Explore the vast range of titles available.

This study expands research on how intergroup contact makes ethnic minority members less prejudiced toward the majority group. Specifically, we propose that perceived group discrimination may serve as an essential boundary condition of the friendship–prejudice relationship. Accordingly, analyses show that: (a) cross-group friendship predicts less prejudice, (b) perceived group discrimination relates to greater prejudice only among noncontacted ethnic minority members, and (c) greater perceived group discrimination enhances the ability of cross-group friendship to predict reduced prejudice toward majority members. The enhancing effect is inconsistent with previous research. Moreover, we show that perceived personal discrimination does not moderate the friendship–prejudice relationship. Finally, analyses confirm the unique qualities of cross-group friendship, as perceived group discrimination does not predict greater prejudice when this type of contact is most intense. Analyses are performed on an unusually rich, national probability sample of ethnic minority members fielded in 2017 including 1211 respondents from Denmark. We conclude with discussion of the implications of our findings.

This study contributes to social trust research by examining the extent to which crossgroup interaction provokes exclusionary reactions among trusters. Specifically, we examine whether unpleasant contact with ethnic outgroup members constrains the relationship between social trust and ethnic exclusionism among majority members. The analysis shows that: (a) social trust relates negatively to ethnic exclusionism, (b) unpleasant contact experiences relate positively to ethnic exclusionism, and (c) social trust is almost unrelated to ethnic exclusionism when contact experiences have been unpleasant. Inconsistent with \"moralistic\" perspectives, social trusters' views of ethnic outgroup members are remarkably experience-based. To understand the \"experiential effect\", we develop a tentative interpretation emphasizing the joint capacity of negative emotions and group membership salience to enhance the implications of unpleasant encounters among contacted trusters. The analysis is based on the 2014-European Social Survey, including 27,796 individuals and 21 countries. The concluding section discusses how our affect-salience interpretation adds to the experiential understanding of social trust and interethnic relations in contemporary nations.

Socialization theory claims that the ability of education to reduce anti-foreigner sentiment varies cross-nationally because state authorities are not equally committed to accepting ethnic minorities: higher educated persons harbor less anti-foreigner sentiment because they spend longer in educational institutions that impose official democratic values, which forbid negative reactions toward ethnic minorities. Consequently, higher educated persons ought to diverge from the lower educated as democratic institutions progress. Analyses support these claims: the impact of education on reducing anti-foreigner sentiment is strongest in the oldest democracies, moderate among the medium-aged (e.g., South European) democracies and weakest among the youngest (East European) democracies; and higher educated persons are disproportionately influenced by the maturation of democratic institutions. Analyses utilize data from the 28-country 2008 European Social Survey.

Measuring citizens’ political knowledge is important for understanding public opinion formation. In view of the increasing popularity of Web surveys, this paper examines the limitations of this interviewing facility when measuring factual political knowledge. We show that Web surveys contain a source of measurement error as respondents can “Google” the correct answers. This cheating activity is our principal concern. Past efforts are extended by: (1) offering a self-reported estimate of the share of Googling cheaters, (2) showing that the positive effect of education on factual political knowledge is most probably underestimated when cheating occurs, and (3) showing that self-reported cheating activity is inversely related to actual response time. In the concluding section, we discuss the implications of these results and the extent to which cheating can be reduced. The empirical analyses are based on a Danish Web sample from 2012 ( N = 1,509).

This paper introduces a dynamic perspective on how (personal) political ideology shapes reactions to immigration policies at the mass level. Greater ethnic diversity and growing calls for multiculturalism represent a disproportionately greater challenge to rightists because they value conformity, tradition, and stability more than leftists. Consequently, we hypothesize that the impact of political ideology on opposition to immigration has become stronger over time. Analyses show that: (a) leftists were less opposed to immigration than rightists in both 2002 and 2014, and (b) rightists have become more opposed to immigration in the time between 2002 and 2014, whereas leftists’ reactions remained stable across this period. We tested our motivated reasoning hypothesis in a repeated cross-sectional (fixed effects regression) analysis of individual-level data from 18 countries ( N = 55,367). The individual-level data on political ideology and immigration policy preferences is from the European Social Survey data sets fielded in 2002 and 2014.

Objectives. The pioneers of intergroup contact research suggested that the positive impact of face-to-face interaction might fail among “intolerant” participants. To challenge this view, the present study extends previous research by examining religiosity as a boundary condition of intergroup contact among ethnic minority members. Methods. The results were generated in a regression analysis of a Danish national probability sample from 2006 (N = 3,958). Results. Analyses show that: (a) the ability of intergroup contact to reduce prejudice is strongest among the most religious and (b) that contact reduces prejudice at all levels of religiosity. Conclusions. These findings support the general claim that intergroup contact is sufficiently powerful to produce positive outcomes, even among the most “intolerant.” Additionally, the findings suggest that intergroup contact is not necessarily seriously infected by selection biases, as the most intolerant do not systematically avoid contact. The concluding section discusses the theoretical implications of the findings.

