The role of individual differences in understanding and enhancing intergroup contact

In a world characterized by divisive rhetoric, heightened xenophobia, and other forms of prejudice, it is increasingly important to find effective ways of promoting functional intergroup relations. Research on the relationship between intergroup contact and individual differences substantially contributes to achieving this goal. We review research considering the role played by individual differences in moderating the relationship between contact and prejudice and predicting contact, but also as an outcome of contact. We then outline potential directions for future research, including identifying underlying mechanisms, examining the role of context at an intergroup and societal level, and considering how positive – negative contact asymmetry may be influenced by individual differences. We then call for a broader range of individual difference and contact outcomes to be explored and encourage utilization of new methodological advances in the study of intergroup contact

A Social Identity Approach to How Elite Outgroups Are Invoked by Politicians and the Media in Nativist Populism

Existing research into nativist populist (NP) rhetoric has shown that elite outgroups can be used by politicians to further anti‐immigration agendas. The social identity functions of elite outgroups outside of cultivating anti‐immigrant prejudice, however, remain poorly understood. In addition, whether populist news media can be considered social identity entrepreneurs in their own right remains an underexplored topic. This study examines the rhetorical use of elite outgroups in the United Kingdom, United States, and Australia from a social identity perspective, focusing on political leaders and newspapers op‐eds. Our findings demonstrate shared strategies across the countries and source types: (1) NPs depict elites as working through collusion to undermine trust in information production within society and vie for control of the ingroup informational influence; (2) NPs present themselves as nonelite and more ingroup prototypical on dimensions relevant to the elite collusion (being under attack and equally susceptible); (3) NPs contest ingroup norms through constructions of an anti‐immigrant consensus which is suppressed by elites. We conclude that social identity researchers should pay more attention to the rhetorical functions of elite outgroups in addition to cultivating anti‐immigrant prejudice, and that the media‐as‐identity‐entrepreneur is an important aspect of constructing shared social realities, and mobilizing support, within populism

Effects of a demand-led evidence briefing service on the uptake and use of research evidence by commissioners of health services:A controlled before-and-after study

Background: The Health and Social Care Act 2012 has mandated research use as a core consideration of health service commissioning arrangements. We evaluated whether or not access to a demand-led evidence briefing service improved use of research evidence by commissioners compared with less intensive and less targeted alternatives. Design: Controlled before-and-after study. Setting: Clinical Commissioning Groups (CCGs) in the north of England. Main outcome measures: Change at 12 months from baseline of a CCG’s ability to acquire, assess, adapt and apply research evidence to support decision-making. Secondary outcomes measured individual clinical leads’ and managers’ intentions to use research evidence in decision-making. Methods: Nine CCGs received one of three interventions: (1) access to an evidence briefing service; (2) contact plus an unsolicited push of non-tailored evidence; or (3) an unsolicited push of non-tailored evidence. Data for the primary outcome measure were collected at baseline and 12 months post intervention, using a survey instrument devised to assess an organisation’s ability to acquire, assess, adapt and apply research evidence to support decision-making. In addition, documentary and observational evidence of the use of the outputs of the service was sought and interviews with CCG participants were undertaken. Results: Most of the requests were conceptual; they were not directly linked to discrete decisions or actions but intended to provide knowledge about possible options for future actions. Symbolic use to justify existing decisions and actions were less frequent and included a decision to close a walk-in centre and to lend weight to a major initiative to promote self-care already under way. The opportunity to impact directly on decision-making processes was limited to work to establish disinvestment policies. In terms of impact overall, the evidence briefing service was not associated with increases in CCGs’ capacity to acquire, assess, adapt and apply research evidence to support decision-making, individual intentions to use research findings or perceptions of CCGs’ relationships with researchers. Regardless of the intervention received, at baseline participating CCGs indicated that it felt it was inconsistent in its research-seeking behaviours and its capacity to acquire research remained so at follow-up. The informal nature of decision-making processes meant that there was little or no traceability of the use of evidence. Limitations: Low baseline and follow-up response rates (of 68% and 44%, respectively) and missing data limit the reliability of these findings. Conclusions: Access to a demand-led evidence briefing service did not improve the uptake and use of research evidence by NHS commissioners compared with less intensive and less targeted alternatives. Commissioners appear to be well intentioned but ad hoc users of research. Future work: Further research is required on the effects of interventions and strategies to build individual and organisational capacity to use research. Resource-intensive approaches to providing evidence may best be employed to support instrumental decision-making. Comparative evaluation of the impact of less intensive but targeted strategies on the uptake and use of research by commissioners is warranted. Funding: National Institute for Health Research Health Services and Delivery Research programme

Intergroup Contact, Social Dominance and Environmental Concern: A Test of the Cognitive-Liberalization Hypothesis

