Positive contact predicts reduced prejudice, but negative contact may increase prejudice at a stronger rate. The current project builds on this work in four ways: establishing an understanding of contact that is grounded in subjective experience, examining the affective mediators involved in the negative contact-prejudice relationship, extending research on the effects of positive and negative contact to minority groups, and examining the contact asymmetry experimentally. Study 1 introduced anger as a mediator of the relationships between positive and negative contact and prejudice among White Americans ( N = 371), using a contact measure that reflected the frequency and intensity of a wide range of experiences. Study 2 found a contact asymmetry among Black and Hispanic Americans ( N = 365). Study 3 found initial experimental evidence of a contact asymmetry ( N = 309). We conclude by calling for a more nuanced understanding of intergroup contact that recognizes its multifaceted and subjective nature.

The more that individuals with overweight or obesity experience weight stigma and internalize weight bias, the more they report using maladaptive coping and the less they report using adaptive coping when dealing with weight stigma. Maladaptive coping is strongly associated with poorer psychological well-being. Thus, those who experience more frequent weight stigma may be more vulnerable to psychological distress because they appear to be at greater risk of employing maladaptive coping strategies.

Positive contact with advantaged group members can improve disadvantaged group members’ attitudes towards them, yet it may also lower perceptions of group discrimination and consequent collective action. Little is known, however, about how negative contact with the advantaged predicts collective action among members of disadvantaged groups. With samples of Black and Hispanic Americans, we tested positive and negative contact with White Americans as predictors of self‐reported collective action behaviour and future intentions. Across both samples, negative contact with White Americans predicted greater collective action, largely through the mechanisms of perceived discrimination and intergroup anger. Simultaneously, positive contact showed a negative indirect effect on collective action primarily through reduced anger. These findings suggest that negative contact may be a potential driver of social change among racial minorities. Implications of these findings for the contact and collective action literatures are discussed.

These findings provide initial conceptual support for the identity disruption model and extend previous models of body dissatisfaction and disordered eating to include processes that occur earlier in life. This model opens up the possibility for new interventions that are targeted toward those who are most vulnerable to developing body dissatisfaction and disordered eating.

Increased contact between members of different racial groups is often conceptualized as an antidote to racism (Pettigrew & Tropp, 2006). Some studies, however, find that people living in racially diverse areas report higher levels of racism than those living in homogenous enclaves (Putnam, 2007). Further, increased immigration and racial diversity within nations has been associated with a number of divisive geopolitical trends, such as the British exit from the European Union and the rise of White nationalism in America (Inglehart & Norris, 2016). One simple yet understudied reason for this paradox might be that with increasing racial diversity comes increased negative as well as positive contact (Barlow et al., 2012; Paolini, Harwood, & Rubin, 2010). Until recently, negative contact was largely ignored in the literature on intergroup contact, in part because the practical focus was on identifying what types of contact could best be harnessed to reduce prejudice (Allport, 1954). Recently, however, there has been more of an effort to capture the real-life complexity of intergroup contact, which includes a mixture of positive, neutral, and negative experiences. This trend heralds a fundamental shift in the presumed brief of contact researchaway from identifying predictors of prejudice reduction and toward an examination of how contact experiences relate to feelings toward out-groups "in the wild." The nascent field of research on negative contact embraces the theoretical and empirical separability of positive and negative contact experiences but has not yet recognized that this approach also necessitates deep engagement with the separability of the positive and 844269P SSXXX10.

This paper is the first to apply the contact hypothesis, a social psychological theory of prejudice reduction, to the field of weight bias. It aims to investigate whether contact with overweight people is associated with the extent to which people report weight bias, as well as vigilance around their own bodies. In 2013 we recruited 1176 American participants to complete surveys regarding prejudice toward overweight people, as well as a suite of measures capturing people's relationships with their own weight (fat talk, drive for thinness, and body-checking behavior). Positive contact with overweight people predicted decreased prejudice, regardless of whether participants were overweight (p < .001) or not (p = .003). However, negative contact was a stronger predictor of increased prejudice (p < .001 for both samples). For non-overweight participants, any contact with overweight people (whether positive or negative) predicted increased body-checking behaviors (positive-p = .002, negative-p < .001) and fat talk (positive-p = .047, negative-p < .001), and negative contact predicted increased drive for thinness (p < .001). However, for those who were overweight a different picture emerged. While negative contact predicted increased body-checking behaviors (p < .001) and fat talk (p < .001), positive contact was protective, predicting decreased drive for thinness (p = .001) and body-checking behaviors (p < .001). This paper demonstrates that the interactions we have with overweight people are inherently tied to both our attitudes towards them and our relationship with our own bodies.

The role of the mirror system in action understanding has been widely debated. Some authors have suggested that the mirror system plays an important role in action understanding (Rizzolatti and Sinigaglia, 2010), whereas others have claimed that direct evidence to support this view is lacking (Hickok, 2009). If mirror neurons have an active role in action understanding rather than passive visuomotor transformation during action observation, they should respond differently to the observation of actions depending on the intentions of the observer. In this fMRI study, twenty participants observed identical actions under different instruction contexts. The task was either to understand the actions, identify the physical features of the actions, or passively observe the actions. A multi-voxel pattern analysis revealed unique patterns of activation in ventral premotor cortex and inferior parietal lobule across the different contexts. The results suggest that ventral premotor and inferior parietal areas respond differently to observed actions depending on the mindset of the observer. This is consistent with the view that these regions do not merely process observed actions passively, but play an active role in action understanding.

No abstract