conflict resolution

shulman et al 2020

helping people see that they judge aggression in a different intergroup conflict as immoral reduces justification of aggression within their own intergroup conflict

bar-tal et al 2021

by framing the beliefs justifying CSM in extreme terms, makes those ideas seem absurd or indefensible

• undermines the validity of such beliefs, in hopes of dismantling the CSM

pettigrew and tropp 2006

In meta-analysis of contact studies, there was a significant lasting negative correlation between direct contact and outgroup derogation

• suggests contact settings are effective in reducing conflict in the long term

lemmer and wagner 2015

contact interventinos outside the lab were successful in reducing ethnic prejudice

ramiah and hewstone 2013

identified 3 key mediators of successful contact

• reduced anxiety - most important mediator, as encourages future contact meetings

• empathy

• knowledge of the outgroup

van assche et al 2023

contact is effective, even among those who feel highly threatened and discriminated against by the outgroup

• perceived threat and discrimination were strongly negatively associated with intergroup attitudes, but did not hinder the effect of contact on these attitudes

sengupta et al 2023

contact increased white New-Zealanders warmth towards ethnic minorities over time, but did not extend to supporting the political interests of ethnic minorities

• suggests a limited effectiveness when it comes to political interests

reimer and sengupata 2022

Meta-analysis of 98 studies of contact with disadvantaged group members

• generally found that intergroup contact had a sedative effect for perceived injustice, collective action and support for reparative policies

  • small effect sizes

• 31% of studies found positive association between intergroup contact and perceived injustices

• negative contact was found to increased support for social change

= Mixed findings and reliefd on correlational studies

de vos et al 2013

expressions of ‘pure anger’ improved intergroup relations by arousing increased empathy for the communicator, but expressions of ‘non-pure anger’ (mixed by contempt) worsened intergroup relations

• this included infrahumanisation and dehumanisation of the outgroup