Mobilizing or Sedative Effects? A Narrative Review of the Association Between Intergroup Contact and Collective Action Among Advantaged and Disadvantaged Groups

ACADEMIC ABSTRACT

In this narrative review, we examined 134 studies of the relationship between intergroup contact and collective action benefiting disadvantaged groups. We aimed to identify whether, when, and why contact has mobilizing effects (promoting collective action) or sedative effects (inhibiting collective action). For both moderators and mediators, factors associated with the intergroup situation (compared with those associated with the out-group or the in-group) emerged as the most important. Group status had important effects. For members of socially advantaged groups (examined in 98 studies, 100 samples), contact had a general mobilizing effect, which was stronger when contact increased awareness of experiences of injustice among members of disadvantaged groups. For members of disadvantaged groups (examined in 49 studies, 58 samples), contact had mixed effects. Contact that increased awareness of injustice mobilized collection action; contact that made the legitimacy of group hierarchy or threat of retaliation more salient produced sedative effects.

PUBLIC ABSTRACT

We present a review of existing studies that have investigated the relationship between intergroup contact and collective action aimed at promoting equity for disadvantaged groups. We further consider the influence of contact that is positive or negative and face-to-face or indirect (e.g., through mass or social media), and we distinguish between collective action that involves socially acceptable behaviors or is destructive and violent. We identified 134 studies, considering both advantaged (100 samples) and disadvantaged groups (58 samples). We found that intergroup contact impacts collective action differently depending on group status. Contact generally leads advantaged groups to mobilize in favor of disadvantaged groups. However, contact has variable effects on members of disadvantaged groups: It sometimes promotes their collective action in support of their own group; in other cases, it leads them to be less likely to engage in such action. We examine when and why contact can have these different effects.

Deeds, Not Words: Sexual Identities and Antiracist Activism Among White Americans

Sexual minorities of color often speak about racism in White lesbian and gay communities while White sexual minorities often consider themselves liberals, especially for issues of racial justice. This study explored this contradiction by analyzing the role of sexual identities in predicting antiracist thoughts and actions of self-identified White people. Data from the 2010-2012 American National Election Survey provided information on the racial consciousness and social movement participation of White people (N = 2,552). In the end, sexuality differences in racial attitudes was somewhat or partially confirmed as White lesbian, gay, and bisexual individuals endorsed fewer racial stereotypes and saw more racism than did White heterosexuals. However, these liberal sentiments of White lesbians, gays, and bisexuals were connected more to thoughts more than to political actions. Implications for methodological choices for studying race and sexuality were included, along with ideas for better understanding activism across racial lines.

The role of minority discrimination and political participation in shaping majority perceptions of discrimination: Two cross-national studies

We develop a minority influence approach to multilevel intergroup research and examine whether country-level minority norms shape majority members’ perceptions of discrimination. Defining minority norms via actual minority discrimination and political participation, we hypothesized that in national contexts with greater minority experiences of discrimination and greater minority political participation, majority perceptions of discrimination should be higher. We implemented two cross-national multilevel studies drawing on the European Social Survey and Eurobarometer data with 19,392 participants in 22 countries in Study 1, and with 17,651 participants in 19 countries in Study 2. Higher aggregate levels of minority discrimination were not related to greater acknowledgment of discrimination among majority members. However, higher aggregate minority political participation did relate to higher perceptions of discrimination in Studies 1 and 2. We conclude that country-level minority norms are consequential for majority attitudes, but these norms need to be actively communicated through political participation.

The Role of the Family for Racism and Xenophobia in Childhood and Adolescence

Racism and xenophobia are not just the problems of the adult world; As systems of beliefs, practices, and policies, racism and xenophobia influence children’s perceptions and experiences at early ages. Because families can be significant sources of information regarding race and ethnicity, we focus on the family to understand the broader context of racism and xenophobia in childhood and adolescence. In this paper, we first provide an overview of research conducted among BIPOC (Black, Indigenous, and People of Color) and ethnic/religious minority families that has focused on family ethnic–racial socialization to support children and adolescents’ capabilities for resisting racism and xenophobia. We then review research conducted among white and ethnic/religious majority families that has mainly taken an intergroup relations perspective and has examined associations between parents’ and children’s ethnic–racial attitudes, biases, and prejudice. Finally, we discuss the role of family for racism and xenophobia through the lens of family ethnic–racial socialization and intergroup relations perspectives, highlight areas that are currently understudied, and offer recommendations concerning future research directions.

Shared humanity, awareness of socio-economic privilege, and classism during the pandemic as predictors of supporting equal socio-economic policies

The coronavirus pandemic has caused unemployment to skyrocket, exposed the longstanding inequalities in health care services and working conditions, and mainly affected the poor in different parts of the world. In the current study, we focus on social identity and social class-related factors that are critical during the pandemic to gain insights into what predicts support for policies favoring economic equality in the post-pandemic period. We argue that to the extent that individuals 1) identify with all humanity during the pandemic, 2) are aware of their socio-economic status-based privilege, 3) do not hold classist attitudes, they would support policies favoring economic equality. In Study 1, survey data from 1212 participants in Turkey were analyzed by means of hierarchical linear regression analysis. The findings showed that stronger identification with all humanity, higher awareness of socio-economic status-based privilege, and less endorsement of classist attitudes predict more support for socio-economic equality policies in the post-pandemic period, after controlling for socio-demographic and socio-political characteristics of participants. Study 2 (N = 212) replicated the findings in a different context, namely the U.S. Our findings extend previous studies by showing the importance of a global identity, such as shared human identity, in the ongoing and potentially in the aftermath of the pandemic. In addition, our findings highlight the joint contributions of socio-economic factors such as classist attitudes and awareness of class-based privilege to the support for socio-economic policies.

Acting for whom, against what? Group membership and multiple paths to engagement in social change

In a connected and politically engaged world, it is essential to understand how, why, and when people from diverse backgrounds may support social action. Integrating findings from the collective action, solidarity, and allyship literatures, we present working models of how the lenses through which individuals possessing different group memberships may psychologically identify (as part of the targeted group, an inclusive stigmatized identity, or the societally dominant group) and perceive injustice (as exclusively affecting the targeted group, inclusively affecting the target group and one's ingroup, or perceiving ingroup privileges) may shape social change efforts. We highlight disparate effects of positive (and negative) contact between groups on the mobilization of socially dominant and stigmatized groups that may provide challenges to diverse coalitions seeking social change.

The psychology of revolution

Revolutions are attempts to forcibly overthrow the political and social order. However, most revolutions fail to generate longer-term psychological changes to bring about a match between the behavior of the population and the espoused goals of the revolution. Attempts by the new ruling 'revolutionary' elite to re-establish order in society often result in a resurgence of repression and corruption, and imprisonment for those considered 'anti-revolutionary'. Recent psychological research on revolutions explains this failure through limitations in political plasticity, the speed and extent to which political behavior does or does not change, which constrain the impact a revolution can have on individual and collective behavior.