Can we really reduce ethnic prejudice outside the lab? A meta-analysis of direct and indirect contact interventions

Year Published:

Abstract

The present meta-analysis tested the effectiveness of contact-based interventions for the reduction of ethnic prejudice. Up to now, a meta-analysis summarizing the results of real-world interventions that rest on the intergroup contact theory has been missing. We included evaluations of programs realizing direct (i.e., face-to-face) and/or indirect (i.e., extended or virtual) contact in real-world settings outside the lab. The interventions’ effectiveness was tested shortly after their end (k = 123 comparisons, N = 11 371 participants) and with a delay of at least 1 month (k = 25, N = 1650). Our data show that contact interventions improve ethnic attitudes. Importantly, changes persist over time. Furthermore, not only direct but also indirect contact interventions are successful. In addition, contact programs are effective even in the context of a serious societal conflict (e.g., in the Middle East). Although changes are typically larger for ethnic majorities, there is an impact on minorities, too. Finally, contact interventions not only improve attitudes toward individuals involved in the program, their effects also generalize to outgroups as a whole. In sum, social psychology provides an intervention for prejudice reduction that can be successfully implemented in the practical field.

Citation

Relevant Evidence Summaries

The evidence was reviewed and included in the following summaries: 

What works to build welcoming and inclusive communities?

Numerous interventions to build welcoming and inclusive communities are available, with varying degrees of evidence of effectiveness. Strong evidence supports the effectiveness of structured, facilitated contact-based interventions and bystander interventions in reducing ethnic prejudice and improving well-being of people targeted by racism. Suggestive evidence specific to foreign-born groups is consistent with these findings. Strong evidence […]

About this study

AGE: Multiple Age Groups

DIRECTION OF EVIDENCE: Positive impact

FULL TEXT AVAILABILITY: Free

GENDER: All

HOST COUNTRY: Multiple countries

HOST COUNTRY INCOME: High

INTERVENTION DURATION: Varies

INTERVENTION: Contact interventions

OUTCOME AREA: Inclusive Communities

POPULATION: LGBTQI+ Clients

REGION OF ORIGIN OF PARTICIPANT(S): Multiple Regions

STRENGTH OF EVIDENCE: Strong

TYPE OF STUDY: Meta-analysis

YEAR PUBLISHED: 2015

More STUDIES