Movatterモバイル変換

[0]ホーム
URL:

1932
Annual Reviews logo
Skip to content
  1. Home
  2. A-Z Publications
  3. Annual Review of Psychology
  4. Volume 72, 2021
  5. Article

Abstract

The past decade has seen rapid growth in research that evaluates methods for reducing prejudice. This essay reviews 418 experiments reported in 309 manuscripts from 2007 to 2019 to assess which approaches work best and why. Our quantitative assessment uses meta-analysis to estimate average effects. Our qualitative assessment calls attention to landmark studies that are noteworthy for sustained interventions, imaginative measurement, and transparency. However, 76% of all studies evaluate light touch interventions, the long-term impact of which remains unclear. The modal intervention uses mentalizing as a salve for prejudice. Although these studies report optimistic conclusions, we identify troubling indications of publication bias that may exaggerate effects. Furthermore, landmark studies often find limited effects, which suggests the need for further theoretical innovation or synergies with other kinds of psychological or structural interventions. We conclude that much research effort is theoretically and empirically ill-suited to provide actionable, evidence-based recommendations for reducing prejudice.

    Loading

    Article metrics loading...

    /content/journals/10.1146/annurev-psych-071620-030619
    2021-01-04
    2025-05-18
    Download as PowerPoint
    Loading full text...

    Full text loading...

    /deliver/fulltext/psych/72/1/annurev-psych-071620-030619.html?itemId=/content/journals/10.1146/annurev-psych-071620-030619&mimeType=html&fmt=ahah

