Contact hypothesis - Revision history

Bacchus: Text replacement - "tbe " to "the "

2024-04-29T00:28:51Z

Text replacement - "tbe " to "the "

Bacchus: Text replacement - " the " to " tbe "

2024-04-26T17:08:38Z

Text replacement - " the " to " tbe "

𝗔𝗿𝗰𝗵𝗮𝗻𝗴𝗲𝗹: 1 revision imported

2024-02-06T07:07:08Z

1 revision imported

← Older revision	Revision as of 22:07, 5 February 2024
(No difference)

en>Upplysning at 07:19, 22 November 2020

2020-11-22T07:19:23Z

New page

{{Template: Race differences}}
{{Template:Ethnically divided societies}}

The '''contact hypothesis''' is a very popular and [[politically correct]] hypothesis that claims that increased contact between groups (assuming certain conditions) improves attitudes and relations between the groups. This has been argued to be supported by some studies.

One explanation for the claimed effect is that claimed incorrectly negative [[stereotyping]] of the other group is claimed to be diminished by contact. Another is that prolonged exposure is claimed to reduce anxiety to being in the presence of individuals from anther group. A third is that contact involving cooperation between individuals is claimed to increase positive attitudes.

Such and similar ideas have a long history. However, the theory was formally introduced by Gordon W. Allport in his 1954 book ''The nature of prejudice''. Allport pointed out that not all contacts between groups improve attitudes and relations and argued that certain conditions must apply for the effect to occur. However, this is a distinction often ignored when the theory (or similar ideas) has been used to advocate for politically correct changes, such as [[desegregation]] and [[mass immigration]].

Contrary to the assumption that these massive societal changes/"social experiments" would improve intergroup attitudes and relations, research and outcomes, such as increasing political and ethnic/racial polarization, instead support worsening intergroup attitudes and relations.

== Limitations ==
Many of the supporting studies are artificial laboratory experiments with unclear real-world significance.

Many of the studies may involve groups that are similar. For example, studies involving increased contact between different European groups, between university students, between people living in the same area (and thus likely having similar incomes and education), between soldiers (and who often must pass IQ/education minimums and who live in an environment that deliberately minimizes differences between individuals), etc.

The result may be different if increasing contact between more typical groups, such as between an average White and an average Black. More generally, contact with similar persons from another group may possibly decrease false negative stereotyping, but contact with dissimilar persons from another group may possibly decrease false positive stereotyping.

Many of the studies involve working with members from another group towards a common goal. In reality, groups often have different and competing goals.

Many studies involve pleasurable interactions. In reality, this may not always apply.

Many of the studies have a clear authority who enforces cooperation between individuals. In reality, different groups often have different and competing leaders.

Many of the studies make it more or less clear to the participants that they are expected to become more friendly to one another and that this is the morally correct outcome. This may influence the results.

The size of the effect is small, according to a 2006 meta-analysis, and even smaller if the conditions are less than ideal.<ref>Pettigrew TF, Tropp LR (2006) A meta-analytic test of intergroup contact theory. ''J Pers Soc Psychol'' 90 (5):751-83. http://dx.doi.org/10.1037/0022-3514.90.5.751 http://pubmed.gov/16737372</ref>

== Real world applicability ==
That increased contact does not necessarily improve attitudes in the real world was demonstrated after the desegregation of schools in the United States. A review of studies conducted during and after school desegregation found that 46% of the studies reported an increase in "prejudice" among White students, 17% reported a decline in "prejudice", and the remainder reported no change.<ref>Stephan, W. G. (1986). The effects of school desegregation: An evaluation 30 years after Brown. In M. J. Saks & L. Saxe (Eds.), Advances in applied social psychology (vol. 3, pp. 181-206). Hillsdale, NJ: Erlbaum.</ref> Furthermore, "''Studies generally gauge the attitudes of white students towards blacks before and after attending integrated schools. A summary of results shows that after integration, whites are as likely to have a worse view of blacks as they are to have an improved view. These, moreover, are the findings for whites who have stayed in integrated schools, and are probably more likely than those who left to have a favorable view of blacks.''"<ref name=ihf1>Integration Has Failed (Part I) https://www.amren.com/news/2008/10/integration_has/</ref>

This despite a general trend during this time period towards increasing [[politically correct]] propaganda, in, for example, fictional depictions in the [[mass media]] of races and race relations.

