CHAPTER
23
Measures of Intergroup Contact
Simon Lolliot1, Benjamin Fell1, Katharina Schmid1, Ralf Wo ¨lfer1, Hermann
Swart2, Alberto Voci3, Oliver Christ4, Rachel New1and Miles Hewstone1
1University of Oxford, Oxford, UK;2Stellenbosch University, Stellenbosch, South Africa;3University of Padova,
Padova, Italy;4Philipps-University Marburg, Germany
Intergroup contact has long been heralded as a means by which intergroup relations can be improved ( Baker,
1934; Williams, 1947 ). The ideas put forward by these early theorists were integrated by Allport (1954) , who pro-
posed that under the ‘optimal conditions’ of equal status, collaborative work towards a common goal, and sup-
port from relevant authorities, intergroup contact will result in improved intergroup relations. This became
known as the ‘contact hypothesis’ and, more recently, as ‘contact theory’ (e.g., Hewstone, 2009 ). Three impressive
meta-analyses have confirmed (a) the basic contention that positive intergroup contact is negatively associated
with intergroup prejudice ( Pettigrew & Tropp, 2006 ); (b) that this relationship is stronger the more intimate the
contact becomes, with cross-group friendships being more strongly associated with lower prejudice than is gen-
eral contact ( Davies, Tropp, Aron, Pettigrew, & Wright, 2011; Pettigrew & Tropp, 2006 ); and (c) that the processes
of anxiety reduction and empathy enhancement, especially, help translate the beneficial effects of contact into
less prejudiced attitudes ( Pettigrew & Tropp, 2008 ).
Numerous present-day societies are characterized by social segregation (for an authoritative historical over-
view, see Nightingale, 2012 ), despite becoming increasingly diverse (e.g., Hooghe, Reeskens, Stolle, & Trappers,
2009). Given that intergroup contact between groups competing for limited resources /C0such as jobs /C0exacerbates
prejudice ( Esses, Jackson, Dovidio, & Hodson, 2005 ), tensions, often born in segregated areas (see Gallagher,
1995 ), can boil over into intergroup conflict (e.g., xenophobic attacks in South Africa [ Steenkamp, 2009 ]). As socie-
ties become more diverse and competition for scarce resources increases, the role of positive intergroup contact
as a social intervention tool remains as, if not more, important today as when it was first introduced almost a
century ago (e.g., Bogardus, 1928 ).
MEASURES REVIEWED HERE
We review the psychometric properties of some of the key scales used to measure the most pertinent con-
structs to intergroup contact research. To achieve this, the chapter is divided into four over-arching sections cov-
ering seven constructs germane to research on intergroup contact. These are as follows:
Measuring the Dimensions of Intergroup Contact
1.General Intergroup Contact Quantity and Contact Quality ( Islam & Hewstone, 1993 )
2.Cross-Group Friendships ( Turner, Hewstone, & Voci, 2007a )
3.Extended Contact via Work Colleagues, Neighbors, Friends, and Family Members ( Tausch, Hewstone,
Schmid, Hughes, & Cairns, 2011 )
4.Positive and Negative Intergroup Contact
652Measures of Personality and Social Psychological Constructs.
DOI: http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/B978-0-12-386915-9.00023-1 ©2015 Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.