    Literature Cited

    1. AlimoCJ.2012. From dialogue to action: the impact of cross-race intergroup dialogue on the development of white college students as racial allies.Equity Excell. Educ.45:36–59
      [Google Scholar]
    2. AllportG.1954.The Nature of Prejudice Boston, MA: Addison-Wesley
      [Google Scholar]
    3. BalasR,SweklejJ.2013. Changing prejudice with evaluative conditioning.Polish Psychol. Bull.44:379–83
      [Google Scholar]
    4. BanakouD,HanumanthuPD,SlaterM2016. Virtual embodiment of White people in a Black virtual body leads to a sustained reduction in their implicit racial bias.Front. Hum. Neurosci.10:601
      [Google Scholar]
    5. BertholdA,LeichtC,MethnerN,GaumP2013. Seeing the world with the eyes of the outgroup—the impact of perspective taking on the prototypicality of the ingroup relative to the outgroup.J. Exp. Soc. Psychol.49:1034–41
      [Google Scholar]
    6. BezrukovaK,SpellCS,PerryJL,JehnKA2016. A meta-analytical integration of over 40 years of research on diversity training evaluation.Psychol. Bull.142:1227–74
      [Google Scholar]
    7. BoagEM,WilsonD.2014. Inside experience: Engagement empathy and prejudice towards prisoners.J. Crim. Psychol.4:133–43
      [Google Scholar]
    8. BrauerM,Er-RafiyA.2011. Increasing perceived variability reduces prejudice and discrimination.J. Exp. Soc. Psychol.47:871–81
      [Google Scholar]
    9. BroockmanD,KallaJ.2016. Durably reducing transphobia: a field experiment on door-to-door canvassing.Science352:220–24
      [Google Scholar]
    10. BrownsteinM,MadvaA,GawronskiB2019. What do implicit measures measure.Wiley Interdiscip. Rev. Cogn. Sci.10:e1501
      [Google Scholar]
    11. BruneauEG,SaxeR.2012. The power of being heard: the benefits of “perspective-giving” in the context of intergroup conflict.J. Exp. Soc. Psychol.48:855–66
      [Google Scholar]
    12. CameronL,RutlandA,BrownR2007. Promoting children's positive intergroup attitudes towards stigmatized groups: extended contact and multiple classification skills training.Int. J. Behav. Dev.31:454–66
      [Google Scholar]
    13. CastilloJLÁ,EquizábalAJ,CámaraCP,GonzálezHG2014. The fight against prejudice in older adults: perspective taking effectiveness.Rev. Latinoam. Psicol.46:137–47
      [Google Scholar]
    14. ChaneyKE.2016.Ends: the endurance, depth, and scope of confronting as a prejudice reduction strategy Ph.D. Thesis, Rutgers University New Brunswick, NJ:
      [Google Scholar]
    15. ChangEH,MilkmanKL,GrometDM,RebeleRW,MasseyC et al.2019. The mixed effects of online diversity training.PNAS116:7778–83
      [Google Scholar]
    16. DaumeyerNM,OnyeadorIN,BrownX,RichesonJA2019. Consequences of attributing discrimination to implicit versus explicit bias.J. Exp. Soc. Psychol.84:103812
      [Google Scholar]
    17. DesselAB.2010. Effects of intergroup dialogue: public school teachers and sexual orientation prejudice.Small Group Res41:556–92
      [Google Scholar]
    18. DevinePG,ForscherPS,AustinAJ,CoxWT2012. Long-term reduction in implicit race bias: a prejudice habit-breaking intervention.J. Exp. Soc. Psychol.48:1267–78
      [Google Scholar]
    19. DevinePG,MonteithMJ.1999. Automaticity and control in stereotyping.Dual-Process Theories in Social Psychology S Chaiken, Y Trope339–60 New York: Guilford
      [Google Scholar]
    20. EnoCA,EwoldsenDR.2010. The influence of explicitly and implicitly measured prejudice on interpretations of and reactions to Black film.Media Psychol13:1–30
      [Google Scholar]
    21. FestingerL.1962.A Theory of Cognitive Dissonance2: Palo Alto, CA: Stanford Univ. Press
      [Google Scholar]
    22. FinseraasH,KotsadamA.2017. Does personal contact with ethnic minorities affect anti-immigrant sentiments? Evidence from a field experiment.Eur. J. Political Res.56:703–22
      [Google Scholar]
    23. FiskeS,LinM,NeubergSL1999. The continuum model: ten years later.Dual Process Theories in Social Psychology S Chaiken, Y Trope703–22 New York: Guilford
      [Google Scholar]
    24. ForscherPS,DevinePG.2017. Knowledge-based interventions are more likely to reduce legal disparities than are implicit bias interventions.Enhancing Justice: Reducing Bias SE Redfield303–16 Chicago: Am. Bar Assoc.
      [Google Scholar]
    25. ForscherPS,LaiCK,AxtJR,EbersoleCR,HermanM et al.2019. A meta-analysis of procedures to change implicit measures.J. Personal. Soc. Psychol.117:522–59
      [Google Scholar]
    26. ForscherPS,MitamuraC,DixEL,CoxWT,DevinePG2017. Breaking the prejudice habit: mechanisms, timecourse, and longevity.J. Exp. Soc. Psychol.72:133–46
      [Google Scholar]
    27. FrenchAR,FranzTM,PhelanLL,BlaineBE2013. Reducing Muslim/Arab stereotypes through evaluative conditioning.J. Soc. Psychol.153:6–9
      [Google Scholar]
    28. GaertnerSL,DovidioJF.2000.Reducing Intergroup Bias: The Common Ingroup Identity Model Hove, UK: Psychol. Press
      [Google Scholar]
    29. GalinskyAD,MoskowitzGB.2000. Perspective-taking: decreasing stereotype expression, stereotype accessibility, and in-group favoritism.J. Personal. Soc. Psychol.78:708–24
      [Google Scholar]
    30. GoldsteinNJ,CialdiniRB,GriskeviciusV2008. A room with a viewpoint: using social norms to motivate environmental conservation in hotels.J. Consum. Res.35:472–82
      [Google Scholar]
    31. GómezÁ,LRTropp,VázquezA,VociA,HewstoneM2018. Depersonalized extended contact and injunctive norms about cross-group friendship impact intergroup orientations.J. Exp. Soc. Psychol.76:356–70
      [Google Scholar]
    32. GreenMC,BrockTC.2000. The role of transportation in the persuasiveness of public narratives.J. Personal. Soc. Psychol.79:701–21
      [Google Scholar]
    33. GreenwaldAG,KriegerLH.2006. Implicit bias: scientific foundations.Calif. Law Rev.94:945–67
      [Google Scholar]
    34. GreenwaldAG,NosekBA,BanajiMR2003. Understanding and using the implicit association test: I. An improved scoring algorithm.J. Personal. Soc. Psychol.85:197–216
      [Google Scholar]
    35. GreitemeyerT,SchwabA.2014. Employing music exposure to reduce prejudice and discrimination.Aggress. Behav.40:542–51
      [Google Scholar]
    36. GrossJJ.2013.Handbook of Emotion Regulation New York: Guilford
      [Google Scholar]
    37. GurinP,NagdaBRA,ZunigaX2013.Dialogue Across Difference: Practice, Theory, and Research on Intergroup Dialogue New York: Russell Sage Found.
      [Google Scholar]
    38. HallNR,CrispRJ,SuenMw2009. Reducing implicit prejudice by blurring intergroup boundaries.Basic Appl. Soc. Psychol.31:244–54