This article examines intergroup contact effects in different political contexts. We expand on previous efforts of social psychologists by incorporating the messages of political parties as a contextual trigger of group membership awareness in contact situations. We argue that the focus among political parties on us-them categorizations heightens the awareness of group memberships. This focus in turn enhances the positive intergroup contact effect by stimulating majority members to perceive contacted persons as prototypical outgroup members. A multilevel analysis of 22 countries and almost 37,000 individuals confirms that the ability of intergroup contact to reduce antiforeigner sentiment increases when political parties focus intensively on immigration issues and cultural differences. Specifically, both workplace contact and interethnic friendship become more effective in reducing antiforeigner sentiment when intergroup relations are politicized. These findings demonstrate the need for widening the scope of the intergroup contact theory in order to cover macro-political conditions.

Socialpsykologer forfægter den såkaldte kontakthypotese, hvis påstand er, at majoritetsmedlemmer bliver mere imødekommende over for etniske minoritetsmedlemmer, når de kommer i personlig kontakt med dem. Denne hypotese efterprøves på baggrund af den mest omfattende danske spørgeskemaundersøgelse nogensinde vedrørende dette emne (N = 1.928). I modsætning til tidligere internationale undersøgelser, hvori betydningen af venskaber mellem etniske grupper understreges, fremhæver denne artikel betydningen af kontakt mellem majoritetsmedlemmer og minoritetsmedlemmer i nabolaget og på arbejdspladsen. Disse to typer kontakt tilvejebringer en mere overbevisende test af kontakthypotesen, eftersom de rummer mindre selvselektion. Naboskab og kontakt på arbejdspladsen dækker samtidig langt flere sociale relationer end venskaber, som primært vedrører en snæver privatsfære. Artiklen bidrager til den socialpsykologiske litteratur om kontakteffekter med tre hovedkonklusioner. For det første rummer kontakt i nabolaget og på arbejdspladsen mere meningsfuld samtale, end fagfolk hidtil har antaget. For det andet øger begge former for kontakt den etniske tolerance. For det tredje er det samtale og meningsudvekslinger, som delvis forklarer, hvorfor kontakt gør majoritetsmedlemmer mere tolerante over for minoritetsmedlemmer. ENGELSK ABSTRACT: Arzoo Rafiqi and Jens Peter Frølund Thomsen: When the Ethnic Majority Meets Ethnic Minority Members This paper examines the so-called intergroup contact hypothesis by redirecting focus away from the friendship measure preferred by social psychologists. Although theoretically important, the friendship measure is infected by self-selection biases, and its social coverage is too limited, at least in a European context. Instead, this paper focuses on workplace contact and residential contact. It examines how these relate to ethnic tolerance, as reflected in support for various rights of ethnic minority members. These two types of intergroup contact provide a stronger test of the key hypothesis (contact has a positive influence on tolerance) as they do not meet all the ideal conditions. The analysis shows that although residential contact and workplace contact are more superficial (in terms of self-disclosure), they are both positively related to ethnic tolerance. In fact, both types of contact are as strongly related to ethnic tolerance as intimate cross-group friendship. We conclude that intergroup contact effects are robust as they are capable of occurring in unfavorable circumstances. The analyses are performed on the basis of a Danish national probability sample from 2009. Keywords: intergroup contact, ethnic tolerance, cross-group friendship, residential contact, workplace contact.

This paper examines the so-called intergroup contact hypothesis by redirecting focus away from the friendship measure preferred by social psychologists. Although theoretically important, the friendship measure is infected by self-selection biases, and its social coverage is too limited, at least in a European context. Instead, this paper focuses on workplace contact and residential contact. It examines how these relate to ethnic tolerance, as reflected in support for various rights of ethnic minority members. These two types of intergroup contact provide a stronger test of the key hypothesis (contact has a positive influence on tolerance) as they do not meet all the ideal conditions. The analysis shows that although residential contact and workplace contact are more superficial (in terms of self-disclosure), they are both positively related to ethnic tolerance. In fact, both types of contact are as strongly related to ethnic tolerance as intimate cross-group friendship. We conclude that intergroup contact effects are robust as they are capable of occurring in unfavorable circumstances. The analyses are performed on the basis of a Danish national probability sample from 2009.