Contrary to the assumption of many supporters, the [[mass immigration]] to Western countries has been followed by the growth of anti-immigration groups, the growth of groups supporting the various immigrant groups, and increasing political and ethnic/racial polarization. See the [[Political spectrum]] article, in particular the sections "Ethnic homogeneity/heterogeneity" and "Increasing polarization," on aspects such as increasing political polarization in the United States, argued to be related to the increasing ethnic heterogeneity. Race now outweighs all other demographic divides regarding which party to vote for, with factors such as income not even coming close.

== The contact hypothesis and research on ethnic heterogeneity ==
The contact hypothesis and some related research may seem to contradict research results on [[ethnic heterogeneity]], which has found many negative effects (including increased intergroup conflicts and intergroup violence) from increased ethnic heterogeneity in an area and presumably also increased contacts between the different ethnic groups in this area. There are several possible explanations for this seeming contradiction:
* The increasing real world contacts may not occur under the ideal conditions that are used in many laboratory experiments.
* The contact effect is small even under ideal conditions. Thus, it may be by far too weak to counter opposition to other groups due to factors related to [[racial genetic interests]], competition regarding resources, crime and other negative behaviors by other groups, etc.
* Positive contacts may involve atypical individuals. Thus, individuals with higher education tend to report more positive attitudes towards other groups. One explanation is that such individuals tend to only have prolonged contact with out-group individuals that also have a higher education. In contrast, the contacts that average individuals have may be more negative.
* Reverse causality. Studies do have found that having more out-group friends is associated with more positive out-group attitudes. However, this may simply be a case of reverse causality - individuals who have more positive out-group attitudes become friends with more out-group individuals rather than having more out-group friends causing more positive attitudes.
* Another example of reverse causality is that negative contacts may be terminated quickly and future contacts avoided, while positive contacts may be prolonged and repeated in the future. This may cause the illusion of more contact causing more positive attitudes, when the causality is instead that positive attitude causes more contact.

== See also ==
* [[Ethnic heterogeneity]]

{{references}}

[[Category: Race]]

← Older revision		Revision as of 15:28, 28 April 2024
Line 2:		Line 2:
	{{Template:Ethnically divided societies}}		{{Template:Ethnically divided societies}}

	The '''contact hypothesis''' is a very popular and [[politically correct]] hypothesis that claims that increased contact between groups (assuming certain conditions) improves attitudes and relations between ~~tbe~~ groups. This has been argued to be supported by some studies.		The '''contact hypothesis''' is a very popular and [[politically correct]] hypothesis that claims that increased contact between groups (assuming certain conditions) improves attitudes and relations between the groups. This has been argued to be supported by some studies.

	One explanation for ~~tbe~~ claimed effect is that claimed incorrectly negative [[stereotyping]] of ~~tbe~~ other group is claimed to be diminished by contact. Another is that prolonged exposure is claimed to reduce anxiety to being in ~~tbe~~ presence of individuals from anther group. A third is that contact involving cooperation between individuals is claimed to increase positive attitudes.		One explanation for the claimed effect is that claimed incorrectly negative [[stereotyping]] of the other group is claimed to be diminished by contact. Another is that prolonged exposure is claimed to reduce anxiety to being in the presence of individuals from anther group. A third is that contact involving cooperation between individuals is claimed to increase positive attitudes.

	Such and similar ideas have a long history. However, ~~tbe~~ theory was formally introduced by Gordon W. Allport in his 1954 book ''The nature of prejudice''. Allport pointed out that not all contacts between groups improve attitudes and relations and argued that certain conditions must apply for ~~tbe~~ effect to occur. However, this is a distinction often ignored when ~~tbe~~ theory (or similar ideas) has been used to advocate for politically correct changes, such as [[desegregation]] and [[mass immigration]].		Such and similar ideas have a long history. However, the theory was formally introduced by Gordon W. Allport in his 1954 book ''The nature of prejudice''. Allport pointed out that not all contacts between groups improve attitudes and relations and argued that certain conditions must apply for the effect to occur. However, this is a distinction often ignored when the theory (or similar ideas) has been used to advocate for politically correct changes, such as [[desegregation]] and [[mass immigration]].

	Contrary to ~~tbe~~ assumption that these massive societal changes/"social experiments" would improve intergroup attitudes and relations, research and outcomes, such as increasing political and ethnic/racial polarization, instead support worsening intergroup attitudes and relations.		Contrary to the assumption that these massive societal changes/"social experiments" would improve intergroup attitudes and relations, research and outcomes, such as increasing political and ethnic/racial polarization, instead support worsening intergroup attitudes and relations.

