Qual Quant (2011) 45:213–222 DOI 10.1007/s11135-010-9366-0 RESEARCH NOTE
Intergroup contact and reduction of explicit and implicit prejudice toward immigrants: a study with Italian businessmen owning small and medium enterprises Loris Vezzali · Dino Giovannini
Published online: 23 September 2010 © Springer Science+Business Media B.V. 2010
Abstract A field study was conducted to test the effectiveness of intergroup contact (Allport, The nature of prejudice, 1954) as a predictor of explicit and implicit attitudes toward immigrants and to examine the processes driving its effects. Participants were Italian businessmen owning small and medium enterprises in Northern Italy who had daily contact with their immigrant workers. We tested a model in which contact ameliorated explicit attitudes, measured as support for social policies toward immigration, through reduced negative outgroup stereotypes. Furthermore, we predicted that contact would have a direct, unmediated effect on improved implicit attitudes toward immigrants, assessed with an Implicit Association Test (Greenwald et al., J Personal Soc Psychol 74:1464–1480, 1998). The results were fully consistent with predictions, thus providing strong support for the contact hypothesis at both an explicit and at an implicit level. The lack of correlation between explicit and implicit attitudes supports dual-process models, suggesting that the two types of attitudes are formed through different processes. The theoretical and practical implications of the findings are discussed. Keywords Intergroup contact · Implicit attitudes · Prejudice reduction · Social policies support · Contact hypothesis · Negative outgroup stereotypes An important consequence of international migrations is that encounters between host majority group members and individuals belonging to minority groups in several domains of the social life are increasingly frequent. Since one of the main reasons for moving to another country concerns employment, creating the conditions for harmonious intergroup relations in this context is of primary importance. Conflict between people with different cultural origins within the workplace can have detrimental effects not only on social relations, but also on
L. Vezzali (B) · D. Giovannini Department of Education and Human Sciences, University of Modena and Reggio Emilia, Viale Allegri 9, 42121 Reggio Emilia, Italy e-mail:
[email protected] D. Giovannini e-mail:
[email protected]
123
214
L. Vezzali, D. Giovannini
working performance, thus undermining the competitiveness of the enterprises as well as the relationships between the workers. The aim of the present study is to test intergroup contact (Allport 1954) as a strategy for prejudice reduction within small and medium enterprises in Northern Italy, and to examine the processes underlying its effects. In particular, we examined if and how contact between Italian businessmen and their immigrant workers leads to improved attitudes toward the immigrant category. Furthermore, although most of the literature on intergroup contact has considered only explicit attitudes, we included a measure of implicit attitudes. To the extent that explicit attitudes might be biased by self-presentation strategies and social desirability motives, implicit attitudes, which are unintentional and beyond awareness, can tap prejudice independently from people’s attempts to manage their own responses (Devine et al. 2001; Nosek 2005, 2007). Furthermore, since explicit and implicit attitudes are associated with different types of behavior (Dovidio et al. 1997; Gawronski and Bodenhausen 2007; Greenwald et al. 2009), examining the differential processes leading to their positive change is fundamental for the improvement of intergroup relations. It is the first time, to our knowledge, that the effects of intergroup contact on both explicit and implicit interracial attitudes are evaluated in real working contexts. This research has both theoretical and practical goals. On one hand, it evaluates the contact hypothesis (Allport 1954) in a naturalistic setting by considering both explicit and implicit attitudes. On the other hand, by examining the processes underlying prejudice reduction at both an explicit and at an implicit level, it can provide important indications to practitioners interested in improving intergroup relations within the workplace.
1 Intergroup contact The contact hypothesis (Allport 1954) states that contact can improve intergroup relations only under optimal conditions (equal status, cooperation for superordinate goals, institutional support). Decades of research in social psychology provided strong support for the role of intergroup contact in reducing prejudice (Pettigrew 1998). Pettigrew and Tropp (2006) conducted an impressive meta-analysis considering 515 studies and more than 250,000 participants, testing the effectiveness of contact for a large variety of target-groups, situations and cultural contexts. The results revealed that contact was indeed effective, and more so when Allport’s optimal conditions were present. The contact hypothesis (Allport 1954) has one important limitation in that it does not specify the processes leading to improved intergroup relations. Recently, scholars have devoted an increasing attention to the possible mediators of intergroup contact (Pettigrew and Tropp 2008). In the present study, we tested the mediator role of outgroup stereotypes. According to Integrated Threat Theory (Stephan and Stephan 2000), since outgroup stereotypes are associated with negative expectations about outgroup behavior, they are a potential source of threat and constitute an important antecedent of negative attitudes. Some studies failed to support the role of outgroup stereotypes as a proximal predictor of intergroup attitudes (e.g., Stephan et al. 2002); however, there is evidence that at least in some cases they can mediate the path from contact to reduced prejudice (e.g., Stephan et al. 2000). In the present study, we reasoned that positive contact experiences at work would lead Italian businessmen to limit the endorsement of negative stereotypes related to immigrants; diminished negative outgroup stereotypes should in turn be associated with more positive intergroup attitudes.