      [Google Scholar]
    39. HalperinE,PoratR,TamirM,GrossJJ2013. Can emotion regulation change political attitudes in intractable conflicts? From the laboratory to the field.Psychol. Sci.24:106–11
      [Google Scholar]
    40. HeitlandK,BohnerG.2010. Reducing prejudice via cognitive dissonance: Individual differences in preference for consistency moderate the effects of counter-attitudinal advocacy.Soc. Influ.5:164–81
      [Google Scholar]
    41. HocevarKP,MetzgerM,FlanaginAJ2017. Source credibility, expertise, and trust in health and risk messaging.Oxford Research Encyclopedia of Communication.https://oxfordre.com/communication/view/10.1093/acrefore/9780190228613.001.0001/acrefore-9780190228613-e-287?print=pdf
      [Google Scholar]
    42. HusnuS,CrispRJ.2010. Imagined intergroup contact: a new technique for encouraging greater inter-ethnic contact in cyprus.Peace Confl. J. Peace Psychol.16:97–108
      [Google Scholar]
    43. HusnuS,PaoliniS.2019. Positive imagined contact is actively chosen: exploring determinants and consequences of volitional intergroup imagery in a conflict-ridden setting.Group Process. Intergroup Relat.22:511–29
      [Google Scholar]
    44. JohnsonDR,JasperDM,GriffinS,HuffmanBL2013. Reading narrative fiction reduces Arab-Muslim prejudice and offers a safe haven from intergroup anxiety.Soc. Cogn.31:578–98
      [Google Scholar]
    45. JostJT,RudmanLA,BlairIV,CarneyDR,DasguptaN et al.2009. The existence of implicit bias is beyond reasonable doubt: a refutation of ideological and methodological objections and executive summary of ten studies that no manager should ignore.Res. Organ. Behav.29:39–69
      [Google Scholar]
    46. KalevA,DobbinF,KellyE2006. Best practices or best guesses? Assessing the efficacy of corporate affirmative action and diversity policies.Am. Sociol. Rev.71:589–617
      [Google Scholar]
    47. KallaJL,BroockmanDE.2020. Reducing exclusionary attitudes through interpersonal conversation: evidence from three field experiments.Am. Political Sci. Rev.114:410–25
      [Google Scholar]
    48. KawakamiK,PhillsCE,SteeleJR,DovidioJF2007. (Close) distance makes the heart grow fonder: improving implicit racial attitudes and interracial interactions through approach behaviors.J. Personal. Soc. Psychol.92:957–71
      [Google Scholar]
    49. KleinRA,RatliffKA,VianelloM,AdamsRB,BahníkŠ et al.2014. Investigating variation in replicability: a “many labs” replication project.Soc. Psychol.45:142–52
      [Google Scholar]
    50. KraimerM,BolinoM,MeadB2016. Themes in expatriate and repatriate research over four decades: What do we know and what do we still need to learn.Annu. Rev. Organ. Psychol. Organ. Behav.3:83–109
      [Google Scholar]
    51. KurdiB,SeitchikAE,AxtJ,CarrollT,KarapetyanA et al.2018. Relationship between the implicit association test and intergroup behavior: a meta-analysis.Am. Psychol.74:569–86
      [Google Scholar]
    52. LaiC,HoffmanK,NosekB2013. Reducing implicit prejudice.Soc. Personal. Psychol. Compass7:315–30
      [Google Scholar]
    53. LaiC,MariniM,LehrS,CerrutiC,ShinJE et al.2014. Reducing implicit racial preferences: I. A comparative investigation of 17 interventions.J. Exp. Psychol. Gen.143:1765–85
      [Google Scholar]
    54. LaiC,SkinnerA,CooleyE,MurrarS,BrauerM et al.2016. Reducing implicit racial preferences: II. Intervention effectiveness across time.J. Exp. Psychol. Gen.145:1001–16
      [Google Scholar]
    55. LaPiereRT.1934. Attitudes versus actions.Soc. Forces13:230–37
      [Google Scholar]
    56. LatuIM.2010.Reducing automatic stereotype activation: mechanisms and moderators of situational attribution training PhD Thesis, Ga. State Univ Atlanta:
      [Google Scholar]
    57. LehmillerJJ,LawAT,TormalaTT2010. The effect of self-affirmation on sexual prejudice.J. Exp. Soc. Psychol.46:276–85
      [Google Scholar]
    58. LemmerG,WagnerU.2015. Can we really reduce ethnic prejudice outside the lab? A meta-analysis of direct and indirect contact interventions.Eur. J. Soc. Psychol.45:152–68
      [Google Scholar]
    59. LiJ,FanY,ZhongHQ,DuanXL,ChenW et al.2019. Effectiveness of an anti-stigma training on improving attitudes and decreasing discrimination towards people with mental disorders among care assistant workers in Guangzhou, China.Int. J. Ment. Health Syst.13:1
      [Google Scholar]
    60. LoweM.2020.Types of contact: a field experiment on collaborative and adversarial caste integration CESifo Work. Pap. No. 8089, CESifo Munich, Ger:.
      [Google Scholar]
    61. MendozaSA,GollwitzerPM,AmodioDM2010. Reducing the expression of implicit stereotypes: reflexive control through implementation intentions.Personal. Soc. Psychol. Bull.36:512–23
      [Google Scholar]
    62. MoherD,LiberatiA,TetzlaffJ,AltmanDG2009. Preferred reporting items for systematic reviews and meta-analyses: the PRISMA statement.Ann. Intern. Med.151:264–69
      [Google Scholar]
    63. MousaS.2020. Building social cohesion between Christians and Muslims through soccer in post-ISIS Iraq.Science369:866–70
      [Google Scholar]
    64. MungerK.2017. Tweetment effects on the tweeted: experimentally reducing racist harassment.Political Behav39:629–49
      [Google Scholar]
    65. MurrarS,BrauerM.2018. Entertainment-education effectively reduces prejudice.Group Process. Intergroup Relat.21:1053–77
      [Google Scholar]
    66. NetoF,da Conceiçao PintoM,MulletE2016. Can music reduce anti-dark-skin prejudice? A test of a cross-cultural musical education programme.Psychol. Music44:388–98
      [Google Scholar]
    67. OhSY,BailensonJ,WeiszE,ZakiJ2016. Virtually old: embodied perspective taking and the reduction of ageism under threat.Comput. Hum. Behav.60:398–410
      [Google Scholar]
    68. OlsonMA,FazioRH.2006. Reducing automatically activated racial prejudice through implicit evaluative conditioning.Personal. Soc. Psychol. Bull.32:421–33
      [Google Scholar]
    69. OswaldFL,MitchellG,BlantonH,JaccardJ,TetlockPE2013. Predicting ethnic and racial discrimination: a meta-analysis of IAT criterion studies.J. Personal. Soc. Psychol.105:171–92
      [Google Scholar]
    70. PaluckEL.2006. Diversity training and intergroup contact: a call to action research.J. Soc. Issues62:577–95
      [Google Scholar]
    71. PaluckEL.2009a. Reducing intergroup prejudice and conflict using the media: a field experiment in Rwanda.J. Personal. Soc. Psychol.96:574–87
      [Google Scholar]
    72. PaluckEL.2009b. What's in a norm? Sources and processes of norm change.J. Personal. Soc. Psychol.96:594–600
