Test/C0Retest
No information on test /C0retest reliability is currently available.
Validity
Convergent/Concurrent
Tausch et al. (2011) reported correlation coefficients between the different forms of extended contact that ranged
from medium (extended contact via work and family r5.53) to strong (extended contact via friends and family
r5.72). Tausch et al. also reported significant positive correlations between the various types of extended contact
and direct contact (.22 #r#.41). Furthermore, extended contact via work colleagues ( r5.38), neighbors ( r5.37),
friends ( r5.49), and family members ( r5.47) all correlated significantly and positively with outgroup trust.
Divergent/Discriminant
Closeness of neighbors, work colleagues, friends, and family members (rated on a five-point scale) correlated
weakly with extended contact via neighbors (0 #r#.05), work colleagues (.06 #r#.14), friends (.03 #r#
.11), and family members ( /C0.04#r#.03).
Criterion/Predictive
Tausch et al. (2011) reported that extended contact was positively associated with outgroup trust for extended
contact via friends ( β5.25) and family members ( β5.23) but not via neighbors or work colleagues (both βs#.07).
Moderated by perceived closeness, extended contact was significantly and more strongly associated with outgroup
trust if the respondent perceived their relationship to be close with the work colleague ( β5.16), neighbor ( β5.19),
friend ( β5.38), and family member ( β5.31). All beta weights were non-significant for low closeness.
Location
Tausch, N., Hewstone, M., Schmid, K., Hughes, J., & Cairns, E. (2011). Extended contact effects as a function of
closeness of relationship with ingroup contacts. Group Processes & Intergroup Relations ,14, 239/C0254.
Results and Comments
The Tausch et al. (2011) items represent the most comprehensive approach to measuring self-reported
extended contact. Covering extended contact experiences from friends, family members, neighbors, and work col-
leagues, these items provide a reliable means by which a number of hypotheses relating to the extended contact
effect can be assessed. The correlations provided by Tausch et al. (2011) help demonstrate both convergent and
divergent validity. Furthermore, their multi-item nature permits researchers to take advantage of latent variable
modeling techniques allowing for more accurate parameter estimation. Future research, however, needs to sub-
ject these items to a stricter analysis of validity with longitudinal analyses needed to confirm their test /C0retest
reliability. Despite these shortcomings, these items represent the best set of questions available for estimating self-
reported levels of extended contact and thus form an integral part of the intergroup contact researcher’s toolkit.
EXTENDED CONTACT VIA WORK COLLEAGUES, NEIGHBORS,
FRIENDS, AND FAMILY MEMBERS
How many of your ingroup [ neighbors (excluding
item 1 below) / colleagues (excluding item 2 below) /
friends / family members ] have ...
1. ...neighbors from [the outgroup]
2. ...work colleagues from [the outgroup]3. ...close friends from [the outgroup]
4. ...were married to someone from [the outgroup]
Notes:
Scored from: 1 5none to 65all.
Reproduced with permission.
Positive and Negative Intergroup Contact
Variable
Since its inception, research into intergroup contact has experienced a marked positivity bias (see Pettigrew &
Tropp, 2006 ;Pettigrew, 2008 ), with the majority of work focusing on its potential beneficial outcomes. This is,660 23. MEASURES OF INTERGROUP CONTACT
VI. SOCIOCULTURAL INTERACTION AND CONFLICT