Unwilling, but not unaffected-Imagined contact effects for authoritarians and social dominators

European Journal of Social Psychology

Volumn 43, Issue 5, 2013, Pages 404-412

  Asbrock, Frank ^a   Gutenbrunner, Lisa ^a   Wagner, Ulrich ^a  

^a PHILIPPS UNIVERSITY MARBURG   (Germany)

Author keywords

[No Author keywords available]

Indexed keywords

EID: 84880701217     PISSN: 00462772     EISSN: 10990992     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1002/ejsp.1956     Document Type: Article

References (59)

1. Adorno, T. W., Frenkel-Brunswik, E., Levinson, D., & Sanford, N.(1950). The authoritarian personality. New York, NY: Harper.
2. Aiken, L. S., & West, S. G. (1991). Multiple regression: Testing and interpreting interactions. Newbury Park, California: Sage.
3. Allport, G. W. (1954). The nature of prejudice. Cambridge, MA: Perseus Books.
4. Altemeyer, B. (1981). Right-wing authoritarianism. Winnipeg, Manitoba: The University of Manitoba Press.
5. Altemeyer, B. (1996). The authoritarian specter. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press.
6. 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.
7. 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.
8. 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.
9. 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.
10. 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.
11. 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.
12. 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.
13. Crisp, R. J., & Turner, R. N. (2009). Can imagined interactions produce positive perceptions? Reducing prejudice through simulated social contact. American Psychologist, 64, 231-240.
14. 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.
15. 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.
16. 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.
17. 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.
18. Dru, V. (2007). Authoritarianism, social dominance orientation and prejudice: Effects of various self-categorization conditions. Journal of Experimental Social Psychology, 43, 877-883.
19. 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.
20. 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.
21. 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.
22. 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.
23. 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.
24. Funke, F. (2005). The dimensionality of right-wing authoritarianism: Lessons from the dilemma between theory and measurement. Political Psychology, 26, 195-218.
25. 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.
26. 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.
27. 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.
28. 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.
29. Hodson, G. (2008). Interracial prison contact: The pros for (socially dominant) cons. British Journal of Social Psychology, 47, 325-351.
30. Hodson, G. (2011). Do ideologically intolerant people benefit from intergroup contact? Current Directions in Psychological Science, 20, 154-159.
31. Hodson, G., & Hewstone, M. (Eds.). (2013). Advances in intergroup contact. London, UK: Psychology Press.
32. 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.
33. 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.
34. Husnu, S., & Crisp, R. J. (2010a). Elaboration enhances the imagined contact effect. Journal of Experimental Social Psychology, 46, 943-950.
35. 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.
36. 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.
37. 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.
38. 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.
39. 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.
40. Pettigrew, T. F., & Tropp, L. R. (2006). A meta-analytic test of intergroup contact theory. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 90, 751-783.
41. Pettigrew, T. F., & Tropp, L. R. (2011). When groups meet: The dynamics of intergroup contact. London: Psychology Press.
42. 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.
43. 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.
44. Sidanius, J., & Pratto, F. (1999). Social dominance. Cambridge, UK: Cambridge University Press.
45. Stathi, S., & Crisp, R. J. (2008). Imagining intergroup contact promotes projection to outgroups. Journal of Experimental Social Psychology, 44, 943-957.
46. 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.
47. 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.
48. Strauß, D. (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.
49. 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.
50. 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.
51. Turner, R. N., & Crisp, R. J. (2010). Imagining intergroup contact reduces implicit prejudice. British Journal of Social Psychology, 49, 129-142.
52. Turner, R. N., & West, K. (2012). Behavioural consequences of imagining intergroup contact with stigmatized outgroups. Group Processes and Intergroup Relations, 15, 193-202.
53. Turner, R. N., Crisp, R. J., & Lambert, E. (2007). Imagining intergroup contact can improve intergroup attitudes. Group Processes and Intergroup Relations, 10, 427-441.
54. 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.
55. 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.
56. 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.
57. 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.
58. 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.
59. 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.