Blog 2: The Contact Hypothesis

The contact hypothesis states that intergroup contact can reduce prejudice under certain conditions. The contact hypothesis has been heavily investigated since its development over 50 years ago and is considered to be one of the most effective strategies for improving intergroup relations. Whilst the significance of the contact hypothesis is widely recognized it has been subject to considerable criticism. A number of social psychologists have argued that that the contact hypothesis is overly optimistic and suggest that contact may not be effective in reducing prejudice and stereotypes even under ideal circumstances. The research that supports the contact hypothesis has also been criticized for its limited scope and focus on ideal over mundane settings. Contact theorists and researchers have also been criticized for assuming a causal relationship between contact and a reduction in prejudice when there are alternate conclusions that can be drawn from the research findings.

What is the contact hypothesis?

Gordon Allport (1954, as cited in Baumeister & Bushman, 2008) proposed the contact hypothesis which states that regular interaction between members of different groups reduces prejudice. The contact hypothesis is based on the notion that prejudice arises out of ignorance, which is the result of limited contact with outgroup members. Limited contact with and lack of knowledge about members of different groups encourages the development of unfavorable, stereotypical views (Ellison & Powers, 1994). According to the contact hypothesis, frequent contact with other group members promotes positive and tolerant attitudes towards the group as a whole as it allows ingroup members to gain information about the lifestyles, behaviours and experiences of other groups. It is believed that the information acquired through contact is generalized to the whole group and negative stereotypical views are consequently disproved (Ellison & Powers, 1994).

Allport recognized that not all contact is effective in reducing prejudice and proposed four conditions for successful intergroup contact. The first condition states that the contact must be between group members who are equal in status. When participants are of unequal status intergroup contact is likely to increase prejudice and confirm stereotypes (Robinson & Preston, 1976). The second condition states that the contact should be pleasant. If the contact is not a pleasurable experience for members of both groups future contact may be avoided. The third condition specifies that it is necessary for the groups to cooperate in achieving a common goal. Introducing any conflicts of interest whether actual or perceived may increase tension between the groups. Finally the contact should occur in situations where intergroup interaction is encouraged by authority figures. If these conditions are not met there is no guarantee that positive attitude change will occur and there is the possibility of an increase in intergroup conflict and prejudice (Bratt, 2002).

There is a plethora of empirical evidence that supports the contact hypothesis. For example, Bratt (2002) found that school aged students had more favorable attitudes towards outgroup members that they encountered at school compared to outgroup members they had little interaction with. Ellison and Powers (1994) found that African Americans who had close white friends held more positive views of white people than African Americans without such friendships.

Argument that contact is not a successful method for reducing prejudice.

Social psychologists have argued that the optimal conditions required for prejudice reduction make the contact hypothesis inapplicable to the real world (Dixon, Durrheim & Tredoux, 2005). The conditions for optimal contact are not characteristic of most casual encounters between groups and because of this it has been suggested that casual contact is not sufficient in reducing prejudice (Ellison & Powers, 1994; Robinson & Preston, 1976). Some social psychologists have argued that even contact under ideal conditions might not result in the ingroup making positive generalizations towards the outgroup. Ingroup members might view those they come into contact with as atypical and subcategorize those individuals as exceptions of their particular social group. Research has found that contact with people who are exceptions to a stereotype has no effect in changing how the whole group is perceived (Hamburger, 1994). It might seem that the solution to this problem is to ensure that contact occurs between those who are highly representative of a group however, attitude change only results from positive contact and contact with highly stereotypical individuals is likely to be viewed as negative. It has been suggested that contact might have the effect of individuals recognizing that not all members of a group are the same whilst maintaining their prejudicial views (Hamburger, 1994).

Limitations of the research examining the contact hypothesis.

Studies that support the contact hypothesis probably outweigh those that challenge it however the research on the contact hypothesis has been criticized for having been conducted under ideal or laboratory conditions instead of everyday settings (Hanssen, 2001). Contact has mainly been examined in laboratory settings or the armed services, mixed race residential areas and in educational and occupational institutions all of which are designed to create intergroup contact (Ellison & Powers, 1994). This makes generalizing the findings of such research to the general population difficult, as most interracial contact does not occur under such monitored conditions. The implication of this is that whether contact reduces prejudice in the general population is yet to be conclusively determined. A study conducted by Hanssen (2001), which investigated the effect of contact in a natural setting failed to support the contact hypothesis. Hanssen expected white American baseball players to be less prejudiced towards African Americans than baseball fans due to regular contact and believed that this would be evident in the votes for baseball’s annual All-Star game however no significant difference was found.

The benefit of examining the ideal situations in which contact is effective is that it demonstrates social order and can promote social change. However, it is necessary to investigate contact in everyday situations in order to better understand the implications of intergroup contact (Dixon et al., 2005).

