Positive and negative asymmetry of intergroup contact: A dynamic approach 2016-2019

In the course of this project, we have conducted several studies that allowed us to collect a variety of unique data, which we describe in further detail below. (1) A diary study with the aim to obtain data about the frequency, intensity and location of positive and negative contact experiences and to, furthermore, investigate the effects of personality variables (e.g., RWA and SDO), perceived norms and contextual predictors on these daily positive and negative contact experiences. The 13-day diary study was conducted by an external survey company (Ipsos MORI). Respondents were N = 780 majority (White British) and N = 605 minority (British Asians) respondents, purposely sampled from ethnically mixed neighbourhoods (Lower Super Output Areas, LSOA). The core of this diary study was a daily report of the frequency of overall, positive, and negative intergroup contact, with open answers to provide information about qualitative aspects of the most memorable positive and negative contact experience for each day. As planned, we also run a pre-test and a post-test survey. Regarding the latter, we asked half of the sample 2 weeks and half of the sample 6 weeks after the diary study to recall positive and negative contact experiences. (2) The two-wave longitudinal survey is, to our knowledge, the first longitudinal dataset including positive and negative contact experiences as well as the theoretically most important moderators and mediators in this respect. The main focus of this study was to test the longitudinal effects of and interactions between positive and negative intergroup contact. The survey was conducted in line with the proposed planning by an external survey company (Ipsos MORI), which used a face-to-face random location quota approach. Respondents were sampled from diverse areas with a mix of White British and Asian British (of Indian, Pakistani and Bangladeshi heritage) residents as well as low, medium, and high levels of deprivation. In line with our estimated number of participants, White British (n = 1520) and Asian British participants (n = 1474) from 290 neighborhoods were recruited and longitudinally followed. (3) The main aim of the school social network study was to obtain social network measures of contact between adolescents in schools, and to examine the co-development of adolescents’ social networks and outgroup attitudes over time. We have collected five waves of data over the academic year 2017-2018 in year 2 (Wave 1: 10/2017, Wave 2: 11/2017, Wave 3: 02/2018, Wave 4: 03/2018, & Wave 5: 05/2018). Respondents were N = 1328 students (aged 11-14) nested in six year-group networks in two schools in North West England. As this study focused on relations between White British and Asian British individuals, the final analytic sample included N = 1170 students (n = 341 White British & n = 829 Asian British). Students completed identical surveys at each of the five waves, which contained four social network measures (friendship, bullying, positive contact, & negative contact), and a range of self-reported measures (e.g., outgroup attitudes). Although positive intergroup contact has been shown to reduce prejudice, negative contact has the potential to worsen intergroup relations. The efficacy of intergroup contact hence has policy implications for wider debates about diversity, multiculturalism, and social conflict; but doubt has recently been cast on its potential in applied settings because whilst contact can be positive (e.g., having outgroup friends) it can also be negative (e.g., being bullied by an ethnic outgroup member). Moreover, diverse settings (e.g., schools, neighbourhoods) could potentially have unintended consequences of actually increasing prejudice because they may expose people to greater frequency of both positive and negative contact (which may undermine positive effects of contact). Yet little is known about the combined effects of positive and negative contact, and the consequences for increasingly diverse nations and communities. Using a variety of different methodological approaches, and testing participants in UK, GER and NL (where in each case majority group members interact with a different set of minority groups) we test the claim that negative contact exerts stronger effects on various outcomes than positive contact. In a series of studies involving both ethnic majority and minority participants, and using different methodological paradigms (diary, experimental, longitudinal survey, and social network studies), we seek to test three hypotheses that emerge from a critical reading of the relevant literature: buffering (i.e., positive contact weakens any negative effect of negative contact), augmentation (i.e., negative contact augments the impact of positive contact, because it contrasts the positive with the negative contact), and poisoning (i.e., negative contact reduces the impact of positive contact) effects. Finally, we use the cumulative knowledge of the project to test and seek to improve a large-scale social intervention, which is premised on promoting positive contact, but that has ignored any possible role for negative contact. This research further examines how and when positive and negative contact have their joint effects. They may have their impact, for example, via category salience (when contact is negative, categories are more salient). And the effect of positive vs negative contact on category salience may be qualified by various 'psychological' and 'social' factors. Among key psychological moderators, we will explore the order in which positive and negative contact are experienced (are outcomes worse when initial contact is negative?), and the intensity and consistency of the (positive or negative; are outcomes worst when one instance of negative contact follows another?). Among more 'social' factors, we will explore the impact of social norms.