      [Google Scholar]
    73. PaluckEL,GreenDP.2009. Prejudice reduction: What works? A review and assessment of research and practice.Annu. Rev. Psychol.60:339–67
      [Google Scholar]
    74. PaluckEL,GreenSA,GreenDP2019. The contact hypothesis re-evaluated.Behav. Public Policy3:129–58
      [Google Scholar]
    75. ParkB,RothbartM.1982. Perception of out-group homogeneity and levels of social categorization: memory for the subordinate attributes of in-group and out-group members.J. Personal. Soc. Psychol.42:1051–68
      [Google Scholar]
    76. ParrottS,CarpentierFRD,NorthupCT2017. A test of interactive narrative as a tool against prejudice.Howard J. Commun.28:374–89
      [Google Scholar]
    77. PatelSL.2013.Examining the influence of perceived social consensus information on weight prejudice across development PhD Thesis, Univ. Tex Dallas:
      [Google Scholar]
    78. PerryS.2011.Responses to prejudice feedback on the race-implicit associations test and the role of bias awareness PhD Thesis, Univ. Ill Chicago:
      [Google Scholar]
    79. PettigrewTF,TroppLR.2006. A meta-analytic test of intergroup contact theory.J. Personal. Soc. Psychol.90:751–83
      [Google Scholar]
    80. PrenticeD,PaluckEL.2020. Engineering social change using social norms: lessons from the study of collective action.Curr. Opin. Psychol. Bull.35:138–42
      [Google Scholar]
    81. RadnitzS.2018. Historical narratives and post-conflict reconciliation: an experiment in Azerbaijan.Confl. Manag. Peace Sci.35:154–74
      [Google Scholar]
    82. RobinsonC.2010. Cross-cutting messages and political tolerance: an experiment using evangelical Protestants.Political Behav32:495–515
      [Google Scholar]
    83. RoeseNJ,JamiesonDW.1993. Twenty years of bogus pipeline research: a critical review and meta-analysis.Psychol. Bull.114:363–75
      [Google Scholar]
    84. RosenthalR.1979. The “file drawer problem” and tolerance for null results.Psychol. Bull.86:638–41
      [Google Scholar]
    85. ScaccoA,WarrenSS.2018. Can social contact reduce prejudice and discrimination? Evidence from a field experiment in Nigeria.Am. Political Sci. Rev.112:654–77
      [Google Scholar]
    86. SechristGB,Milford-SzafranLR.2011. “I depend on you, you depend on me. Shouldn't we agree?”: the influence of interdependent relationships on individuals' racial attitudes.Basic Appl. Soc. Psychol.33:145–56
      [Google Scholar]
    87. SekaquaptewaD,EspinozaP,ThompsonM,VargasP,von HippelW2003. Stereotypic explanatory bias: implicit stereotyping as a predictor of discrimination.J. Exp. Soc. Psychol.39:75–82
      [Google Scholar]
    88. ShermanDK,CohenGL.2006. The psychology of self-defense: self-affirmation theory.Adv. Exp. Soc. Psychol.38:183–242
      [Google Scholar]
    89. ShihMJ,StotzerR,GutiérrezAS2013. Perspective-taking and empathy: generalizing the reduction of group bias towards Asian Americans to general outgroups.Asian Am. J. Psychol.4:79–83
      [Google Scholar]
    90. SiegelAA,BadaanV.2020. #No2sectarianism: experimental approaches to reducing sectarian hate speech online.Am. Political Sci. Rev.114:837–55
      [Google Scholar]
    91. SimonsohnU,NelsonLD,SimmonsJP2014. P-curve: a key to the file-drawer.J. Exp. Psychol. Gen.143:534–47
      [Google Scholar]
    92. SmeekesA,VerkuytenM,PoppeE2012. How a tolerant past affects the present: historical tolerance and the acceptance of Muslim expressive rights.Personal. Soc. Psychol. Bull.38:1410–22
      [Google Scholar]
    93. SmithBD,SilkK.2011. Cultural competence clinic: an online, interactive, simulation for working effectively with Arab American Muslim patients.Acad. Psychiatry35:312–16
      [Google Scholar]
    94. StellAJ,FarsidesT.2016. Brief loving-kindness meditation reduces racial bias, mediated by positive other-regarding emotions.Motiv. Emot.40:140–47
      [Google Scholar]
    95. StewartBD,PayneBK.2008. Bringing automatic stereotyping under control: implementation intentions as efficient means of thought control.Personal. Soc. Psychol. Bull.34:1332–45
      [Google Scholar]
    96. TajfelH,TurnerJ.1979. An integrative theory of intergroup conflict.The Social Psychology of Intergroup Relations WG Austin, S Worchel33–47 Monterey, CA: Brooks/Cole
      [Google Scholar]
    97. ThalerRH,SunsteinCR.2009.Nudge: Improving Decisions About Health, Wealth, and Happiness New York: Penguin
      [Google Scholar]
    98. TurnerRN,CrispRJ,LambertE2007. Imagining intergroup contact can improve intergroup attitudes.Group Process. Intergroup Relat.10:427–41
      [Google Scholar]
    99. VezzaliL.2017. Valence matters: positive meta-stereotypes and interethnic interactions.J. Soc. Psychol.157:247–61
      [Google Scholar]
    100. VillicanaAJ,RiveraLM,GarciaDM2018. When one's group is beneficial: the effect of group-affirmation and subjective group identification on prejudice.Group Process. Intergroup Relat.21:962–76
      [Google Scholar]
    101. WalshSP.2013.Reducing automatic stereotype activation: European and African American photos in situational attribution training PhD Thesis, Univ. Miss Oxford:
      [Google Scholar]
    102. WaltonGM.2014. The new science of wise psychological interventions.Curr. Dir. Psychol. Sci.23:73–82
      [Google Scholar]
    103. WestK,BruckmüllerS.2013. Nice and easy does it: how perceptual fluency moderates the effectiveness of imagined contact.J. Exp. Soc. Psychol.49:254–62
      [Google Scholar]
    104. WitkowskaM,BenedaM,Čehajić-ClancyS,BilewiczM2019. Fostering contact after historical atrocities: the potential of moral exemplars.Political Psychol40:565–82
      [Google Scholar]
    105. WoodcockA,MonteithMJ.2013. Forging links with the self to combat implicit bias.Group Process. Intergroup Relat.16:445–61
      [Google Scholar]
    106. WrightSC,AronA,McLaughlin-VolpeT,RoppSA1997. The extended contact effect: knowledge of cross-group friendships and prejudice.J. Personal. Soc. Psychol.73:73–90
      [Google Scholar]
    107. YablonYB.2012. Are we preaching to the converted? The role of motivation in understanding the contribution of intergroup encounters.J. Peace Educ.9:249–63
      [Google Scholar]
    /content/journals/10.1146/annurev-psych-071620-030619
    Loading
    Prejudice Reduction: Progress and Challenges
    Annual Review of Psychology72, 533 (2021);https://doi.org/10.1146/annurev-psych-071620-030619
    /content/journals/10.1146/annurev-psych-071620-030619
    /content/journals/10.1146/annurev-psych-071620-030619
    Loading

