Contact, Political Solidarity and Collective Action: An Indian Case Study of Relations between Historically Disadvantaged Communities

Abstract

Research on the contact hypothesis has highlighted the role of contact in improving intergroup relations. Most of this research has addressed the problem of transforming the prejudices of historically advantaged communities, thereby eroding wider patterns of discrimination and inequality. In the present research, drawing on evidence from a cross-sectional survey conducted in New Delhi, we explored an alternative process through which contact may promote social change, namely by fostering political solidarity and empowerment amongst the disadvantaged. The results indicated that Muslim studentsˈ experiences of contact with other disadvantaged communities were associated with their willingness to participate in joint collective action to reduce shared inequalities. This relationship was mediated by perceptions of collective efficacy and shared historical grievances and moderated by positive experiences of contact with the Hindu majority. Implications for recent debates about the relationship between contact and social change are discussed.

“Welcome to our neighbourhood”: Collective confidence in contact facilitates successful mixing in residential settings

“…Common identity salience (one typical outcome of contact) has been directly linked to a reduction in group efficacy among Black and Latino students in the US (Ufkes et al, 2016). Elsewhere, contact between minority groups has been found to increase their participation in collective action against their shared majority outgroup (Cakal et al, 2016;Dixon et al, 2017), while positive interracial contact has been linked to the willingness of the dominant group to engage in collective action on behalf of the minority (Selvanathan et al, 2017).…”

Political solidarity: A theory and a measure

“…For instance, existing measures assess positive emotions towards the group (Dragojevic & Giles, 2014;Wheeless, 1976), identification with the group (Doosje, Ellemers, & Spears, 1995;Leach et al, 2008;Wiley et al, 2013), and beliefs that the ingroup and outgroup should "stick together" (Glasford & Calcagno, 2012, Study 1). Other measures relate to various forms of support, such as prosocial attitudes towards the outgroup (Stavrova & Schlösser, 2015;Vollhardt et al, 2016), expressions of support for resolving the outgroup's cause (Cortland et al, 2017), empathic concern towards the outgroup (Papacostas, 2012), and collective action intentions to help address the outgroup's cause (Chayinska, Minescu, & McGarty, 2017;Dixon et al, 2017;Glasford & Calcagno, 2012, Study 2;Saab, Tausch, Spears, & Cheung, 2015;Subašić, Schmitt, & Reynolds, 2011). A notable exception to the uni-or bi-dimensional measurement of solidarity comes from Smith, McGarty, and Thomas (2018), who assessed Twitter users' solidarity with refugees by coding the proportion of their tweets that communicated pro-refugee sentiment, affiliation, loyalty, and collective action.…”

Intergroup contact fosters more inclusive social identities

“…Vollhardt et al (2016) observed that South Indians from disadvantaged caste and religious groups were more likely to express support for another disadvantaged group when they recognized similarities between their own and other groups' experiences of discrimination. Dixon et al (2017) found that Indian Muslims who reported having more contact with other disadvantaged groups were also more likely to recognize shared grievances and to express support for collective action benefiting all disadvantaged groups. Our research adds to this literature by examining intergroup relations between two disadvantaged groups, one of which occupies an intermediate position in the social hierarchy.…”