VonCharlotte Nickerson, published on 05.11.2021
The contact hypothesis was proposed by Gordon Allport (1897-1967) and states that social contact between social groups is sufficient to reduce intergroup prejudice. However, empirical evidence suggests that this only occurs in certain circumstances.
Main conclusions: contact hypothesis
- The contact hypothesis is essentially based on the idea that ingroups that have more interactions with a particular outgroup tend to develop more positive and less negative perceptions of that outgroup.
- Theorists have been interested in this for a long timeconflicts between groups. However, Robin Williams and Gordon Allport proposed a set of conditions for intensifying intergroup conflict that formed the basis of empirical research for several decades.
- Allport suggests four "positive factors" that lead to better intergroup relationships; However, recent research suggests that these factors may facilitate intergroup bias, but are not required.
- Although the contact hypothesis was originally studied in the context of racial and ethnic relationships, it is applicable to ingroup and outgroup relationships related to religion, age, sexuality, disease status, economic circumstances, and so on.
historical context
The contact hypothesis is the idea that intergroup contact can, under certain conditions, reduce prejudice between members of majority and minority groups.
In a single chapter of his bookThe nature of prejudiceGordon Allport (1955) tries to answer the question of what happens when groups interact with his "intergroup contact hypothesis".
This chapter spawned a large body of research on race relations and beyond. Theorists had speculated on the effects of intergroup contact since the 19th century.
Social Darwinists such as William Graham Sumner (1906) believed that contact between groups almost inevitably leads to conflict. Since most groups considered themselves superior, Sumner believed that animosity and conflict between the groups were natural and inevitable consequences of contact.
Perspectives such as Jackson (1983) and Levine and Campbell (1972) make similar predictions. In the 20th century perspectives began to diversify.
While some theorists believed that contact between groups, such as e.g., between races, "evoked suspicion, fear, resentment, disturbance, and sometimes open conflict" (Baker, 1934); others, like Lett (1945), believed that interracial contact leads to "mutual understanding and respect".
However, these early investigations were speculative rather than empirical (Pettigrew and Tropp, 2005). The burgeoning field of social psychology emphasized theories of contact between groups.
University of Alabama researchers Sims and Patrick (1936) were among the first to conduct a study of intergroup contact, but they were disappointing to find that anti-Black attitudes among white northern students increased as they at the University of Alabama, which was totally white then. .
Brophy (1946) was more in line with Allport's later work and examined racial relations between blacks and whites in the almost unbundled merchant marine. The researchers found that the more voyages white seafarers made with black seafarers, the more positive their racist attitudes became.
Similarly, in Philadelphia, white police officers with black colleagues showed fewer objections to working with black partners, admitting blacks to previously all-white police districts, and taking orders from qualified black officers (Kephart, 1957; Pettigrew and Tropp, 2005). . ).
Following these studies, Cornell University sociologist Robin Williams Jr. offered 102 Propositions on Intergroup Relations, which were an early formulation of intergroup contact theory.
These theses generally emphasized that intergroup contact reduces prejudice when (Williams, 1947):
- The two groups share similar status, interests, and responsibilities;
- the situation favors intimate and personal contact between the groups;
- the participants do not correspond to the stereotypical ideas of the members of their group;
- Activities go beyond group boundaries.
Stouffer et al. offered the first major field study of the effects of intergroup contact (1949).
Stouffer et al. showed that white soldiers who fought side-by-side with black soldiers in the 1944-1945 Battle of the Bulge tended to have much more positive attitudes toward their black counterparts (Pettigrew & Tropp, 2005), regardless of their status or place of origin.
Researchers such as Deutsch and Collins (1951); Wilner, Walkley and Cook (1955); and Works (1961) supported the growing evidence that contact reduced racial prejudice between blacks and whites through their studies of racially disaggregated housing arrangements.
Allport's four conditions
Scholars agree that all of this earlier work provided a basis and context for Allport's thinking (Pettigrew & Tropp, 2005). Indeed, in The Nature of Prejudice, Allport quoted Williams, Brophy, Stouffer et al. and housing studies.
