Imagined contact with atypical outgroup members that are anti-normative within their group can reduce prejudice

Orkun Yetkili,Dominic Abrams,Giovanni A Travaglino,Roger Giner-Sorolla

doi:10.1016/j.jesp.2018.02.004

Abstract

Can imagining contact with anti-normative outgroup members be an effective tool for improving intergroup relations? Extant theories predict greatest prejudice reduction following contact with typical outgroup members. In contrast, using subjective group dynamics theory, we predicted that imagining contact with anti-normative outgroup members canpromote positive intergroup attitudes because these atypical members potentially reduce intergroup threat and reinforce ingroup norms. In Study 1 (N = 79) when contact was imagined with an anti-normative rather than a normative outgroup member, that member was viewed as less typical and the contact was less threatening. Studies 2 (N = 47) and 3 (N = 180), employed differing methods, measures and target groups, and controlled for the effects of direct contact. Both studies showed that imagined contact with anti-normative outgroup members promoted positive attitudes to the outgroup, relative both to a no contact control condition and (in Study 3) to a condition involving imagined contact with an ingroup antinormative member. Overall, this research offers new practical and theoretical approaches to prejudice reduction.

Highlights

Intergroup contact theory suggests that positive contact between individual members of different groups can improve intergroup relations (Allport, 1954; Oskamp & Jones, 2000; Pettigrew & Tropp, 2006)
We proposed that imagined contact with anti-normative outgroup members can be a vehicle for promoting positive intergroup relations
Prior research shows that intergroup contact has most positive effects if the outgroup member is typical (e.g. Brown et al, 1999), this has been operationalized as meaning only that the person is stereotypically consistent

Summary

Introduction

Intergroup contact theory suggests that positive contact between individual members of different groups can improve intergroup relations (Allport, 1954; Oskamp & Jones, 2000; Pettigrew & Tropp, 2006). More recent theories have suggested that contact may be more fruitful if it helps to create a new common superordinate ingroup, or if there is the possibility of a dual identity (i.e., both subgroups retain their distinctiveness and recognize that they share a superordinate category – see Pettigrew & Tropp, 2011; Gaertner & Dovidio, 2000). These more recent approaches recognize that generalization can only occur if ingroup-outgroup memberships are salient during the contact experience. Even when intergroup categorization remains intact, imagined contact with atypical outgroup members could provide a viable vehicle for improving intergroup relations

Methods

Results

Conclusion