Unwilling, but not unaffected—Imagined contact effects for authoritarians and social dominators
Corresponding Author
Frank Asbrock
Philipps University Marburg, Germany
Correspondence to: Frank Asbrock, Philipps University Marburg, Gutenbergstr. 18, 35032 Marburg, Germany.
E-mail: [email protected]
Search for more papers by this authorCorresponding Author
Frank Asbrock
Philipps University Marburg, Germany
Correspondence to: Frank Asbrock, Philipps University Marburg, Gutenbergstr. 18, 35032 Marburg, Germany.
E-mail: [email protected]
Search for more papers by this authorAbstract
According to a dual process model perspective, intergroup contact should be particularly effective for people high in right-wing authoritarianism (RWA), but not for those high in social dominance orientation (SDO), because of different underlying motivational goals. In the present studies, we tested the hypothesis that imagined contact, that is, the mental representation of a positive intergroup encounter, improves intergroup relations for high RWAs. In two experimental studies, we showed that high RWAs, compared with low RWAs, show less negative emotions toward Turks (Study 1; N = 120) and more willingness to engage in future contact with Romani people (Study 2; N = 85) after imagined contact. As expected, people high in SDO did not benefit from imagined contact. Instead, people low in SDO showed less negative emotions after imagined contact in Study 1, but this effect was not replicated in the second study. Theoretical implications and the role of imagined contact as a possible intervention for highly biased individuals will be discussed. Copyright © 2013 John Wiley & Sons, Ltd.
REFERENCES
- Adorno, T. W., Frenkel-Brunswik, E., Levinson, D., & Sanford, N.(1950). The authoritarian personality. New York, NY: Harper.
- Aiken, L. S., & West, S. G. (1991). Multiple regression: Testing and interpreting interactions. Newbury Park, California: Sage.
- Allport, G. W. (1954). The nature of prejudice. Cambridge, MA: Perseus Books.
- Altemeyer, B. (1981). Right-wing authoritarianism. Winnipeg, Manitoba: The University of Manitoba Press.
- Altemeyer, B. (1996). The authoritarian specter. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press.
- Altemeyer, B. (1998). The “other” authoritarian personality. In M. P. Zanna (Ed.), Advances in experimental social psychology (Vol. 30, pp. 47–91). San Diego: Academic Press.
- Armitage, C. J., & Reidy, J. G. (2008). Use of mental simulations to change theory of planned behaviour variables. British Journal of Health Psychology, 13, 513–524.
- Asbrock, F., Christ, O., Duckitt, J., & Sibley, C. G. (2012). Differential effects of intergroup contact for authoritarians and social dominators: A dual process model perspective. Personality and Social Psychology Bulletin, 38, 477–490.
- Asbrock, F., Lemmer, G., Wagner, U., Becker, J., & Koller, J. (2009). Das Gefühl macht den Unterschied – Emotionen gegenüber Ausländern in Ost- und Westdeutschland [The feeling makes the difference—Emotions toward ‘foreigners’ in East and West Germany]. Deutsche Zustände, Folge 7 [German states, episode 7] (pp. 152–167). Frankfurt am Main: Suhrkamp.
- Brown, R., & Hewstone, M. (2005). An integrative theory of intergroup contact. In M. P. Zanna (Ed.), Advances in experimental social psychology (Vol. 37, pp. 255–343). San Diego: Academic Press.
- Cohrs, J. C., & Asbrock, F. (2009). Right-wing authoritarianism, social dominance orientation and prejudice against threatening and competitive ethnic groups. European Journal of Social Psychology, 32, 270–289.
- Cohrs, J. C., Moschner, B., Maes, J., & Kielmann, S. (2005). The motivational bases of right-wing authoritarianism and social dominance orientation: Relations to values and attitudes in the aftermath of September 11, 2001. Personality and Social Psychology Bulletin, 31, 1425–1434.
- Crisp, R. J., & Turner, R. N. (2009). Can imagined interactions produce positive perceptions? Reducing prejudice through simulated social contact. American Psychologist, 64, 231–240.
- Crisp, R. J., & Turner, R. N. (2012). The imagined contact hypothesis. In J. Olson, & M. P. Zanna (Eds.). Advances in experimental social psychology (vol. 46, pp. 125–182). Orlando, FL: Academic Press.
- Crisp, R. J., Husnu, S., Meleady, R., Stathi, S., & Turner, R. N. (2010) From imagery to intention: A dual route model of imagined contact effects. European Review of Social Psychology, 21, 188–236.
