e1e6b10bebfb74ed9c3619f5da3363763

How researchers see this paper

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

In Social Psychology

In Sociology and Political Science

Citations in the corpus

Can imagined interactions produce positive perceptions? Reducing prejudice through simulated social contact. (2009, background): “If positive contact can make relevant outgroup members seem more similar to self, which we know is the case for actual and extended contact (Eller & Abrams, 2004; Wright et al., 1997), then those outgroup members should benefit from the positive projection that ingroup members typically benefit…”
Reducing intergroup bias through intergroup contact: Twenty years of progress and future directions (2017, background): “At the interpersonal level, through repeated, intimate direct contact, the outgroup becomes incorporated into the self-concept, which then leads, at the intergroup level, to more positive outgroup attitudes (Eller & Abrams, 2004).”
Advances in Intergroup Contact (2012, background): “In addition to the direct relationship from primary outgroup contact to secondary outgroup attitudes reported on earlier, Eller and Abrams (2004) provided initial longitudinal support for the attitude generalization hypothesis.”
Direct, extended, and mass-mediated contact with immigrants in Italy: their associations with emotions, prejudice, and humanity perceptions (2017, background): “Although this cognitive mechanism has proved to exert some effects on reducing prejudice (e.g., Eller & Abrams, 2004), there is now general agreement that affective factors play a greater role in the contact process than cognitive factors do (Brown & Hewstone, 2005; Miller, Smith, & Mackie, 2004).”
Longitudinal effects of contact on intergroup relations: The role of majority and minority group membership and intergroup emotions (2010, background): “For instance, Brown and colleagues (Brown, Eller, Leeds, & Stace, 2007; see also, e.g. Eller & Abrams, 2003, 2004; Stephan & Rosenfield, 1978) examined attitudes of British state secondary school students towards students of a private school, located in the same town.”
Imagined contact as a prejudice‐reduction intervention in schools: the underlying role of similarity and attitudes (2014, background): “Ample research has provided strong evidence about the effectiveness of intergroup contact in reducing prejudice (e.g., Eller & Abrams, 2004; Pettigrew & Tropp, 2008; Stathi & Crisp, 2010; Voci & Hewstone, 2003; for review, see Pettigrew & Tropp, 2006).”
Interminority Attitudes (2014, unknown): “Evidence for this so-called secondary transfer effect was found in different studies (e.g., Eller and Abrams 2004; Van Laar et al. 2005).”
Challenging the Stubborn Core of Opposition to Equality: Racial Contact and Policy Attitudes (2010, background): “Thus, as demonstrated by longitudinal contact research (e.g., Binder et al., 2009; Eller & Abrams, 2004; Levin, van Laar, & Sidanius, 2003), both causal paths are in operation, but they may not always be equal in magnitude.”
Does contact reduce prejudice or does prejudice reduce contact? A longitudinal test of the contact hypothesis among majority and minority groups in three European countries. (2009, background): “With few exceptions (Gerard & Miller, 1975; Schofield, 1979), other longitudinal studies have also shown that contact generally has beneficial effects on intergroup attitudes (Brown et al., 2007; Eller & Abrams, 2003, 2004; Hamilton & Bishop, 1976; Maras & Brown, 1996).”