The DOI matches its Crossref record; 3 of the 3 references it cites were found in a registry or an index.
Beyond Contact: Intergroup Contact in the Context of Power Relations
Abstract
This work investigated how group-based power affects the motivations and preferences that members of advantaged and disadvantaged groups bring to situations of contact. To measure the preferred content of interactions, desires to address particular topics in intergroup contact were assessed for both experimental groups (Study 1) and real groups (Study 2). As predicted, across both studies, the desire to talk about power was greater among members of disadvantaged than of advantaged groups. This difference was mediated by motivation for change in group-based power. Study 2 further demonstrated that more highly identified members of disadvantaged groups wanted to talk about power more. Members of advantaged groups generally preferred to talk about commonalities between the groups more than about group-based power, and this desire was greater with higher levels of identification. However, perceiving that their group's advantage was illegitimate increased the desire of advantaged group members to address power in intergroup interactions.
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
A meta-analytic test of intergroup contact theory.
Pettigrew, T. F., & Tropp, L. R. (2006) · Journal of personality and social psychology · doi:10.1037/0022-3514.90.5.751 · Cited by 9,708 · cited 2×
“or more than five decades now, contact between members of different groups has been considered one of the most effective strategies for improving intergroup relations (Allport, 1954; Brown & Hewstone, 2005; Pettigrew & Tropp, 2006 ).”
BackgroundSocial psychology of intergroup relations
Tajfel, H. (1982) · Annual Review of Psychology · doi:10.1146/annurev.ps.33.020182.000245 · Cited by 7,949
The Group Engagement Model: Procedural Justice, Social Identity, and Cooperative Behavior
Tyler, T. R., & Blader, S. L. (2003) · Personality and Social Psychology Review · doi:10.1207/s15327957pspr0704_07 · Cited by 2,208
Cited by
Noor, M., Shnabel, N., Halabi, S., & Nadler, A. (2012) · Personality and Social Psychology Review · doi:10.1177/1088868312440048 · Cited by 419
Deny, Distance, or Dismantle? How White Americans Manage a Privileged Identity
Knowles, E. D., Lowery, B. S., Chow, R. M., & Unzueta, M. M. (2014) · Perspectives on Psychological Science · doi:10.1177/1745691614554658 · Cited by 340
“What about me?” Perceptions of exclusion and Whites' reactions to multiculturalism.
Plaut, V. C., Garnett, F. G., Buffardi, L. E., & Sanchez-Burks, J. (2011) · Journal of Personality and Social Psychology · doi:10.1037/a0022832 · Cited by 331
Dovidio, J. F., & Gaertner, S. L. (2010) · Handbook of Social Psychology · doi:10.1002/9780470561119.socpsy002029 · Cited by 218
Self-citationVollhardt, J. R. (2012) · The Oxford Handbook of Intergroup Conflict · doi:10.1093/oxfordhb/9780199747672.013.0009 · Cited by 204
Metadata
- Authors
- Saguy, T., Dovidio, J. F., & Pratto, F.
- Venue
- Personality and Social Psychology Bulletin
- Publisher
- SAGE Publications
- Published
- 2008-03
- Volume
- 34
- Issue
- 3
- Pages
- 432-445
- ISSN
- 0146-1672 (ISSN-L)
- 1552-7433
- OpenAlex
- W2107692758
- Cited by
- 271
- References
- 3
- FWCI
- 47.62
- 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 Contact: Intergroup Contact in the Context of Power Relations. https://app.cochat.ai/papers/10.1177/0146167207311200
- The paper
- Saguy, T., Dovidio, J. F., & Pratto, F. (2008). Beyond Contact: Intergroup Contact in the Context of Power Relations. Personality and Social Psychology Bulletin. https://doi.org/10.1177/0146167207311200
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.