    Data & Media loading...

    Supplementary Data

    • Download theSupplemental Appendix (PDF). Includes Supplemental Tables 1-5, and Supplemental Figures A and 1-6.

    Most Read This Month

    Article
    content/journals/psych
    Journal
    5
    3
    false
    en
    Loading

    Most CitedMost Cited RSS feed

    Related Articles from Annual Reviews

    /content/journals/10.1146/annurev-psych-071620-030619
    dcterms_title,dcterms_subject,pub_keyword
    -contentType:Journal -contentType:Contributor -contentType:Concept -contentType:Institution
    4
    4

    Literature Cited

    1. AlimoCJ.2012. From dialogue to action: the impact of cross-race intergroup dialogue on the development of white college students as racial allies.Equity Excell. Educ.45:36–59
      [Google Scholar]
    2. AllportG.1954.The Nature of Prejudice Boston, MA: Addison-Wesley
      [Google Scholar]
    3. BalasR,SweklejJ.2013. Changing prejudice with evaluative conditioning.Polish Psychol. Bull.44:379–83
      [Google Scholar]
    4. BanakouD,HanumanthuPD,SlaterM2016. Virtual embodiment of White people in a Black virtual body leads to a sustained reduction in their implicit racial bias.Front. Hum. Neurosci.10:601
      [Google Scholar]
    5. BertholdA,LeichtC,MethnerN,GaumP2013. Seeing the world with the eyes of the outgroup—the impact of perspective taking on the prototypicality of the ingroup relative to the outgroup.J. Exp. Soc. Psychol.49:1034–41
      [Google Scholar]
    6. BezrukovaK,SpellCS,PerryJL,JehnKA2016. A meta-analytical integration of over 40 years of research on diversity training evaluation.Psychol. Bull.142:1227–74
      [Google Scholar]
    7. BoagEM,WilsonD.2014. Inside experience: Engagement empathy and prejudice towards prisoners.J. Crim. Psychol.4:133–43
      [Google Scholar]
    8. BrauerM,Er-RafiyA.2011. Increasing perceived variability reduces prejudice and discrimination.J. Exp. Soc. Psychol.47:871–81
      [Google Scholar]
    9. BroockmanD,KallaJ.2016. Durably reducing transphobia: a field experiment on door-to-door canvassing.Science352:220–24
      [Google Scholar]
    10. BrownsteinM,MadvaA,GawronskiB2019. What do implicit measures measure.Wiley Interdiscip. Rev. Cogn. Sci.10:e1501
      [Google Scholar]
    11. BruneauEG,SaxeR.2012. The power of being heard: the benefits of “perspective-giving” in the context of intergroup conflict.J. Exp. Soc. Psychol.48:855–66
      [Google Scholar]
    12. CameronL,RutlandA,BrownR2007. Promoting children's positive intergroup attitudes towards stigmatized groups: extended contact and multiple classification skills training.Int. J. Behav. Dev.31:454–66
      [Google Scholar]
    13. CastilloJLÁ,EquizábalAJ,CámaraCP,GonzálezHG2014. The fight against prejudice in older adults: perspective taking effectiveness.Rev. Latinoam. Psicol.46:137–47
      [Google Scholar]
    14. ChaneyKE.2016.Ends: the endurance, depth, and scope of confronting as a prejudice reduction strategy Ph.D. Thesis, Rutgers University New Brunswick, NJ:
      [Google Scholar]
    15. ChangEH,MilkmanKL,GrometDM,RebeleRW,MasseyC et al.2019. The mixed effects of online diversity training.PNAS116:7778–83
      [Google Scholar]
    16. DaumeyerNM,OnyeadorIN,BrownX,RichesonJA2019. Consequences of attributing discrimination to implicit versus explicit bias.J. Exp. Soc. Psychol.84:103812
      [Google Scholar]
    17. DesselAB.2010. Effects of intergroup dialogue: public school teachers and sexual orientation prejudice.Small Group Res41:556–92
      [Google Scholar]
    18. DevinePG,ForscherPS,AustinAJ,CoxWT2012. Long-term reduction in implicit race bias: a prejudice habit-breaking intervention.J. Exp. Soc. Psychol.48:1267–78
      [Google Scholar]
    19. DevinePG,MonteithMJ.1999. Automaticity and control in stereotyping.Dual-Process Theories in Social Psychology S Chaiken, Y Trope339–60 New York: Guilford
      [Google Scholar]
    20. EnoCA,EwoldsenDR.2010. The influence of explicitly and implicitly measured prejudice on interpretations of and reactions to Black film.Media Psychol13:1–30
      [Google Scholar]
    21. FestingerL.1962.A Theory of Cognitive Dissonance2: Palo Alto, CA: Stanford Univ. Press
      [Google Scholar]
    22. FinseraasH,KotsadamA.2017. Does personal contact with ethnic minorities affect anti-immigrant sentiments? Evidence from a field experiment.Eur. J. Political Res.56:703–22
      [Google Scholar]
    23. FiskeS,LinM,NeubergSL1999. The continuum model: ten years later.Dual Process Theories in Social Psychology S Chaiken, Y Trope703–22 New York: Guilford
      [Google Scholar]
    24. ForscherPS,DevinePG.2017. Knowledge-based interventions are more likely to reduce legal disparities than are implicit bias interventions.Enhancing Justice: Reducing Bias SE Redfield303–16 Chicago: Am. Bar Assoc.
      [Google Scholar]
    25. ForscherPS,LaiCK,AxtJR,EbersoleCR,HermanM et al.2019. A meta-analysis of procedures to change implicit measures.J. Personal. Soc. Psychol.117:522–59
      [Google Scholar]
    26. ForscherPS,MitamuraC,DixEL,CoxWT,DevinePG2017. Breaking the prejudice habit: mechanisms, timecourse, and longevity.J. Exp. Soc. Psychol.72:133–46