Furthermore, the research into the contact hypothesis has been criticized for its heavy focus on white Americans (Ellison & Powers, 1994). The result of such limited scope is that the meaning of intergroup contact for members of other races is not entirely understood. This notion is supported by a study conducted by Robinson and Preston (1976) in which the prejudices of white American and African American teachers were examined. African Americans were initially less prejudiced towards whites and after contact their prejudices reduced less than white Americans. This implies that contact may have different meanings for African Americans and white Americans. The limited research that has involved other races (e.g. Jews, Hispanics and Asians) has also indicated that the contact hypothesis needs to be refined to more accurately depict how intergroup contact affects races other than white Americans (Dixon et al., 2005).

Causal assumptions of the research into the contact hypothesis.

Researchers who have investigated the contact hypothesis have been criticized for concluding that intergroup contact causes a reduction in prejudice and promotes tolerance. Whether attitude change is the result is of interracial contact is questionable as the behaviour change might be better explained by the possibility that those who are least prejudiced and most tolerant are likely to seek out contact with individuals of other groups whilst the most prejudiced people are likely to avoid such contact (Hanssen, 2001). This is a serious issue because contact is most likely to be favorable when participants come together voluntarily (Robinson & Preston, 1976). This belief suggests that forcing highly prejudiced individuals into contact situations in an effort to reduce their prejudices is likely to produce unfavorable results. This criticism again questions the relevance of the contact hypothesis to the general population and implies that the research that has been conducted over the past four to five decades has been misguided (Hanssen, 2001).

Whilst the contribution of the contact hypothesis to social psychology and its effectiveness in improving intergroup relations is largely acknowledged and recognized amongst psychologists it has been subject to considerable criticism since its development over 50 years ago. According to the contact hypothesis, frequent interaction between members of different social groups has the effect of reducing intergroup prejudice and eliminating stereotypes under certain conditions. The first criticism is that the conditions necessary for positive attitude change make the hypothesis inapplicable to the real world. It has also been suggested that contact does not result in positive generalizations being made to the whole group but rather people recognize that not all individuals are representative of their group. The research investigating the contact hypothesis has been criticized for its focus settings where intergroup contact is promoted and monitored instead of everyday situations. The research has also been criticized for focusing largely on white Americans. The researchers who have examined the contact hypothesis have been criticized for assuming that contact causes a reduction in prejudice when the least prejudiced individuals seeking out contact with members of other groups might better explain this result. Overall, the criticisms of the contact hypotheses question its efficacy in reducing prejudice and application outside of laboratory situations.

References

Baumeister, R. F., & Bushman, B. J. (2008). Social psychology and human nature (1st ed.).
Belmont, CA: Thomson Wadsworth.

Bratt, C. (2002). Contact and attitudes between ethnic groups: A survey-based study of
adolescents in Norway. Acta Sociologica, 45 (2), 107-125.

Dixon, J., Durrheim, K., & Tredoux, C. (2005). Beyond the optimal contact strategy: A reality
A reality check for the contact hypothesis. American Psychologist, 60 (7), 697-711.

Ellison, C. G., & Powers, D. A. (1994). The contact hypothesis and racial attitudes among Black
Americans. Social Science Quarterly, 75 (2), 385-400.

Hamburger, Y (1994). The contact hypothesis reconsidered: Effects of the atypical outgroup
member on the outgroup stereotype. Basic and Applied Social Psychology, 15 (3),
339-358.

Hanssen, A. F. (2001). A test of the racial contact hypothesis from a natural experiment:
Baseball's all star voting as a case. Social Science Quarterly, 82 (1), 51-66.

Robinson, J., & Preston, J. D. (1976). Equal-status contact and modification of racial prejudice:
A reexamination of the contact hypothesis. Social Forces, 54 (4), 911-924.

Self Assessment
Theory: The theory I discussed was the contact hypothesis itself. I had originally planned to critique the contact hypothesis from the viewpoint of a different theory however found no relevant theory to use for this purpose in conducting my research. I feel that I was able to adequately critique the hypothesis without doing so however, and believe would not have been able to do so sufficiently anyway due to the limited word count.
Research: I read a considerable number of studies when researching for my essay a number of which I refer to in the essay. The majority of the research I used was recent however I used some older research which I would normally avoid however as the contact hypothesis has been around for over 50 years I believe it was relevant to include some of the earlier research findings and views on the contact hypothesis.
Written Expression: I am quite confident that my essay conforms to APS standards. The readability level is 15.5 (despite a number of editing attempts to reduce this to 12) however I believe my essay is easy to read and understand
On-line Engagement: My online engagement improved since writing the first blog having finished the majority of assessment items. I posted 4 original posts (compared to one at the beginning of the semester) and made a number of comments on other peoples blog postings. My postings were thoughtful and I made thoughtful and relevant comments on other peoples blogs. I enjoyed the online engagement more since posting blog 1 as I was more involved in it.