In addition, Allport was influenced by his graduate students Bernard Kramer (1950) and Barbara MacKenzi (1948), who found that intergroup contact can both reduce and reinforce prejudice and ultimately explain these consistencies by assuming four "positive factors", to disapprove of group prejudice. Kontakt recalls Williams (1947):
- Equality of status between groups:Members of the contact situation must not have an unequal hierarchical relationship (e.g. teacher/student, employer/employee). and Tropp, 2005). Although some scholars emphasize that groups should have equal status before (Brewer & Kramer, 1985) and during (Foster & Finchilescu, 1986) a contact situation, research has shown that equal status can promote positive attitudes between groups even when it is groups initially differ in status. (Patchen, 1982; Schofield and Rich-Fulcher, 2001).
- common goal: Members must respond to each other to achieve their common desired goal. In order to have effective contact, groups usually need to actively seek a common goal. , 1982) could attract many people of different races and ethnic origins, attracting people from different groups to work together and respond to each other to achieve their common goals. This tends to lead to Allport's third feature of intergroup contact; Collaboration between groups (Pettigrew & Tropp, 2005).
- cross-group collaboration: Members must work together in a non-competitive environment. According to Allport (1954), achieving these common goals must be based on cooperation rather than competition. For example, in Sheriff et al. from (1961)Thieves Den Field Studythe researchers created barriers to shared goals, such as a planned picnic, that could only be resolved through collaboration between the two groups. This collaboration between groups promotes positive relationships between groups. Another example of collaboration between groups has been studied in schools (e.g. Brewer & Miller, 1984; Johnson, Johnson & Maruyama, 1984; Schofield, 1986). For example, Elliot Aronson developed a “puzzle” approach for students from diverse backgrounds to work toward common goals and foster positive relationships among children around the world (Aronson, 2002).
- Support from authorities, laws or customs: Support from authorities, laws, and custom also tends to produce more positive contact effects between groups, because authorities can set norms of acceptance and guidelines for how group members should interact with one another.
There should be no official laws enforcing segregation.
This importance has been demonstrated in circumstances as broad as military (Landis, Hope & Day, 1983), economic (Morrison & Herlihy, 1992), and religious (Parker, 1968).
Laws, such as civil rights laws in American society, can also help establish norms against harm (Pettigrew & Tropp, 2005).
Why does Kontakt break down prejudices?
Brewer and Miller (1996) and Brewer and Brown (1998) suggest that these conditions can be viewed as an application ofdissonance theory(Festinger, 1957).
In particular, when individuals with negative attitudes toward certain groups are placed in situations in which they engage in positive social interactions with members of those groups, their behavior contradicts their attitudes.
This dissonance, the theory goes, can lead to a change in attitude to justify the new behavior if the situation is structured to meet the four conditions above.
In contrast, Forbes (1997) argues that most social scientists implicitly assume that increased interracial/ethnic contact reduces intergroup tensions by providing each with information about the other.
Those who write, adopt, participate in, or evaluate bias reduction programs are likely to have explicit or implicit informal theories about how bias reduction programs work.
Examples of the contact hypothesis
Without jacket
Historically, in contact hypothesis research, racial and ethnic minorities have been the outgroup of choice; However, the hypothesis can be extended to outgroups created by various factors. One of those alienating situations is homelessness.
Like many outside groups, homeless people are more visible than ever due to growing numbers and widespread media and political coverage.
This has led to much stigma and associations between homelessness and physical and mental health problems, substance abuse and crime, and ethnographic studies have found that homeless people are routinely degraded, rejected, or treated as non-persons by passers-by (Anderson, Nieve & Cress, 1994).
Lee, Farrell, and Link (2004) used data from a national survey of public attitudes toward homelessness to assess the applicability of the contact hypothesis to relationships between homeless and sheltered people even in the absence of all four positive Allport factors.
Researchers found that even after accounting for selection bias and social desirability, overall exposure to homelessness tended to positively affect public attitudes toward homelessness (Lee, Farrell, & Link, 2004).
Contact between the age groups
In the 1980s, there was a trend in American society toward widespread age segregation, with children and adults tending to lead separate and independent lives” (Caspi, 1984).
This had consequences such as a lack of transmission of skills and work culture, poor preparation for parenthood, and generally inaccurate stereotypes and unfavorable attitudes towards other age groups.