123
Intergroup contact, explicit and implicit prejudice
215
2 Reducing implicit prejudice During the last few decades, overt expressions of prejudice toward a wide number of social groups have declined, giving rise to more subtle forms of discrimination (Dovidio and Gaertner 2004; Pettigrew and Meertens 1995). As a consequence, the attention of scholars has recently focused on the assessment of implicit attitudes so as to reveal hidden aspects of attitudes that explicit evaluations can not capture. Implicit attitudes are activated by the mere presence of an attitude object, they are unintentional and thus less influenced by social desirability concerns (Gawronski and Bodenhausen 2006). Notwithstanding the importance of implicit attitudes for a better understanding of intergroup relations, there are only few studies testing contact as a predictor of reduced implicit prejudice. The results in general show that frequent and cooperative contact is directly related to improved implicit attitudes (e.g., Aberson and Haag 2007; Giovannini and Vezzali 2010; Tam et al. 2006; Turner et al. 2007). However, most of these studies lack external validity as they have been generally conducted with student samples. One important exception is provided by Vezzali et al. (2009a), who showed that implicit prejudice toward the disabled held by non-disabled workers was reduced as a result of contact between these individuals and their disabled colleagues. On the basis of the reviewed literature, we expect a direct, unmediated effect of cooperative contact on diminished implicit prejudice toward immigrants. This prediction is consistent with recent dual-process models of attitudes (e.g., Fazio and Olson 2003; Gawronski and Bodenhausen 2006) suggesting that explicit and implicit attitudes are formed through different processes and that implicit attitude change stems from the repeated association between positive stimuli and an attitude object. In our case, we expect that the association of immigrant exemplars with positive concepts during cooperative contact will enhance the implicit evaluation of the immigrant category.
3 The present research The aim of the present study was to test cooperative contact as a predictor of explicit and implicit intergroup attitudes, as well as the processes implied in prejudice reduction. The hypothesized model is presented in Fig. 1. The study was conducted in small and medium enterprises of Northern Italy among Italian businessmen. Participants completed an Implicit Association Test (IAT; Greenwald et al. 1998) to assess their implicit attitudes toward immigrants and were then administered a questionnaire
Cooperative contact at work
Negative outgroup stereotypes
Social policies support
Implicit prejudice
Fig. 1 Hypothesized path model
123
216
L. Vezzali, D. Giovannini
measuring: cooperative contact at work, stereotypes toward immigrants, social policies favoring immigration. The hypotheses are the following: Hypothesis 1: cooperative contact should improve explicit attitudes, measured by assessing the agreement with social policies toward immigration. Hypothesis 2: the relationship between contact and improved explicit attitudes should be mediated by reduced negative outgroup stereotypes. Hypothesis 3: cooperative contact should diminish implicit prejudice. Hypothesis 4: negative outgroup stereotypes should not mediate the effects of cooperative contact on implicit prejudice.