      [Google Scholar]
    27. FrenchAR,FranzTM,PhelanLL,BlaineBE2013. Reducing Muslim/Arab stereotypes through evaluative conditioning.J. Soc. Psychol.153:6–9
      [Google Scholar]
    28. GaertnerSL,DovidioJF.2000.Reducing Intergroup Bias: The Common Ingroup Identity Model Hove, UK: Psychol. Press
      [Google Scholar]
    29. GalinskyAD,MoskowitzGB.2000. Perspective-taking: decreasing stereotype expression, stereotype accessibility, and in-group favoritism.J. Personal. Soc. Psychol.78:708–24
      [Google Scholar]
    30. GoldsteinNJ,CialdiniRB,GriskeviciusV2008. A room with a viewpoint: using social norms to motivate environmental conservation in hotels.J. Consum. Res.35:472–82
      [Google Scholar]
    31. GómezÁ,LRTropp,VázquezA,VociA,HewstoneM2018. Depersonalized extended contact and injunctive norms about cross-group friendship impact intergroup orientations.J. Exp. Soc. Psychol.76:356–70
      [Google Scholar]
    32. GreenMC,BrockTC.2000. The role of transportation in the persuasiveness of public narratives.J. Personal. Soc. Psychol.79:701–21
      [Google Scholar]
    33. GreenwaldAG,KriegerLH.2006. Implicit bias: scientific foundations.Calif. Law Rev.94:945–67
      [Google Scholar]
    34. GreenwaldAG,NosekBA,BanajiMR2003. Understanding and using the implicit association test: I. An improved scoring algorithm.J. Personal. Soc. Psychol.85:197–216
      [Google Scholar]
    35. GreitemeyerT,SchwabA.2014. Employing music exposure to reduce prejudice and discrimination.Aggress. Behav.40:542–51
      [Google Scholar]
    36. GrossJJ.2013.Handbook of Emotion Regulation New York: Guilford
      [Google Scholar]
    37. GurinP,NagdaBRA,ZunigaX2013.Dialogue Across Difference: Practice, Theory, and Research on Intergroup Dialogue New York: Russell Sage Found.
      [Google Scholar]
    38. HallNR,CrispRJ,SuenMw2009. Reducing implicit prejudice by blurring intergroup boundaries.Basic Appl. Soc. Psychol.31:244–54
      [Google Scholar]
    39. HalperinE,PoratR,TamirM,GrossJJ2013. Can emotion regulation change political attitudes in intractable conflicts? From the laboratory to the field.Psychol. Sci.24:106–11
      [Google Scholar]
    40. HeitlandK,BohnerG.2010. Reducing prejudice via cognitive dissonance: Individual differences in preference for consistency moderate the effects of counter-attitudinal advocacy.Soc. Influ.5:164–81
      [Google Scholar]
    41. HocevarKP,MetzgerM,FlanaginAJ2017. Source credibility, expertise, and trust in health and risk messaging.Oxford Research Encyclopedia of Communication.https://oxfordre.com/communication/view/10.1093/acrefore/9780190228613.001.0001/acrefore-9780190228613-e-287?print=pdf
      [Google Scholar]
    42. HusnuS,CrispRJ.2010. Imagined intergroup contact: a new technique for encouraging greater inter-ethnic contact in cyprus.Peace Confl. J. Peace Psychol.16:97–108
      [Google Scholar]
    43. HusnuS,PaoliniS.2019. Positive imagined contact is actively chosen: exploring determinants and consequences of volitional intergroup imagery in a conflict-ridden setting.Group Process. Intergroup Relat.22:511–29
      [Google Scholar]
    44. JohnsonDR,JasperDM,GriffinS,HuffmanBL2013. Reading narrative fiction reduces Arab-Muslim prejudice and offers a safe haven from intergroup anxiety.Soc. Cogn.31:578–98
      [Google Scholar]
    45. JostJT,RudmanLA,BlairIV,CarneyDR,DasguptaN et al.2009. The existence of implicit bias is beyond reasonable doubt: a refutation of ideological and methodological objections and executive summary of ten studies that no manager should ignore.Res. Organ. Behav.29:39–69
      [Google Scholar]
    46. KalevA,DobbinF,KellyE2006. Best practices or best guesses? Assessing the efficacy of corporate affirmative action and diversity policies.Am. Sociol. Rev.71:589–617
      [Google Scholar]
    47. KallaJL,BroockmanDE.2020. Reducing exclusionary attitudes through interpersonal conversation: evidence from three field experiments.Am. Political Sci. Rev.114:410–25
      [Google Scholar]
    48. KawakamiK,PhillsCE,SteeleJR,DovidioJF2007. (Close) distance makes the heart grow fonder: improving implicit racial attitudes and interracial interactions through approach behaviors.J. Personal. Soc. Psychol.92:957–71
      [Google Scholar]
    49. KleinRA,RatliffKA,VianelloM,AdamsRB,BahníkŠ et al.2014. Investigating variation in replicability: a “many labs” replication project.Soc. Psychol.45:142–52
      [Google Scholar]
    50. KraimerM,BolinoM,MeadB2016. Themes in expatriate and repatriate research over four decades: What do we know and what do we still need to learn.Annu. Rev. Organ. Psychol. Organ. Behav.3:83–109
      [Google Scholar]
    51. KurdiB,SeitchikAE,AxtJ,CarrollT,KarapetyanA et al.2018. Relationship between the implicit association test and intergroup behavior: a meta-analysis.Am. Psychol.74:569–86
      [Google Scholar]
    52. LaiC,HoffmanK,NosekB2013. Reducing implicit prejudice.Soc. Personal. Psychol. Compass7:315–30
      [Google Scholar]
    53. LaiC,MariniM,LehrS,CerrutiC,ShinJE et al.2014. Reducing implicit racial preferences: I. A comparative investigation of 17 interventions.J. Exp. Psychol. Gen.143:1765–85