Caspi (1984) assessed the effects of age contact on children's attitudes towards older adults by comparing children attending an age-integrated preschool to children attending a traditional preschool.
Those in age-integrated preschools (who had daily contact with older adults) tended to have positive attitudes toward older adults, while those without such contact tended to have vague or indifferent attitudes.
In addition, children in age-integrated preschool show better differentiation between adult age groups than those who are not in this preschool.
These results were the first to suggest that Allport's contact hypothesis was relevant to intergroup contact beyond race relations (Caspi, 1984).
Contact between religious groups in Indonesia and the Philippines
After the resurgence of sectarian conflict and intolerance and violence and the outbreak of sectarian violence in Ambon, Indonesia, between Christians and Muslims in 1999-2002, researchers were motivated to find ways to reduce acts of intolerance on religious grounds reduce.
Kanas, Scheepers, and Sterkens (2015) examined the relationship between interfaith contacts and negative attitudes toward religious outgroups by conducting surveys among Christian and Muslim students in Indonesia and the Philippines.
They tried to answer the following questions (Kanas, Scheeepers, & Sterkens, 2015):
- Does it reduce positive interfaith contacts while negative interfaith contacts evoke negative attitudes towards the religious outgroup?
- Does perceived group threat provide a valid mechanism for the positive and negative effects of interfaith contact?
- Does positive interfaith contact reduce negative outgroup attitudes when intergroup relationships are strained and both groups experience extreme conflict and violence?
Researchers focused on four ethnically and religiously distinct regions of Indonesia and the Philippines: Moluccas and Yogyakarta, the Autonomous Region of Muslim Mindanao, and Metro Manila, with Moluccas and the Autonomous Region of Muslim Mindanao showing greater religious conflict than the other two. regions. .
Kanas, Scheepers, and Sterkens found that interfaith friendships reduced negative attitudes toward the religious outgroup, even adjusting for self-selection effects, while casual interfaith contact tended to reinforce negative outgroup attitudes.
In regions experiencing more interfaith violence, there was no impact on interfaith friendships, but there was a greater deterioration in the effect between occasional interfaith contact and negative outgroup attitudes.
Kanas, Scheepers, and Sterrkens believed that this effect could be explained by perceived group threat.
Evaluation of the contact hypothesis
Allport's testable formulation of the contact hypothesis has spawned research using a wide range of approaches, such as B. field studies, laboratory experiments, surveys and archive research.
Pettigrew and Tropp (2005) performed a 5-year meta-analysis of 515 studies (a method in which researchers collect data from as many studies as possible and statistically aggregate the results to examine general patterns) to assess the overall impact of the discovering contacts between groups. for bias and assess the impact of specific factors Allport has identified as important for successful intergroup contact.
These studies spanned from the 1940s to 2000 and represented the responses of 250,493 people in 38 countries.
The researchers found that, in general, higher levels of intergroup contact were associated with lower levels of bias, and that more rigorous research studies actually revealed stronger associations between contact and reduced bias (Pettigrew & Tropp, 2005).
The meta-analysis showed that the positive effects of contact on group relationships vary dramatically across groups, such as age, sexual orientation, disability, and mental illness, with the largest contact effects occurring for contact between heterosexuals and heterosexuals straight.
The smallest contact effects occurred in people with and without intellectual and physical disabilities (Pettigrew & Tropp, 2005).
Although meta-analyses such as that of Pettigrew and Tropp (2005) show that there is a strong association between contacts between groups and a reduction in prejudice, the existence or non-existence of Allport's four conditions is rather questionable.
Some researchers have suggested that the inverse relationship between contact and prejudice still holds in situations that do not meet Allport's key conditions, although not as strongly as when they do (Pettigrew & Tropp, 2005).
Gordon Allport taught sociology in Turkey as a young man (Nicholson, 2003), but emphasized proximate and proximate causes and neglected the broader social causes of intergroup effects.
As a result, both Allport and Williams (1947) doubted that contact itself would reduce intergroup bias, and thus attempted to specify a set of "positive conditions" where intergroup contact did so.
Researchers have criticized Allport's “positive factors” approach because it invites the addition of various situational conditions that are deemed critical that in reality are not.