- Crisp, R. J., Stathi, S., Turner, R. N., & Husnu, S. (2008). Imagined intergroup contact: Theory, paradigm, and practice. Social and Personality Psychology Compass, 2, 1–18.
- Dhont, K., & Van Hiel, A. (2009). We must not be enemies: Interracial contact and the reduction of prejudice among authoritarians. Personality and Individual Differences, 46, 172–177.
- Dru, V. (2007). Authoritarianism, social dominance orientation and prejudice: Effects of various self-categorization conditions. Journal of Experimental Social Psychology, 43, 877–883.
- Duckitt, J. (2001). A dual-process cognitive-motivational theory of ideology and prejudice. In M. P. Zanna (Ed.), Advances in experimental social psychology (Vol. 33, pp. 41–113). San Diego: Academic Press.
- Duckitt, J., & Sibley, C. G. (2010). Right-wing authoritarianism and social dominance orientation differentially moderate intergroup effects on prejudice. European Journal of Personality, 24, 583–601.
- Duriez, B., & Van Hiel, A. (2002). The march of modern fascism: A comparison of social dominance orientation and authoritarianism. Personality and Individual Differences, 32, 1199–1213.
- Esses, V. M., & Dovidio, J. F. (2002). The role of emotions in determining willingness to engage in intergroup contact. Personality and Social Psychology Bulletin, 28, 1202–1214.
- Fazio, R. H., Powell, M. C., & Herr, P. M. (1983). Toward a process model of the attitude–behavior relation: Accessing one's attitude upon mere observation of the attitude object. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 44, 723–735.
- Funke, F. (2005). The dimensionality of right-wing authoritarianism: Lessons from the dilemma between theory and measurement. Political Psychology, 26, 195–218.
- Garcia, S. M., Weaver, K., Moskowitz, G. B., & Darley, J. M. (2002). Crowded minds: The implicit bystander effect. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 83, 843−853.
- Haddock, G., Zanna, M. P., & Esses, V. M. (1993). Assessing the structure of prejudicial attitudes: The case of attitudes towards homosexuals. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 65, 1105–1118.
- Harwood, J., Paolini, S., Joyce, N., Rubin, M., & Arroyo, A. (2011). Secondary transfer effects from imagined contact: Group similarity affects the generalization gradient. The British Journal of Social Psychology, 50, 180–189.
- Heitmeyer, W. (2012). Gruppenbezogene Menschenfeindlichkeit in einem entsicherten Jahrzehnt [Group-focused enmity in an insecure decade]. In W. Heitmeyer (Ed.), Deutsche Zustände, Folge 10 [German states, episode 10] (pp. 15–41). Berlin: Suhrkamp.
- Hodson, G. (2008). Interracial prison contact: The pros for (socially dominant) cons. British Journal of Social Psychology, 47, 325–351.
- Hodson, G. (2011). Do ideologically intolerant people benefit from intergroup contact? Current Directions in Psychological Science, 20, 154–159.
- G. Hodson, & M. Hewstone (Eds.). (2013). Advances in intergroup contact. London, UK: Psychology Press.
- Hodson, G., Costello, K., & MacInnis, C. C. (2013). Is intergroup contact beneficial among intolerant people? Exploring individual differences in the benefits of contact on attitudes. In G. Hodson, & M. Hewstone (Eds.), Advances in intergroup contact (pp. 49–80). London, UK: Psychology Press.
- Hodson, G., Harry, H., & Mitchell, A. (2009). Independent benefits of contact and friendship on attitudes toward homosexuals among authoritarians and highly identified heterosexuals. European Journal of Social Psychology, 35, 509–525.
- Husnu, S., & Crisp, R. J. (2010a). Elaboration enhances the imagined contact effect. Journal of Experimental Social Psychology, 46, 943–950.
-
Husnu, S., &
Crisp, R. J. (2010b). Imagined intergroup contact: A new technique for encouraging greater inter-ethnic contact in Cyprus. Peace & Conflict: Journal of Peace Psychology, 16, 97–108.
10.1080/10781910903484776 Google Scholar
- Kessler, T., & Cohrs, J. C. (2008). The evolution of authoritarian processes: Fostering cooperation in large-scale groups. Group Dynamics: Theory, Research, and Practice, 12, 73–84.
- Lemmer, G., & Wagner, U. (2012). Effectiveness of direct and indirect contact programs: A meta-analysis of interventions to improve ethnic attitudes. Manuscript submitted for publication.
- Navarrete, C. D., McDonald, M., Molina, L., & Sidanius, J. (2010). Prejudice at the nexus of race and gender: An out-group male target hypothesis. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 98, 933–945.
