Dixon John, Durrheim Kevin, Tredoux Colin
Department of Psychology, Lancaster University, Lancaster LA1 4YF, United Kingdom.
Am Psychol. 2005 Oct;60(7):697-711. doi: 10.1037/0003-066X.60.7.697.
The contact hypothesis proposes that interaction between members of different groups reduces intergroup prejudice if--and only if--certain optimal conditions are present. For over 50 years, research using this framework has explored the boundary conditions for ideal contact and has guided interventions to promote desegregation. Although supporting the contact hypothesis in principle, the authors critique some research practices that have come to dominate the field: (a) the prioritizing of the study of interactions occurring under rarefied conditions, (b) the reformulation of lay understandings of contact in terms of a generic typology of ideal dimensions, and (c) the use of shifts in personal prejudice as the primary measure of outcome. The authors argue that these practices have limited the contact hypothesis both as an explanation of the intergroup dynamics of desegregation and as a framework for promoting social psychological change. In so arguing, the authors look toward a complementary program of research on contact and desegregation.
接触假说提出,不同群体成员之间的互动能够减少群体间的偏见,但前提是且仅在某些最佳条件存在的情况下。五十多年来,使用这一框架的研究探索了理想接触的边界条件,并指导了促进种族融合的干预措施。尽管原则上支持接触假说,但作者批评了一些在该领域占据主导地位的研究做法:(a)优先研究在稀薄条件下发生的互动;(b)根据理想维度的通用类型重新阐述对接触的通俗理解;(c)将个人偏见的变化作为主要的结果衡量标准。作者认为,这些做法限制了接触假说作为种族融合群体间动态的一种解释以及作为促进社会心理变化的一个框架的作用。在这样论证的过程中,作者展望了一个关于接触和种族融合的补充性研究计划。