As a result, several researchers have proposed a number of additional conditions necessary to produce positive contact outcomes (e.g. Foster & Finchilescu, 1986), to the extent that a contact situation is unlikely to meet all of the conditions required by the Body knowledge contact hypothesists (Pettigrew & Tropp, 2005).
Researchers have also criticized Allport for not specifying the processes involved in the effects of intergroup contact, or how they affect other situations, the outgroup as a whole, or outgroups not involved in the contact (Pettigrew, 1998).
For example, Allport's contact terms leave open the question of whether contact with one group might lead to less harmful views from other external groups. In summary, Allport's hypothesis does not reveal the processes behind the factors that lead to the intergroup contact effect, nor its impact on outgroups not involved in contact (Pettigrew, 1998).
Theorists have since changed their position on the intergroup contact hypothesis, believing that intergroup contact reduces prejudice in general, but that a variety of supporting factors may increase or decrease the magnitude of the effect.
In fact, according to recent theoretical approaches, there are negative factors that may even undermine the way contact normally breaks down prejudice (Pettigrew & Tropp, 2005).
For example, groups that tend to feel fearful and threatened by others tend to break down prejudice when they come into contact with other groups (Blair, Park & Bachelor, 2003; Stephan et al., 2002).
Indeed, recent research on the contact hypothesis has suggested that the underlying mechanism of the phenomenon is no longer knowledge of the outgroup itself, but rather outgroup empathy and a reduction in intergroup threat and fear (Pettigrew and Tropp, 2008; Kanas, Scheepers, & Sterkens, 2015).
About the author
Charlotte Nickerson is a member of Class 2024 at Harvard University. With a research background in biology and archaeology, Charlotte is currently investigating how physical and digital space shapes human beliefs, norms and behaviors and how it can be used to create businesses with greater social impact.
To reference this article:
To reference this article:
Nickerson, C. (2021, 1. November).Allport's Intergroup Contact Hypothesis: Its History and Impact. Just Psychology. www.simplypsychology.org/contact-hypothesis.html
references
Allport, GW (1955). The nature of prejudice. In: JSTOR.
Anderson, L., Snow, D.A. and Kress, D. (1994). Negotiating the Public: Dealing with Stigma and Collective Action Among the Homeless. Research in Community Sociology, 1(1), 121-143.
Aronson, E. (2002). Building Empathy, Compassion, and Achievement in the Puzzle Classroom. In Improving Academic Performance (pp. 209-225): Elsevier.
Baker, P.E. (1934). Black and white attitude in America. Journal of Black Education, 194-204.
Blair IV, Park B & Bachelor J (2003). Understanding Intergroup Anxiety: Are Some People More Anxious Than Others? Group Processes and Intergroup Relations, 6(2), 151-169. doi:10.1177/1368430203006002002
Brewer, MB and Kramer, R.M. (1985). The psychology of attitudes and intergroup behavior. Psychology Annual Review, 36(1), 219-243.
Brophy, IN (1945). The luxury of prejudice against blacks. Quarterly Public Opinion, 9(4), 456-466.
Caspi, A. (1984). Inter-age contact hypothesis and attitudes: A field study of inter-age contact. Social Psychology Quarterly, 47(1), 74-80. doi:10.2307/3033890
Chu, D. and Griffey, D. (1985). The contact theory of racial integration: the case of sport. Journal of Exercise Sociology, 2(4), 323-333.
Cohen, E.G. (1982). Expectations and interracial interaction in the school setting. Sociology Annual Review, 8(1), 209-235.
Deutsch, M. & Collins, M.E. (1951). Interracial Housing: A Psychological Appraisal of a Social Experiment: U of Minnesota Press.
Foster, D. and Finchilescu, G. (1986). Contact in a contactless society: the case of South Africa.
Jackson, JW (1993). Contact theory of intergroup hostility: a review and appraisal of the theoretical and empirical literature. International Journal of Group Tension, 23(1), 43-65.
Jackson, P (1985). Social Geography: Race and Racism. Progress in Human Geography, 9(1), 99-108.
Johnson, D., Johnson, R. & Maruyama, G. (1984). Goal interdependence and interpersonal attraction in heterogeneous classes: a meta-analysis, chapters in Miller N & Brewer MB Groups in Contact: The Psychology of Desegregation. In: New York: Academic Press.