- Page-Gould, E., Mendoza-Denton, R., & Tropp, L. R. (2008). With a little help from my cross-group friend: Reducing anxiety in intergroup contexts through cross-group friendship. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 95, 1080–1094.
- Pettigrew, T. F., & Tropp, L. R. (2006). A meta-analytic test of intergroup contact theory. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 90, 751–783.
- Pettigrew, T. F., & Tropp, L. R. (2011). When groups meet: The dynamics of intergroup contact. London: Psychology Press.
- Pratto, F., Sidanius, J., Stallworth, L. M., & Malle, B. M. (1994). Social dominance orientation: A personality variable predicting social and political attitudes. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 67, 741–763.
- Schmid, K., Hewstone, M., Küpper, B., Zick, A., & Wagner, U. (2012). Secondary transfer effects of intergroup contact: A cross-national comparison in Europe. Social Psychology Quarterly, 75, 28–51.
-
Sidanius, J., &
Pratto, F. (1999). Social dominance. Cambridge,UK: Cambridge University Press.
10.1017/CBO9781139175043 Google Scholar
- Stathi, S., & Crisp, R. J. (2008). Imagining intergroup contact promotes projection to outgroups. Journal of Experimental Social Psychology, 44, 943–957.
- Stathi, S., Crisp, R. J., & Hogg, M. A. (2011). Imagining intergroup contact enables member-to-group generalization. Group Dynamics: Theory Research and Practice, 15, 275–284.
- Stephan, W. G., & Renfro, C. L. (2003). The role of threat in intergroup relations. In D. M. Mackie, & E. R. Smith (Eds.), From prejudice to intergroup relations. Different reactions to social groups (pp. 191–207). New York, NY: Psychology Press.
- D. Strauß (Ed.). (2011). Studie zur aktuellen Bildungssituation deutscher Sinti und Roma. Dokumentation und Forschungsbericht [Study on the current state of education of Sinti and Romani people in Germany. Documentation and research report]. Marburg: I-Verb.de.
- Tam, T., Hewstone, M., Cairns, E., Tausch, N., Maio, G. R., & Kenworthy, J. (2007). The impact of intergroup emotions on forgiveness in Northern Ireland. Group Processes & Intergroup Relations, 10, 119–136.
- Thomsen, L., Green, E. G. T., & Sidanius, J. (2008). We will hunt them down: How social dominance orientation and right-wing authoritarianism fuel ethnic persecution of immigrants in fundamentally different ways. Journal of Experimental Social Psychology, 44, 1455–1464.
- Turner, R. N., & Crisp, R. J. (2010). Imagining intergroup contact reduces implicit prejudice. British Journal of Social Psychology, 49, 129–142.
- Turner, R. N., & West, K. (2012). Behavioural consequences of imagining intergroup contact with stigmatized outgroups. Group Processes and Intergroup Relations, 15, 193–202.
- Turner, R. N., Crisp, R. J., & Lambert, E. (2007). Imagining intergroup contact can improve intergroup attitudes. Group Processes and Intergroup Relations, 10, 427−441.
- Vezzali, L., Capozza, D., Giovannini, D., & Stathi, S. (2012). Improving implicit and explicit intergroup attitudes using imagined contact: An experimental intervention with elementary school children. Group Processes and Intergroup Relations, 15, 203–212.
- Wagner, U., van Dick, R., Pettigrew, T. F., & Christ, O. (2003). Ethnic prejudice in East and West Germany: The explanatory power of intergroup contact. Group Processes and Intergroup Relations, 6, 22–36.
- West, S. G., Aiken, L. S., & Krull, J. L. (1996). Experimental personality designs: Analyzing categorical by continuous variable interactions. Journal of Personality, 64, 1–49.
- West, K., & Bruckmüller, S. (2013). Nice and easy does it: How perceptual fluency moderates the effectiveness of imagined contact. Journal of Experimental Social Psychology, 49, 254–262.
- West, K., Holmes, E. A., & Hewstone, M. (2011). Enhancing imagined contact to reduce prejudice against people with schizophrenia. Group Processes and Intergroup Relations, 14, 407–428.
- Wolf, C., & Van Dick, R. (2008). Wenn anders nicht schlechter bedeutet - Wertschätzung von Vielfalt fördert Gleichwertigkeit der Gruppen [When different does not mean worse—Valuing diversity as a key to group equality]. In W. Heitmeyer (Ed.), Deutsche Zustände, Folge 6 [German states, episode 6] (pp. 137–153). Frankfurt am Main: Suhrkamp.