The DOI matches its Crossref record; 77 of the 77 references it cites were found in a registry or an index.
Beyond the Optimal Contact Strategy: A Reality Check for the Contact Hypothesis.
Abstract
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.
Overview
The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.
Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.
Integrity signals
Registry
Cites
Statistics
Verification
Claims the paper makes
The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.
Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.
Self-check
Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.
The self-check needs the paper’s full text.
Citations
Cites
Birds of a Feather: Homophily in Social Networks
McPherson, M., Smith-Lovin, L., & Cook, J. M. (2001) · Annual Review of Sociology · doi:10.1146/annurev.soc.27.1.415 · Cited by 18,567
(1954) · Cited by 15,935
The Handbook of Social Psychology
Gravatt, A. E., Lindzey, G., & Aronson, F. (1969) · The Family Coordinator · doi:10.2307/582242 · Cited by 12,517
American Apartheid: Segregation and the Making of the Underclass.
Fernandez, R. M., Massey, D. S., & Denton, N. A. (1993) · Contemporary Sociology · doi:10.2307/2074502 · Cited by 6,193
Pettigrew, T. F. (1998) · Annual Review of Psychology · doi:10.1146/annurev.psych.49.1.65 · Cited by 6,001
The role of stereotyping in system‐justification and the production of false consciousness
Jost, J. T., & Banaji, M. R. (1994) · British Journal of Social Psychology · doi:10.1111/j.2044-8309.1994.tb01008.x · Cited by 3,290
Dantzer, R. (1990) · Neuropsychologia · doi:10.1016/0028-3932(90)90065-v · Cited by 2,354
Readings in Social Psychology.
Greenwood, E., Newcomb, T. M., & Hartley, E. L. (1948) · American Sociological Review · doi:10.2307/2087246 · Cited by 2,014
Core Discussion Networks of Americans
Marsden, P. V. (1987) · American Sociological Review · doi:10.2307/2095397 · Cited by 1,921
Mapping the Language of Racism: Discourse and the Legitimation of Exploitation
Wetherell, M. S., & Potter, J. (1993) · Open Research Online (The Open University) · Cited by 1,747
Cited by
Putnam, R. D. (2007) · Scandinavian Political Studies · doi:10.1111/j.1467-9477.2007.00176.x · Cited by 4,027
Crisp, R. J., & Turner, R. N. (2009) · American Psychologist · doi:10.1037/a0014718 · Cited by 663
Commonality and the Complexity of “We”: Social Attitudes and Social Change
Dovidio, J. F., Gaertner, S. L., & Saguy, T. (2009) · Personality and Social Psychology Review · doi:10.1177/1088868308326751 · Cited by 598
Noor, M., Shnabel, N., Halabi, S., & Nadler, A. (2012) · Personality and Social Psychology Review · doi:10.1177/1088868312440048 · Cited by 419
Intergroup Contact and Attitudes Toward the Principle and Practice of Racial Equality
Dixon, J., Durrheim, K., & Tredoux, C. (2007) · Psychological Science · doi:10.1111/j.1467-9280.2007.01993.x · Cited by 329
Self-citation
Metadata
- Authors
- Dixon, J., Durrheim, K., & Tredoux, C.
- Venue
- American Psychologist
- Published
- 2005
- Volume
- 60
- Issue
- 7
- Pages
- 697-711
- ISSN
- 0003-066X (ISSN-L)
- 1935-990X
- OpenAlex
- W2057970772
- Cited by
- 695
- References
- 77
- FWCI
- 54.47
- Type
- journal article
- Language
- en
- Open access
- closed
About these checks
Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.
Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.
Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.
What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›
Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review
How to cite
Cite CoChat for the checks on this page, and the paper for its own findings.
- This page
- CoChat. (2026). Citation check: Beyond the Optimal Contact Strategy: A Reality Check for the Contact Hypothesis. https://app.cochat.ai/papers/10.1037/0003-066x.60.7.697
- The paper
- Dixon, J., Durrheim, K., & Tredoux, C. (2005). Beyond the Optimal Contact Strategy: A Reality Check for the Contact Hypothesis. American Psychologist. https://doi.org/10.1037/0003-066x.60.7.697
Data sources
Bibliographic data: Semantic Scholar, OpenAlex, Crossref.
Contains information from the Semantic Scholar Academic Graph Datasets, made available under the ODC Attribution License (ODC-BY 1.0).
Semantic Scholar’s data is described in: Kinney, R., et al. (2023). The Semantic Scholar Open Data Platform. arXiv:2301.10140.
