‘Gringos’ in Mexico: Cross-Sectional and Longitudinal Effects of Language School-Promoted Contact on Intergroup Bias

By Anja Eller, Dominic Abrams. 2003

156 citations recorded by the source corpus.

Subfields: Social Psychology, Sociology and Political Science

View Paper: https://www.semanticscholar.org/paper/f84bbd8bd225f764148dd19009252ec39cf157b1

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

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).”
Improving intergroup relations through direct, extended and other forms of indirect contact (2011, background): “Cognitively, although greater knowledge of the other group had only limited impact in reducing bias (Pettigrew & Tropp, 2008; but also see Eller & Abrams, 2003, 2004), the manner in which contact changed the ways people socially categorized others and perceived the relationship between these…”
Cross-Group Friendships and Intergroup Attitudes (2011, background): “Related work on intergroup relations highlighting the role of positive affective processes (e.g., Eller & Abrams, 2003) suggests that feelings of closeness to outgroup members should yield strong effects of cross-group friendships.”
Come together: longitudinal comparisons of Pettigrew's reformulated intergroup contact model and the Common Ingroup Identity Model in Anglo-French and Mexican-American contexts (2004, background): “Unless otherwise indicated, measures are taken from Eller and Abrams (2003).”
The Single Factor Fallacy: Implications of Missing Critical Variables from an Analysis of Intergroup Contact Theory1 (2017, unknown): “In short, the results of longitudinal studies typically support the bidirectional nature of the contact–prejudice relationship, emphasizing that this relationship constitutes a dynamic, reciprocal process (e.g., Eller & Abrams, 2003; Swart, Hewstone, Christ & Voci, 2011).”
Silencing the Past (2010, background): “This finding is in line with other research on the effects of contact on prejudice reduction (Binder et al., 2009; Eller & Abrams, 2003).”
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.”
Multicultural and Colorblind Ideology, Stereotypes, and Ethnocentrism among Black and White Americans (2007, background): “However, it seems reasonable that people who have greater contact perceive ethnic group differences as less important than their common identity (Eller & Abrams, 2003, 2004; Gaertner & Dovidio, 2000).”
Changing the ideological roots of prejudice: Longitudinal effects of ethnic intergroup contact on social dominance orientation (2014, background): “When measured separately, however, contact quality is typically the stronger predictor of the two (e.g., Binder et al., 2009; Eller & Abrams, 2003).”