Online intergroup contact and intergroup attitudes: A cross sectional and a longitudinal study of Greeks and Germans interacting on Twitter and Facebook

Abstract

The current study examined social networking sites, specifically Twitter and Facebook, as spaces for intergroup communication and contact between members of two national groups, Germans and Greeks, during the turbulent times of the Greek economic crisis. A cross-sectional study on Twitter and a longitudinal study on Facebook were conducted. We examined how social psychological variables (such as prior and extended contact, friendship, intergroup anxiety, national identification) and variables specific to the communication context (such as perceived quality of contact, vicarious contact quality, perceived anonymity, self-disclosure) relate to intergroup attitudes. Both social psychological and communication-relevant variables statistically significantly and independently predicted intergroup attitudes. Moreover, the longitudinal study showed that online contact improved intergroup attitudes and reduced intergroup anxiety. Findings suggest that intergroup contact via social networking sites can have positive effects on intergroup attitudes and that both social psychological and communication-related variables are important in understanding these effects.

Are Women Brave or Braver Than Men? Judgments of Implicit and Explicit Intergroup Comparisons

“…We extend this by suggesting that social norms related to the expression of stereotypes may be among the motivational factors that impose boundaries on fluency effects. In a similar vein, communicators in a recent study by Kioumi and Gardikiotis (2023) tended to prioritize ingroup norms and showed stronger stereotypical thinking the more they felt that they were communicating anonymously.…”

Virtually meeting “The Intouchables”: Online contact, sense of community, and prejudice toward people with a disability

“…There is evidence that online contact can improve attitudes for a variety of intergroup relations, like relationships based on ethnicity/nationality/ immigration status (Bagci et al, 2021;Kim & Wojcieszak, 2018;Kioumi & Gardikiotis, 2023), religion (Lev-On & Lissitsa, 2015;Walther et al, 2015;White et al, 2014;White, Turner, et al, 2019), sexual orientation (Boccanfuso et al, 2021;Hatoum & White, 2022;White, Verrelli, et al, 2019), age (Chua et al, 2013).…”