Kanas, A., Scheepers, P. & Sterkens, C. (2015). Interfaith Contact, Perceived Group Threat, and Perceived Discrimination: Predicting Negative Attitudes Among Religious Minorities and Majorities in Indonesia. Quarterly Journal of Social Psychology, 78(2), 102-126. doi:10.1177/0190272514564790
Kephart, WM (2018). Racial Factors and Urban Law Enforcement: University of Pennsylvania Press.
Kramer, B.M. (1950). Residential contact as a determinant of attitudes towards blacks. Harvard University.
Lee, BA, Farrell, C.R. and Link, B.G. (2004). Testing the Contact Hypothesis: The Case of Public Exposure to the Homeless. American Sociological Review, 69(1), 40-63. doi:10.1177/000312240406900104
Lee, F. F. (1956). Human relationships in interracial dwellings: A study of the contact hypothesis. In: JSTOR.
Lett, HA (1945). Techniques for achieving interracial cooperation. Harvard Educational Review, 15(1), 62-71.
Levine, R.A. & Campbell, D.T. (1972). Ethnocentrism: conflict theories, ethnic attitudes and group behavior.
MacKenzie, B.K. (1948). The importance of contact in determining attitudes towards black people. The Journal of Abnormal and Social Psychology, 43(4), 417.
Morrison, E.W. & Herlihy, J.M. (1992). Becoming the best place to work: diversity management at American Express Travel Services. Diversity in the Workplace, 203-226.
Nicholson, IAM (2003). The Invention of Personality: Gordon Allport and the Science of Individuality. Washington, DC, USA: American Psychological Association.
Parker, JH (1968). The Interaction of Blacks and Whites in an Integrated Church Setting. Social Forces, 46(3), 359-366. doi:10.2307/2574883
Pettigrew, TF (1998). CONTACT THEORY BETWEEN GROUPS. Annual Review of Psychology, 49(1), 65-85. doi:10.1146/annurev.psych.49.1.65
Pettigrew, TF & Tropp, LR (2005). Allport's Intergroup Contact Hypothesis: Its History and Impact. On the Nature of Prejudice: Fifty Years after Allport, 262-277.
Riordan, C. and Ruggiero, J. (1980). Establishing equal status interracial interaction: a rejoinder. Social Psychology Quarterly, 131-136. Schofield, JW (1986). White-Black Contact in Unbundled Schools.
Schofield, JW & Eurich-Fulcer, R (2004). When and how school desegregation improves intergroup relations.
Sims, V.M. and Patrick, J.R. (1936). Attitudes towards black among college students in the North and South. The Journal of Social Psychology, 7(2), 192-204.
Stephan WG, Boniecki KA, Ybarra O, Bettencourt A, Ervin KS, Jackson LA. . Renfro, CL (2002). The Role of Threats in Racial Attitudes of Blacks and Whites. Personality and Social Psychology Bulletin, 28(9), 1242-1254. doi:10.1177/01461672022812009
Stouffer, S.A., Suchman, E.A., DeVinney, L.C., Star, S.A. and Williams Jr., R.M. (1949). The American Soldier: Fit During Military Life. (Social Psychological Studies in World War II), vol. 1.
Sumner, W.G. (1906). Folkways: A sociological meaning two uses. Manners, manners, mores and morals, Ginn & Co., New York, NY.
Williams Jr., R.M. (1947). Reducing Intergroup Tensions: A Research Survey on Issues of Ethnic, Racial, and Religious Relations. Bulletin of the Social Science Research Council.
Works, E. (1961). The Interaction of Prejudice Hypothesis from the Perspective of the Black Minority. American Journal of Sociology, 67(1), 47-52.
Other information
Dovidio, J.F., Love, A., Schellhaas, F.M. and Hewstone, M. (2017). Reducing intergroup bias through intergroup contact: twenty years of progress and future directions. Group Processes and Intergroup Relations, 20(5), 606-620.Pettigrew TF, Tropp LR, Wagner U, & Christ O (2011). Recent advances in the theory of intergroup contact. International Journal of Intercultural Relations, 35(3), 271-280.Pettigrew, TF & Tropp, LR (2006). A meta-analytic test of intergroup contact theory. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 90(5), 751.
large | About Us | Privacy Policy | Announce | Contact us
go back up
The content of Simply Psychology is for informational and educational purposes only. Our website is not intended as a substitute for professional medical advice, diagnosis or treatment.