      [Google Scholar]
    54. LaiC,SkinnerA,CooleyE,MurrarS,BrauerM et al.2016. Reducing implicit racial preferences: II. Intervention effectiveness across time.J. Exp. Psychol. Gen.145:1001–16
      [Google Scholar]
    55. LaPiereRT.1934. Attitudes versus actions.Soc. Forces13:230–37
      [Google Scholar]
    56. LatuIM.2010.Reducing automatic stereotype activation: mechanisms and moderators of situational attribution training PhD Thesis, Ga. State Univ Atlanta:
      [Google Scholar]
    57. LehmillerJJ,LawAT,TormalaTT2010. The effect of self-affirmation on sexual prejudice.J. Exp. Soc. Psychol.46:276–85
      [Google Scholar]
    58. LemmerG,WagnerU.2015. Can we really reduce ethnic prejudice outside the lab? A meta-analysis of direct and indirect contact interventions.Eur. J. Soc. Psychol.45:152–68
      [Google Scholar]
    59. LiJ,FanY,ZhongHQ,DuanXL,ChenW et al.2019. Effectiveness of an anti-stigma training on improving attitudes and decreasing discrimination towards people with mental disorders among care assistant workers in Guangzhou, China.Int. J. Ment. Health Syst.13:1
      [Google Scholar]
    60. LoweM.2020.Types of contact: a field experiment on collaborative and adversarial caste integration CESifo Work. Pap. No. 8089, CESifo Munich, Ger:.
      [Google Scholar]
    61. MendozaSA,GollwitzerPM,AmodioDM2010. Reducing the expression of implicit stereotypes: reflexive control through implementation intentions.Personal. Soc. Psychol. Bull.36:512–23
      [Google Scholar]
    62. MoherD,LiberatiA,TetzlaffJ,AltmanDG2009. Preferred reporting items for systematic reviews and meta-analyses: the PRISMA statement.Ann. Intern. Med.151:264–69
      [Google Scholar]
    63. MousaS.2020. Building social cohesion between Christians and Muslims through soccer in post-ISIS Iraq.Science369:866–70
      [Google Scholar]
    64. MungerK.2017. Tweetment effects on the tweeted: experimentally reducing racist harassment.Political Behav39:629–49
      [Google Scholar]
    65. MurrarS,BrauerM.2018. Entertainment-education effectively reduces prejudice.Group Process. Intergroup Relat.21:1053–77
      [Google Scholar]
    66. NetoF,da Conceiçao PintoM,MulletE2016. Can music reduce anti-dark-skin prejudice? A test of a cross-cultural musical education programme.Psychol. Music44:388–98
      [Google Scholar]
    67. OhSY,BailensonJ,WeiszE,ZakiJ2016. Virtually old: embodied perspective taking and the reduction of ageism under threat.Comput. Hum. Behav.60:398–410
      [Google Scholar]
    68. OlsonMA,FazioRH.2006. Reducing automatically activated racial prejudice through implicit evaluative conditioning.Personal. Soc. Psychol. Bull.32:421–33
      [Google Scholar]
    69. OswaldFL,MitchellG,BlantonH,JaccardJ,TetlockPE2013. Predicting ethnic and racial discrimination: a meta-analysis of IAT criterion studies.J. Personal. Soc. Psychol.105:171–92
      [Google Scholar]
    70. PaluckEL.2006. Diversity training and intergroup contact: a call to action research.J. Soc. Issues62:577–95
      [Google Scholar]
    71. PaluckEL.2009a. Reducing intergroup prejudice and conflict using the media: a field experiment in Rwanda.J. Personal. Soc. Psychol.96:574–87
      [Google Scholar]
    72. PaluckEL.2009b. What's in a norm? Sources and processes of norm change.J. Personal. Soc. Psychol.96:594–600
      [Google Scholar]
    73. PaluckEL,GreenDP.2009. Prejudice reduction: What works? A review and assessment of research and practice.Annu. Rev. Psychol.60:339–67
      [Google Scholar]
    74. PaluckEL,GreenSA,GreenDP2019. The contact hypothesis re-evaluated.Behav. Public Policy3:129–58
      [Google Scholar]
    75. ParkB,RothbartM.1982. Perception of out-group homogeneity and levels of social categorization: memory for the subordinate attributes of in-group and out-group members.J. Personal. Soc. Psychol.42:1051–68
      [Google Scholar]
    76. ParrottS,CarpentierFRD,NorthupCT2017. A test of interactive narrative as a tool against prejudice.Howard J. Commun.28:374–89
      [Google Scholar]
    77. PatelSL.2013.Examining the influence of perceived social consensus information on weight prejudice across development PhD Thesis, Univ. Tex Dallas:
      [Google Scholar]
    78. PerryS.2011.Responses to prejudice feedback on the race-implicit associations test and the role of bias awareness PhD Thesis, Univ. Ill Chicago:
      [Google Scholar]
    79. PettigrewTF,TroppLR.2006. A meta-analytic test of intergroup contact theory.J. Personal. Soc. Psychol.90:751–83
      [Google Scholar]
    80. PrenticeD,PaluckEL.2020. Engineering social change using social norms: lessons from the study of collective action.Curr. Opin. Psychol. Bull.35:138–42
      [Google Scholar]
    81. RadnitzS.2018. Historical narratives and post-conflict reconciliation: an experiment in Azerbaijan.Confl. Manag. Peace Sci.35:154–74
      [Google Scholar]
    82. RobinsonC.2010. Cross-cutting messages and political tolerance: an experiment using evangelical Protestants.Political Behav32:495–515
      [Google Scholar]
