Direct contact and authoritarianism as moderators between extended contact and reduced prejudice

Abstract

Using a representative sample of Dutch adults (N = 1238), we investigated the moderating influence of direct contact and authoritarianism on the potential of extended contact to reduce prejudice. As expected, direct contact and authoritarianism moderated the effect of extended contact on prejudice. Moreover, the third-order moderation effect was also significant, revealing that extended contact has the strongest effect among high authoritarians with low levels of direct contact. We identified trust and perceived threat as the mediating processes underlying these moderation effects. The present study thus attests to the theoretical and practical relevance of reducing prejudice via extended contact. The discussion focuses on the role of extended contact in relation to direct contact and authoritarianism as well as on the importance of trust in intergroup contexts. Mediated Moderators of Extended Contact 3Direct contact and authoritarianism as moderators between extended contact and reduced prejudice: Lower threat and greater trust as mediators Originally proposed by Wright, Aron, McLaughlin-Volpe, and Ropp (1997), the extended contact hypothesis asserts that the mere fact of knowing an ingroup member who maintains close relations with an outgroup member ameliorates outgroup attitudes. During the past decade, correlational and (quasi-)experimental support for this hypothesis has increased, demonstrating that people who witness friendships between in-and outgroup members report lower levels of outgroup prejudice than those without extended contact experiences (Paolini,

Why do right-wing adherents engage in more animal exploitation and meat consumption?

“…Those higher in RWA or SDO hold prejudiced attitudes against deviants and outgroups (e.g., immigrants) because they are seen as threatening the dominant culture and ideological system (e.g., Asbrock et al2010;Dhont & Van Hiel, 2011;Hodson et al, 2009;Kteilly, Ho, & Sidanius, 2012). Only recently have researchers considered how dominanceideologies against human outgroups share commonalities with human-animal relations and exploitation (e.g., Costello & Hodson, 2010, in press;Hodson & Costello, 2012;Jackson, 2011;Plous, 2003).…”

Imagined contact encourages prosocial behavior towards outgroup members

“…To confirm that imagined contact exerted an effect on cooperation over and above participants prior direct contact experience, we measured participants previous contact with the outgroup with two items tapping the quantity and quality of contact experience: "How often do you believe you have interacted with people from India" (1 = never to 7 = all the time), "How positive or negative have your interactions with people from India been" (1 = very negative to 7 = very positive; adapted from Paolini et al, 2014). Scores were combined into a single multiplicative index of frequent positive contact (as per Dhont & van Hiel, 2011). We also controlled for participants' tendency to present themselves in socially desirable ways, which in economic experiments may increase overall levels of cooperation (Zizzo & Fleming, 2011).…”

Strengthening Purity: Moral Purity as a Mediator of Direct and Extended Cross-Group Friendships on Sexual Prejudice

“…Extended cross-group friendships were assessed with five items (see Christ et al, 2010;Dhont & Van Hiel, 2011;Tam, Hewstone, Kenworthy, & Cairns, 2009, Study 2; see also Lolliot et al, 2015): "Do you have heterosexual friends who have homosexuals friends? "; "How many of your heterosexual friends have homosexual friends?…”