© Simply Scholar Ltd - All rights reserved
FAQs
What is Gordon Allport's intergroup contact hypothesis? ›
Gordon W. Allport is often credited with the development of the contact hypothesis, also known as Intergroup Contact Theory. The premise of Allport's theory states that under appropriate conditions interpersonal contact is one of the most effective ways to reduce prejudice between majority and minority group members.
What is the history of contact hypothesis? ›The intergroup contact hypothesis was first proposed by Allport (1954), who suggested that positive effects of intergroup contact occur in contact situations characterized by four key conditions: equal status, intergroup cooperation, common goals, and support by social and institutional authorities (See Table 1).
What are the four conditions for intergroup contact? ›Allport specified four conditions for optimal intergroup contact: equal group status within the situation, common goals, intergroup cooperation and authority support.
What are the principles of contact hypothesis? ›The contact hypothesis suggests that interpersonal contact between groups can reduce prejudice. According to Gordon Allport, who first proposed the theory, four conditions are necessary to reduce prejudice: equal status, common goals, cooperation, and institutional support.
What is the importance of contact hypothesis? ›In psychology and other social sciences, the contact hypothesis suggests that intergroup contact under appropriate conditions can effectively reduce prejudice between majority and minority group members.
What is the intergroup theory? ›Developmental intergroup theory specifies the mechanisms and rules that govern the processes by which children single out groups as targets of stereotyping and prejudice, and by which children learn and construct both the characteristics (i.e., stereotypes) and affective responses (i.e., prejudices) that are associated ...
What is a real life example of the contact hypothesis? ›For example, if a certain white individual holds negative stereotypes about Latinos, then, according to the contact hypothesis, those stereotypes should be reduced by having the individual interact with Latinos in a supportive, friendly environment.
What are the types of intergroup contact? ›This Special Issue of Group Processes & Intergroup Relations examines how various forms of indirect intergroup contact—including extended, vicarious, and imagined contact—can reduce prejudice and improve relations between groups.
What are the different forms of intergroup contact? ›Recent research has demonstrated that also indirect contact is a useful strategy to improve intergroup relations. In the present work, we focus on three forms of indirect contact which have received consistent attention by social psychologists in recent years: vicarious contact, extended contact, imagined contact.
What are the 3 components of intergroup conflicts? ›But many of the most perplexing intergroup conflicts in organizations include all three elements--functional differences, power differences, and historical differences.
What are the 4 reasons behind the inter group conflict? ›
Causes of Intergroup Conflict
Other reasons may be work interdependence, goal variances, differences in perceptions, and the increased demand for specialists. Also, individual members of a group often play a role in the initiation of group conflict.
Positive intergroup contact provides a way to overcome intergroup tensions and conflict that are often associated with segregation (8), and extensive evidence shows that positive face-to-face contact, especially between cross-group friends (9), reduces outgroup prejudice among minority and especially majority group ...
What is the meaning of contact theory? ›The contact hypothesis is the idea that intergroup contact under particular conditions can reduce prejudice between majority and minority group members.
What is the contact hypothesis quizlet? ›Contact hypothesis. And interactionist perspective which states that in cooperative circumstances interracial contact between people of equal status will reduce prejudice. Discrimination. The denial of opportunities in equal rights individuals and groups because of prejudice or other arbitrary reasons.
What are three factors that explain why people conform? ›Group size: People are more likely to conform in situations that involve between three and five other people. Situation: People are more likely to conform in ambiguous situations where they are unclear about how they should respond. Cultural differences: People from collectivist cultures are more likely to conform.
Why it is important to psychologists to test their hypothesis? ›Hypothesis testing is an important feature of science, as this is how theories are developed and modified. A good theory should generate testable predictions (hypotheses), and if research fails to support the hypotheses, then this suggests that the theory needs to be modified in some way.
What is intergroup relations in history? ›Intergroup relations (relationships between different groups of people) range along a spectrum between tolerance and intolerance. The most tolerant form of intergroup relations is pluralism, in which no distinction is made between minority and majority groups, but instead there's equal standing.