    83. RoeseNJ,JamiesonDW.1993. Twenty years of bogus pipeline research: a critical review and meta-analysis.Psychol. Bull.114:363–75
      [Google Scholar]
    84. RosenthalR.1979. The “file drawer problem” and tolerance for null results.Psychol. Bull.86:638–41
      [Google Scholar]
    85. ScaccoA,WarrenSS.2018. Can social contact reduce prejudice and discrimination? Evidence from a field experiment in Nigeria.Am. Political Sci. Rev.112:654–77
      [Google Scholar]
    86. SechristGB,Milford-SzafranLR.2011. “I depend on you, you depend on me. Shouldn't we agree?”: the influence of interdependent relationships on individuals' racial attitudes.Basic Appl. Soc. Psychol.33:145–56
      [Google Scholar]
    87. SekaquaptewaD,EspinozaP,ThompsonM,VargasP,von HippelW2003. Stereotypic explanatory bias: implicit stereotyping as a predictor of discrimination.J. Exp. Soc. Psychol.39:75–82
      [Google Scholar]
    88. ShermanDK,CohenGL.2006. The psychology of self-defense: self-affirmation theory.Adv. Exp. Soc. Psychol.38:183–242
      [Google Scholar]
    89. ShihMJ,StotzerR,GutiérrezAS2013. Perspective-taking and empathy: generalizing the reduction of group bias towards Asian Americans to general outgroups.Asian Am. J. Psychol.4:79–83
      [Google Scholar]
    90. SiegelAA,BadaanV.2020. #No2sectarianism: experimental approaches to reducing sectarian hate speech online.Am. Political Sci. Rev.114:837–55
      [Google Scholar]
    91. SimonsohnU,NelsonLD,SimmonsJP2014. P-curve: a key to the file-drawer.J. Exp. Psychol. Gen.143:534–47
      [Google Scholar]
    92. SmeekesA,VerkuytenM,PoppeE2012. How a tolerant past affects the present: historical tolerance and the acceptance of Muslim expressive rights.Personal. Soc. Psychol. Bull.38:1410–22
      [Google Scholar]
    93. SmithBD,SilkK.2011. Cultural competence clinic: an online, interactive, simulation for working effectively with Arab American Muslim patients.Acad. Psychiatry35:312–16
      [Google Scholar]
    94. StellAJ,FarsidesT.2016. Brief loving-kindness meditation reduces racial bias, mediated by positive other-regarding emotions.Motiv. Emot.40:140–47
      [Google Scholar]
    95. StewartBD,PayneBK.2008. Bringing automatic stereotyping under control: implementation intentions as efficient means of thought control.Personal. Soc. Psychol. Bull.34:1332–45
      [Google Scholar]
    96. TajfelH,TurnerJ.1979. An integrative theory of intergroup conflict.The Social Psychology of Intergroup Relations WG Austin, S Worchel33–47 Monterey, CA: Brooks/Cole
      [Google Scholar]
    97. ThalerRH,SunsteinCR.2009.Nudge: Improving Decisions About Health, Wealth, and Happiness New York: Penguin
      [Google Scholar]
    98. TurnerRN,CrispRJ,LambertE2007. Imagining intergroup contact can improve intergroup attitudes.Group Process. Intergroup Relat.10:427–41
      [Google Scholar]
    99. VezzaliL.2017. Valence matters: positive meta-stereotypes and interethnic interactions.J. Soc. Psychol.157:247–61
      [Google Scholar]
    100. VillicanaAJ,RiveraLM,GarciaDM2018. When one's group is beneficial: the effect of group-affirmation and subjective group identification on prejudice.Group Process. Intergroup Relat.21:962–76
      [Google Scholar]
    101. WalshSP.2013.Reducing automatic stereotype activation: European and African American photos in situational attribution training PhD Thesis, Univ. Miss Oxford:
      [Google Scholar]
    102. WaltonGM.2014. The new science of wise psychological interventions.Curr. Dir. Psychol. Sci.23:73–82
      [Google Scholar]
    103. WestK,BruckmüllerS.2013. Nice and easy does it: how perceptual fluency moderates the effectiveness of imagined contact.J. Exp. Soc. Psychol.49:254–62
      [Google Scholar]
    104. WitkowskaM,BenedaM,Čehajić-ClancyS,BilewiczM2019. Fostering contact after historical atrocities: the potential of moral exemplars.Political Psychol40:565–82
      [Google Scholar]
    105. WoodcockA,MonteithMJ.2013. Forging links with the self to combat implicit bias.Group Process. Intergroup Relat.16:445–61
      [Google Scholar]
    106. WrightSC,AronA,McLaughlin-VolpeT,RoppSA1997. The extended contact effect: knowledge of cross-group friendships and prejudice.J. Personal. Soc. Psychol.73:73–90
      [Google Scholar]
    107. YablonYB.2012. Are we preaching to the converted? The role of motivation in understanding the contribution of intergroup encounters.J. Peace Educ.9:249–63
      [Google Scholar]

    Read the latest from
    Knowable Magazine

    knowable magazine from Annual Reviews

    Climate Resource Center, Article Collection from Annual Reviews


    Political Science Perspectives on Climate Change, Article Collection from Annual Reviews


    Journal News

    This is a required field
    Please enter a valid email address
    Approval was a Success
    Invalid data
    An Error Occurred
    Approval was partially successful, following selected items could not be processed due to error
    Annual Reviews:
    http://instance.metastore.ingenta.com/content/journals/10.1146/annurev-psych-071620-030619
    10.1146/annurev-psych-071620-030619
    SEARCH_EXPAND_ITEM
    [8]ページ先頭
    ©2009-2025 Movatter.jp