Student or educator? Sign up with your school email and get 6 months of Pro free.
Cited by 222

The DOI matches its Crossref record.

Reducing prejudice and discrimination

Gross, Richard·2020·The Psychology of Prejudice

Abstract

While each of the three main explanations of prejudice discussed in Chapters 3 through 5 has implications for how prejudice and discrimination might be reduced, almost all research into their reduction has focused on Allport’s contact hypothesis (CH). This stipulated four conditions – equal-status contact , the pursuit of common/superordinate goals in a co-operative spirit , sanctioned by institutional supports – which together are sufficient for prejudice reduction. Most research has focused on the first two, and there is considerable support for these conditions, including the final stage of the Robbers Cave experiment and Aronson et al.’s jigsaw classroom method of interdependent learning . One major issue arising from this research is whether the more positive feelings produced through contact with particular outgroup members generalizes to the outgroup as a whole . Allport’s conditions act as facilitators of more effective intergroup contact rather than being absolutely necessary. According to Gaertner and Dovidio’s common ingroup identity model (CIIM), co-operative contact should reduce group/category salience and at the same time increase the adoption of a superordinate identity (‘we’ replaces ‘us’ and ‘them’). Recent research has expanded what’s understood by ‘contact’ to include extended intergroup contact (knowing an ingroup member who has an outgroup member friend), imagined intergroup contact and electronic (or E-) contact . Other methods shown to help reduce prejudice and discrimination include education and consciousness raising (as in Elliot’s ‘blue eyes-brown eyes’ experiment) and collective blame hypocrisy intervention .

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.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.4324/9781003082040-6

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.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

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

See all 222

Metadata

Authors
Gross, R.
Venue
The Psychology of Prejudice
Publisher
Routledge
Published
2020-10-07
Pages
95-120
OpenAlex
W3046933331
Cited by
222
References
0
FWCI
59.16
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/10.4324/9781003082040-6
The paper
Gross, R. (2020). Reducing prejudice and discrimination. The Psychology of Prejudice. https://doi.org/10.4324/9781003082040-6

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.