significantly, and consistently across the three waves (all factor loadings $.66, all p,.001).7Additionally, Swart
et al. reported that their shorter intergroup anxiety scale displayed metric invariance over time (i.e., all item par-
cels were loaded equivalently by the latent variable when compared with the same parcel at a later time point).
The CFA model presented in Swart et al. (2010) , which included cross-group friendships, intergroup anxiety, out-
group attitudes, perceived outgroup variability (Study 1), and action tendencies (Study 2), displayed adequate
model fit for both White and mixed-race samples, helped to establish the divergent validity of this short form of
the scale. Furthermore, the factor loadings for the intergroup anxiety scale were invariant (i.e., statistically equiv-
alent) between the White and mixed-race samples in both studies.
Criterion/Predictive
Stephan and Stephan (1985) found that higher levels of intergroup contact significantly predicted lower levels
of intergroup anxiety. Furthermore, Islam and Hewstone (1993) also found that both contact quantity ( β5/C0.23)
and contact quality ( β5/C0.52) were negatively associated with intergroup anxiety. In turn, Islam and Hewstone
reported that higher levels of intergroup anxiety were significantly negatively associated with perceived out-
group variability ( β5/C0.37) and outgroup attitudes ( β5/C0.16). These results attest to the predictive validity of the
full version of the intergroup anxiety scale.
Replicating the results with the short version of the intergroup anxiety scale, Paolini et al. (2004) found that
direct cross-group friendships ( β5/C0.31) and extended cross-group friendships ( β5/C0.26) were negatively associ-
ated with intergroup anxiety. Intergroup anxiety was in turn significantly and positively associated with out-
group prejudice ( β5.57) and was negatively associated with perceived outgroup variability ( β5/C0.17). Turner
et al. (2008, Study 1) also found in their multiple mediator model that extended cross-group friendships
(β5/C0.41), and not direct cross-group friendships ( β5/C0.16), were significantly associated with less intergroup
anxiety. In turn, intergroup anxiety was negatively associated with outgroup attitudes ( β5/C0.19). These results
support the predictive validity of the short version of Stephan and Stephan’s (1985) intergroup anxiety scale.
The short version of the intergroup anxiety scale ( Swart et al., 2011 ) displayed good predictive validity, longi-
tudinally. Cross-group friendships at time 1 (and time 2) were associated with less intergroup anxiety at time 2
(and time 3, respectively). Intergroup anxiety at earlier time points, itself, was associated with less perceived out-
group variability at later time points.
Location
Original scale
Stephan, W.G., & Stephan, C.W. (1985). Intergroup anxiety. Journal of Social Issues ,41, 157/C0175.
Short form
Paolini, S., Hewstone, M., Cairns, E., & Voci, A. (2004). Effects of direct and indirect cross-group friendships
on judgments of Catholics and Protestants in Northern Ireland: The mediating role of an anxiety reduction mech-
anism. Personality and Social Psychology Bulletin ,30, 770/C0786.
Short form for younger sample
Swart, H., Hewstone, M., Christ, O., & Voci, A. (2010). The impact of cross-group friendships in South Africa:
Affective mediators and multigroup comparisons. Journal of Social Issues ,66, 309/C0333.
Results and Comments
Based on the evidence presented above, Stephan and Stephan’s (1985) intergroup anxiety scale provides a
good way in which researchers can assess intergroup anxiety. The full 11-item scale covers a wide range of adjec-
tives that could be used to describe one’s anxious feelings during an intergroup encounter. Some doubt is cast
over the content validity of the measure as not all the items seem suited to estimating one’s feelings of anxiety in
an intergroup encounter. For example, feelings of being ‘irritated’ or ‘impatient’, while they may appear in anxi-
ety provoking situations, seem to be more closely related to feelings of annoyance than anxiousness.
Furthermore, neither Stephan and Stephan (1985) norIslam and Hewstone (1993) performed an EFA on the full
version of the scale. We, therefore, remain unsure as to its underlying dimensionality. The high reliability
7In both the 2010 and 2011 studies ( Swart et al., 2010, 2011 ), Swart and colleagues used a partial disaggregation approach when setting up
their latent variables. In their model, they used two-items per parcel yielding a total of three parcels. Results attesting to a construct’s validity
using item ‘parcels’ have been used in previous research (e.g., see Bagozzi & Edwards, 1998 ).669 MEDIATORS OF THE EFFECTS OF INTERGROUP CONTACT ON OUTGROUP ATTITUDES
VI. SOCIOCULTURAL INTERACTION AND CONFLICT