Intergroup contact is among the most effective ways to improve intergroup attitudes. While it is now beyond any doubt that contact can reduce prejudice, in this paper we provide evidence that its benefits can extend beyond intergroup relations – a process referred to as cognitive liberalization (Hodson, Crisp, Meleady & Earle, 2018). We focus specifically on the impact of intergroup contact on environmentally-relevant attitudes and behavior. Recent studies suggest that support for an inequality-based ideology (Social Dominance Orientation) can predict both intergroup attitudes and broader environmental conduct. Individuals higher in SDO are more willing to exploit the environment in unsustainable ways because doing so aids the production and maintenance of hierarchical social structures. In four studies conducted with British adults we show that by promoting less hierarchical and more egalitarian viewpoints (reduced SDO), intergroup contact encourages more environmentally responsible attitudes and behavior. Both cross-sectional and longitudinal data support this model. Effects are more strongly explained by reductions in an anti-egalitarian motive (SDO-E) than a dominance motive (SDO-D). We discuss how these findings help define an expanded vision for intergroup contact theory that moves beyond traditional conflict-related outcomes

The Motivating Role of Dissociative Outgroups in Encouraging Positive Consumer Behaviors

Previous research has found that people tend to avoid products or behaviors that are linked to dissociative reference groups. The present research demonstrates conditions under which consumers exhibit similar behaviors to dissociative out-group members in the domain of positive consumption behaviors. In particular, when a consumer learns that a dissociative out-group performs comparatively well on a positive behavior, the consumer is more likely to respond with positive intentions and actions when the setting is public (vs. private). The authors suggest that this occurs because learning of the successful performance of a dissociative out-group under public conditions threatens the consumer’s group image and activates the desire to present the group image in a positive light. The authors show that although group affirmation mitigates these effects, self-affirmation does not. They also examine the moderating role of the positivity of the behavior and the mediating role of group image motives. Taken together, the results highlight conditions under which communicating information about the behaviors of dissociative out-groups can be used to spur consumers to engage in positive actions

Cross-ethnic friendship self-efficacy: A new predictor of cross-ethnic friendships among children

Across two studies (NStudy 1 = 101; NStudy 2 = 262) conducted among children in the UK, we incorporate Bandura’s (1986) self-efficacy theory to intergroup contact literature and introduce the new construct of cross-ethnic friendship self-efficacy (CEFSE), the belief that one can successfully form and maintain high-quality cross-ethnic friendships. Study 1 examined whether sources of CEFSE beliefs (prior contact, indirect contact, social norms, and intergroup anxiety) predicted higher quality cross-ethnic friendships through CEFSE. Study 2 replicated Study 1 and extended it by including perceived parental cross-ethnic friendship quality as a further predictor. In both studies, sources of self-efficacy beliefs (except social norms) were related to CEFSE, which predicted higher quality cross-ethnic friendships. Study 2 demonstrated that parental cross-ethnic friendships had direct and indirect associations with children’s cross-ethnic friendships through sources of CEFSE and CEFSE beliefs. Findings are discussed in the light of self-efficacy and intergroup contact theories

An intervention to improve teacher well-being support and training to support students in UK high schools (the WISE study): A cluster randomised controlled trial.

Funder: Public Health WalesFunder: Bristol City CouncilFunder: Public Health EnglandBACKGROUND: Teachers are at heightened risk of poor mental health and well-being, which is likely to impact on the support they provide to students, and student outcomes. We conducted a cluster randomised controlled trial, to test whether an intervention to improve mental health support and training for high school teachers led to improved mental health and well-being for teachers and students, compared to usual practice. We also conducted a cost evaluation of the intervention. METHODS AND FINDINGS: The intervention comprised (i) Mental Health First Aid training for teachers to support students; (ii) a mental health awareness session; and (iii) a confidential staff peer support service. In total 25 mainstream, non-fee-paying secondary schools stratified by geographical area and free school meal entitlement were randomly allocated to intervention (n = 12) or control group (n = 13) after collection of baseline measures. We analysed data using mixed-effects repeated measures models in the intention-to-treat population, adjusted for stratification variables, sex, and years of experience. The primary outcome was teacher well-being (Warwick-Edinburgh Mental Well-being Scale). Secondary outcomes were teacher depression, absence, and presenteeism, and student well-being, mental health difficulties, attendance, and attainment. Follow-up was at months 12 (T1) and 24 (T2). We collected process data to test the logic model underpinning the intervention, to aid interpretation of the findings. A total of 1,722 teachers were included in the primary analysis. Teacher well-being did not differ between groups at T2 (intervention mean well-being score 47.5, control group mean well-being score 48.4, adjusted mean difference -0.90, 95% CI -2.07 to 0.27, p = 0.130). The only effect on secondary outcomes was higher teacher-reported absence among the intervention group at T2 (intervention group median number of days absent 0, control group median number of days absent 0, ratio of geometric means 1.04, 95% CI 1.00 to 1.09, p = 0.042). Process measures indicated little change in perceived mental health support, quality of relationships, and work-related stress. The average cost of the intervention was £9,103 per school. The study's main limitations were a lack of blinding of research participants and the self-report nature of the outcome measures. CONCLUSIONS: In this study, we observed no improvements to teacher or student mental health following the intervention, possibly due to a lack of impact on key drivers of poor mental health within the school environment. Future research should focus on structural and cultural changes to the school environment, which may be more effective at improving teacher and student mental health and well-being. TRIAL REGISTRATION: www.isrctn.com ISRCTN95909211