4 Method 4.1 Participants and procedure Participants were 78 Italian businessmen (54 males, 24 females) owning a small or a medium enterprise who had contact on a daily basis with their immigrant workers. Mean age was 48.19 years (SD = 9.69). Participants, examined individually at the presence of a researcher, first completed an IAT (Greenwald et al. 1998) to assess implicit attitudes toward immigrants. They were then administered a questionnaire. Finally, they were thanked and debriefed. 4.2 Measures 4.2.1 IAT (implicit attitudes) The IAT (Greenwald et al. 1998) was run using the Inquisit software package (Version 2.0, 2006). The task required participants to categorize items belonging to different categories of stimuli as quickly as possible by using one of two response keys. Items were presented one at a time in the center of the computer screen. Four categories of stimuli were used: ingroup and outgroup were exemplified by 10 Italian (e.g., Davide, Silvia) and 10 immigrant (e.g., Hassan, Nashiema) typical names; for the attribute dimension, the stimuli were 10 positive (e.g., peace, enjoyment) and 10 negative (e.g., cancer, murder) words. There were two experimental blocks of 40 trials, 10 for each category of stimuli. In one block (compatible block), Italian names and positive words shared the same response key, whereas immigrant names and negative words shared a different response key. In the other block (incompatible block), the associations were reversed: Italian names and negative words shared a response key, immigrant names and positive words shared an other response key. Both experimental blocks were preceded by a practice block containing 20 practical trials. The order of the experimental blocks was counterbalanced across participants. Feedback was provided for trials incorrectly categorized: in this case, a red “X” was shown below the stimulus item and the subsequent trial appeared only after participants’ correction of the wrong answer. 4.2.2 Questionnaire (explicit attitudes) Cooperative contact at work. Two items were used (e.g., “To what degree is contact with immigrant workers cooperative in this enterprise?”). The seven-step scale ranged from not at all (1) to very much (7). The two items were averaged to obtain an index of cooperative contact at work (Cronbach alpha = .77).
123
Intergroup contact, explicit and implicit prejudice
217
Negative outgroup stereotypes. Participants indicated their agreement with outgroup members possessing each of eight stereotype traits (e.g., competent, reverse-scored; lazy; friendly, reverse-scored; insensitive), adapted by Vezzali and collaborators (in press). A 7-step scale was used, ranging from 1 (I completely disagree) to 7 (I completely agree); the neutral point was 4 (neither agree nor disagree). The eight items were combined in a single measure (alpha = .76), with higher scores reflecting more negative stereotypes associated to the immigrant outgroup. Social policies support. To investigate attitudes toward immigration, participants expressed their agreement with 18 items, tapping support for national social policies favoring immigrants’ rights (e.g., “Both Italians and immigrants should make use of housing projects”; “Immigrants should go back to their country if they do not have a job,” reverse-scored). A seven-step scale was used, anchored by 1 (I completely disagree) and 7 (I completely agree); 4 was the neutral point. A reliable index of social policies support was obtained by aggregating the 18 items (alpha = .73). The higher the score, the stronger the agreement with social policies favoring immigration.
5 Results 5.1 Introductory analyses The IAT score, which represents our index of implicit prejudice, was obtained by following Greenwald and collaborators’ (2003) improved scoring algorithm. The final measure (D measure) is computed by calculating the averaged differences, divided by the individuals’ standard deviations, between latencies in the incompatible and compatible blocks. Scores above 0 reflect a more positive implicit evaluation of Italians than immigrants and, thus, a stronger implicit prejudice. As can be noted in Table 1, contact at work was perceived as very positive; the mean score was higher than the central point of the scale, t (77) = 6.77, p < .001. Participants endorsed moderately positive outgroup stereotypes; indeed, the average score was lower than the neutral point (4), t (77) = 2.00, p < .05. There was no evidence of explicit bias: the mean score for social policies support was not different than the neutral point, t (77) < 1. In contrast, participants exhibited a strong implicit bias favoring Italians: the average score for the measure of implicit prejudice was reliably higher than 0, t (77) = 19.14, p < .001. Correlations between variables are reported in Table 1. As can be observed, cooperative contact at work was predictably associated with all variables. Negative outgroup stereotypes were negatively correlated with the measure of social policies. Consistent with previous
Table 1 Means, standard deviations and correlations between measures Measures
M
SD
1
2
3
4
1. Cooperative contact at work
4.92
1.20
–
2. Negative outgroup stereotypes
3.78
0.99
−.24∗
3. Support for social policies
4.09
0.82
.30**
−.29 ∗ ∗
–
4. Implicit prejudice
0.65
0.30
−.23∗
.18
−.04
–
* p < .05, ** p ≤ .01
123
218
L. Vezzali, D. Giovannini .24* (.30**) R 2 = .14
Cooperative contact at work
-.24*
-.23*
Negative outgroup stereotypes
-.23*
Social policies support
R 2 = .05
Implicit prejudice
Fig. 2 Path model with observed variables. In parentheses, the total effect of contact on social policies support is reported, * p < .05, ** p