What are the examples of intergroup conflict? ›Examples: Examples of such conflicts include conflicts between Blacks and Whites, Arabs, or Hispanics about race-related issues; conflicts between different ethnic or religious groups, conflicts about sexual-orientation, even gender conflicts.
Who proposed the contact theory? ›A longstanding line of research that aims to combat bias among conflicting groups springs from a theory called the "contact hypothesis." Developed in the 1950s by Gordon Allport, PhD, the theory holds that contact between two groups can promote tolerance and acceptance, but only under certain conditions, such as equal ...
What is an example of a theory that is a hypothesis? ›For example: His hypothesis for the class science project is that this brand of plant food is better than the rest for helping grass grow. After testing his hypothesis, he developed a new theory based on the experiment results: plant food B is actually more effective than plant food A in helping grass grow.
What are examples of contact? ›
A contact force is a force that acts between the point of contact between two objects. Pushing a car up a hill and kicking a ball are examples of contact force.
What is intergroup communication examples? ›Intergroup research informs many social contexts; some examples of these contexts are to be found in communication between members of co-cultures, cultures, nationalities, genders, generations, as well as groups belonging in the workplace and health contexts.
What are intergroup characteristics? ›Intergroup behavior involves the feelings, perceptions, beliefs, and actions that groups and their members have toward another group and its members.
What are characteristics of intergroup conflict? ›Intergroup conflict is a term that refers to disagreement or confrontation between two or more groups and their members. This confrontation can involve physical violence, interpersonal discord, and psychological tension.
What are the two forms of intergroup conflict? ›Interpersonal – this is conflict between two or more individuals; it may be an isolated incident or an ongoing issue. Intragroup – this refers to the conflict between one or more people in the same group or team.
What is intergroup contact quizlet? ›intergroup contact. •Contact hypothesis:-under certain conditions, direct contact between groups will reduce prejudice. •4 conditions for success: equal status, cooperation, acquaintance potential, institutional support.
What are the factors which are mainly influencing intergroup behavior? ›Five Influences on Group Behavior
Social interaction. Perception of a group. Commonality of purpose. Favoritism.
Such conflict resolution proceeds in three phases: analysis, confrontation, resolution. Conflict analysis should identify underlying issues, needs, fears, values, and goals of the parties, through a process that allows mutual clarification and trust-building between the parties.
What is the impact of inter group conflict? ›Intergroup conflict impacts the individual's food and territorial resources, social status and mating opportunities [24,43,114,115]. These impacts can be distinctly different for some group members compared to others.
What is conflict theory of intergroup relations? ›The theory explains how intergroup hostility can arise as a result of conflicting goals and competition over limited resources, and it also offers an explanation for the feelings of prejudice and discrimination toward the outgroup that accompany the intergroup hostility.
What is probably the greatest cause of intergroup conflict in organizations? ›
Goal incompatibility
This is considered to be the most common cause of intergroup conflict.
It produces new ideas, solves continuous problems, provides an opportunity for people and teams to expand their skills, and fosters creativity. When opposing ideas are explored, a breakthrough of thinking can occur. Without conflict, you have “groupthink,” which discourages innovation.
How does intergroup contact impact people's attitudes? ›Contact can also work its effects by enhancing empathy (Pettigrew & Tropp, 2008). People who have more contact with outgroup members also have more empathy for the outgroup in general, and this translates into more positive attitudes.
How can intergroup contact reduce intergroup conflict? ›One critical way that positive intergroup contact improves intergroup relations is by affecting social categorization. Whether people perceive others as members of an ingroup or an outgroup critically affects how they think about, feel toward, and act toward others (see Dovidio & Gaertner, 2010, for a review).
What role does intergroup contact play in conflict resolution and peace building? ›This is arguably because intergroup contact promotes empathy, trust, and interpersonal pro-social actions. These factors may be important antecedents and precursors of support for peacebuilding, which in turn, may motivate further action to help reconstruct society after conflict.
What is the main point of contact? ›Point of contact meaning
A point of contact (POC), or a single point of contact, is an individual or a department that handles communication with customers. They serve as coordinators of information in terms of an activity or a project and act as an organization's representatives.
