Parallel lives: Intergroup contact, threat, and the segregation of everyday activity spaces.

Abstract

Although intergroup contact can reduce prejudice, opportunities to experience such contact are often constrained by systems of segregation. Work on this problem has focused on divisions entrenched within institutions of residence, education and employment. Our research employed a complementary approach, which treated segregation as the outcome of individuals' movements over time within everyday life spaces. Taking as a case study Catholics' and Protestants' use of public environments in north Belfast, we used GPS tracking technology, combined with GIS analytics, to explore the time geography of residents' activity space use over a two-week period (Study 1). We also conducted a field survey to explore how psychological factors shaped their willingness to use activity spaces beyond their own communities (Study 2). Analysis based on around 1000 hours of raw movement data revealed that north Belfast is marked by high levels of segregation, expressed via residents' limited use of public spaces, facilities and pathways located in outgroup areas. However, use of shared spaces is also common, with Catholics spending more time in such spaces than Protestants. Structural equation modelling suggested that residents' self-reported willingness to use activity spaces outside their own communities was associated with both negative and positive intergroup contact-relationships partially mediated by realistic threat, symbolic threat, and anxiety over interaction across sectarian lines. Both kinds of contact and realistic threat were also associated with the time residents actually spent in spaces beyond their own communities. Opportunities for integrating psychological and geographic research on contact and segregation are highlighted.

The role of individual differences in understanding and enhancing intergroup contact

“…Research in this area would benefit from a greater variety of methods for measuring intergroup contact, for example, diary methods like experience sampling (Page‐Gould, 2012), social network analysis (Wölfer et al, 2017), observation of non‐verbal behavior and physiological responses (West & Turner, 2014; West, Turner, & Levita, 2015), and GPS Tracking (Dixon et al, 2019). These are more objective than self‐reported measures and can enable us to observe how intergroup contact unfolds over time as a function of individual differences.…”

Contact Logger: Measuring everyday intergroup contact experiences in near-time

“…Researchers have suggested that intergroup contact needs to be studied in a way that recognizes intergroup dynamics as well as the situated nature of intergroup interactions (e.g., Dixon et al, 2019). In addition, recent studies have begun to examine fleeting interactions with strangers in intergroup contexts (e.g., Thomsen & Rafiqi, 2018).…”

‘Social Re-presentation for…’: An Action-Oriented Formula for Intergroup Relations Research

“…Indeed, perceptions also feature centrally in contact and prejudice research, which studies the possibility of conflict attenuation by means of specified forms of intergroup contact (Dixon et al, 2015). Such studies, and related studies of intergroup threats as they unfold over spatial and temporal dimensions, have been a cornerstone of research aimed at conflict resolution (Dixon et al, 2019).…”