The DOI matches its Crossref record.
Reducing Prejudice and Discrimination
Abstract
The self-regulation model proposes that when unprejudiced people act in a prejudiced way, they search for and apply nonprejudiced responses. Taking an outgroup’s perspective can reduce stereotyping and prejudice toward that group. The contact hypothesis proposes that interacting with outgroup members reduces prejudice. Conditions for the success of intergroup contact include equal status, common goals, acquaintance potential, and institutional support. Positive, extended intergroup contact is more effective at reducing prejudice. Imagined contact can also be effective. The contact process has three stages: personalization, salient categorization, and common ingroup identity. The colorblind perspective, which holds that people should ignore others’ social group membership, has two components: color evasion, related to more prejudice, and equality orientation, related to less prejudice. The assimilationist perspective holds that minority groups should replace their culture with the dominant one; this can lead to prejudice against minority cultures. The multicultural perspective recognizes the value of both majority and minority groups’ perspectives and results in positive intergroup relations. Diversity initiatives are designed to improve the experiences and outcomes of disadvantaged groups. They are most effective in climates where diversity is normative and valued and least effective if they signal that disadvantaged group members are incompetent or cannot succeed without help.
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
Cited by
Prejudice Reduction: What Works? A Review and Assessment of Research and Practice
Paluck, E. L., & Green, D. P. (2009) · Annual Review of Psychology · doi:10.1146/annurev.psych.60.110707.163607 · Cited by 1,376
Cottrell, C. A., & Neuberg, S. L. (2005) · Journal of Personality and Social Psychology · doi:10.1037/0022-3514.88.5.770 · Cited by 1,160
Under Threat: Responses to and the Consequences of Threats to Individuals' Identities
Petriglieri, J. L. (2011) · Academy of Management Review · doi:10.5465/amr.2009.0087 · Cited by 706
Devine, P. G., Plant, E. A., Amodio, D. M., Harmon-Jones, E., & Vance, S. L. (2002) · Journal of Personality and Social Psychology · doi:10.1037/0022-3514.82.5.835 · Cited by 720
State-Level Policies and Psychiatric Morbidity In Lesbian, Gay, and Bisexual Populations
Hatzenbuehler, M. L., Keyes, K. M., & Hasin, D. S. (2009) · American Journal of Public Health · doi:10.2105/ajph.2008.153510 · Cited by 538
Metadata
- Authors
- Kite, M. E., Whitley, B. E., & Wagner, L. S.
- Venue
- Psychology of Prejudice and Discrimination
- Publisher
- Routledge
- Published
- 2022-05-14
- Pages
- 605-666
- OpenAlex
- W4280577217
- Cited by
- 546
- References
- 0
- FWCI
- 192.77
- Type
- book chapter
- 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: Reducing Prejudice and Discrimination. https://app.cochat.ai/papers/10.4324/9780367809218-13
- The paper
- Kite, M. E., Whitley, B. E., & Wagner, L. S. (2022). Reducing Prejudice and Discrimination. Psychology of Prejudice and Discrimination. https://doi.org/10.4324/9780367809218-13
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.