A point of contact (POC) or single point of contact (SPOC) is a person or a department serving as the coordinator or focal point of information concerning an activity or program. A POC is used in many cases where information is time-sensitive and accuracy is important. For examples, they are used in WHOIS databases.
What is contact in simple words? ›noun. the act or state of touching; a touching or meeting, as of two things or people. immediate proximity or association. an acquaintance, colleague, or relative through whom a person can gain access to information, favors, influential people, and the like.
Which of the following elements are important in the contact hypothesis? ›Which of the following elements are important in the contact hypothesis? Contact needs to be sanctioned by authorities. Contact helps to reduce prejudice. Contact involves members of different groups.
What does research on the contact hypothesis suggest quizlet? ›What is the contact hypothesis? It suggest that prejudice is able to be reduced if there is contact being two groups under appropriate conditions.
Which of the following summarizes a hypothesis or a group of hypotheses? ›
A scientific theory summarizes a hypothesis or group of hypotheses that have been supported with repeated testing. A theory is valid as long as there is no evidence to dispute it.
What are three 3 factors that influence behavior? ›- physical factors - age, health, illness, pain, influence of a substance or medication.
- personal and emotional factors - personality, beliefs, expectations, emotions, mental health.
- life experiences - family, culture, friends, life events.
- what the person needs and wants.
- Norms are implicit rules shared by a group of individuals, that guide their interactions with others and among society or social group.
- Herbert Kelman identified three major types of conformity: compliance, identification, and internalization.
Social influence comprises the ways in which individuals adjust their behavior to meet the demands of a social environment. It takes many forms and can be seen in conformity, socialization, peer pressure, obedience, leadership, persuasion, sales, and marketing.
Which are the 3 traits in Allport's theory of personality? ›Allport created a highly influential three-tiered hierarchy of personality traits, consisting of: Cardinal traits: Rare, but strongly deterministic of behavior. Central traits: Present to varying degrees in all people. Central traits influence, but do not determine, an individual's behavior.
What is an example of the contact hypothesis? ›For example, if a certain white individual holds negative stereotypes about Latinos, then, according to the contact hypothesis, those stereotypes should be reduced by having the individual interact with Latinos in a supportive, friendly environment.
How does intergroup contact reduce prejudice? ›Positive intergroup contact provides a way to overcome intergroup tensions and conflict that are often associated with segregation (8), and extensive evidence shows that positive face-to-face contact, especially between cross-group friends (9), reduces outgroup prejudice among minority and especially majority group ...
What is the summary of Gordon Allport theory? ›Allport is best known for the concept that, although adult motives develop from infantile drives, they become independent of them. Allport called this concept functional autonomy. His approach favoured emphasis on the problems of the adult personality rather than on those of infantile emotions and experiences.
What is an example of Allport trait theory? ›Allport suggested that cardinal traits are rare and dominating, usually developing later in life. They tend to define a person to such an extent that their names become synonymous with their personality. Examples of this include the following descriptive terms: Machiavellian, narcissistic, Don Juan, and Christ-like.
What are the strengths of Allport's theory? ›Strengths of Allport's Personality Theory are as follows: a) Strict reliance on objective and statistical data. b) Has no bias compared to other theories. (Freud's relationship with his mother and Jun's belief in mythology could have been possible influences of their theories.) c) Describes each and every trait.
What are three factors for effective intergroup contact? ›
The present research tests which of these three key concepts – knowledge, anxiety, and empathy/perspective taking – are the most effective mediators in accounting for intergroup contact's effects on prejudice.
What is the main cause of intergroup conflict? ›One of the most prominent reasons for intergroup conflict is simply the nature of the group. Other reasons may be work interdependence, goal variances, differences in perceptions, and the increased demand for specialists. Also, individual members of a group often play a role in the initiation of group conflict.
What are the five types of intergroup relations? ›- Pluralism. ...
- Assimilation. ...
- Amalgamation. ...
- Genocide. ...
- Expulsion. ...
- Segregation.
Examples: Examples of such conflicts include conflicts between Blacks and Whites, Arabs, or Hispanics about race-related issues; conflicts between different ethnic or religious groups, conflicts about sexual-orientation, even gender conflicts.