	== Limitations ==		== Limitations ==
	Many of ~~tbe~~ supporting studies are artificial laboratory experiments with unclear real-world significance.		Many of the supporting studies are artificial laboratory experiments with unclear real-world significance.

	Many of ~~tbe~~ studies may involve groups that are similar. For example, studies involving increased contact between different European groups, between university students, between people living in ~~tbe~~ same area (and thus likely having similar incomes and education), between soldiers (and who often must pass IQ/education minimums and who live in an environment that deliberately minimizes differences between individuals), etc.		Many of the studies may involve groups that are similar. For example, studies involving increased contact between different European groups, between university students, between people living in the same area (and thus likely having similar incomes and education), between soldiers (and who often must pass IQ/education minimums and who live in an environment that deliberately minimizes differences between individuals), etc.

	The result may be different if increasing contact between more typical groups, such as between an average White and an average Black. More generally, contact with similar persons from another group may possibly decrease false negative stereotyping, but contact with dissimilar persons from another group may possibly decrease false positive stereotyping.		The result may be different if increasing contact between more typical groups, such as between an average White and an average Black. More generally, contact with similar persons from another group may possibly decrease false negative stereotyping, but contact with dissimilar persons from another group may possibly decrease false positive stereotyping.

	Many of ~~tbe~~ studies involve working with members from another group towards a common goal. In reality, groups often have different and competing goals.		Many of the studies involve working with members from another group towards a common goal. In reality, groups often have different and competing goals.

	Many studies involve pleasurable interactions. In reality, this may not always apply.		Many studies involve pleasurable interactions. In reality, this may not always apply.

	Many of ~~tbe~~ studies have a clear authority who enforces cooperation between individuals. In reality, different groups often have different and competing leaders.		Many of the studies have a clear authority who enforces cooperation between individuals. In reality, different groups often have different and competing leaders.

	Many of ~~tbe~~ studies make it more or less clear to ~~tbe~~ participants that they are expected to become more friendly to one another and that this is ~~tbe~~ morally correct outcome. This may influence ~~tbe~~ results.		Many of the studies make it more or less clear to the participants that they are expected to become more friendly to one another and that this is the morally correct outcome. This may influence the results.

	The size of ~~tbe~~ effect is small, according to a 2006 meta-analysis, and even smaller if ~~tbe~~ conditions are less than ideal.<ref>Pettigrew TF, Tropp LR (2006) A meta-analytic test of intergroup contact theory. ''J Pers Soc Psychol'' 90 (5):751-83. http://dx.doi.org/10.1037/0022-3514.90.5.751 http://pubmed.gov/16737372</ref>		The size of the effect is small, according to a 2006 meta-analysis, and even smaller if the conditions are less than ideal.<ref>Pettigrew TF, Tropp LR (2006) A meta-analytic test of intergroup contact theory. ''J Pers Soc Psychol'' 90 (5):751-83. http://dx.doi.org/10.1037/0022-3514.90.5.751 http://pubmed.gov/16737372</ref>

	== Real world applicability ==		== Real world applicability ==
	That increased contact does not necessarily improve attitudes in ~~tbe~~ real world was demonstrated after ~~tbe~~ desegregation of schools in ~~tbe~~ United States. A review of studies conducted during and after school desegregation found that 46% of ~~tbe~~ studies reported an increase in "prejudice" among White students, 17% reported a decline in "prejudice", and ~~tbe~~ remainder reported no change.<ref>Stephan, W. G. (1986). The effects of school desegregation: An evaluation 30 years after Brown. In M. J. Saks & L. Saxe (Eds.), Advances in applied social psychology (vol. 3, pp. 181-206). Hillsdale, NJ: Erlbaum.</ref> Furthermore, "''Studies generally gauge ~~tbe~~ attitudes of white students towards blacks before and after attending integrated schools. A summary of results shows that after integration, whites are as likely to have a worse view of blacks as they are to have an improved view. These, moreover, are ~~tbe~~ findings for whites who have stayed in integrated schools, and are probably more likely than those who left to have a favorable view of blacks.''"<ref name=ihf1>Integration Has Failed (Part I) https://www.amren.com/news/2008/10/integration_has/</ref>		That increased contact does not necessarily improve attitudes in the real world was demonstrated after the desegregation of schools in the United States. A review of studies conducted during and after school desegregation found that 46% of the studies reported an increase in "prejudice" among White students, 17% reported a decline in "prejudice", and the remainder reported no change.<ref>Stephan, W. G. (1986). The effects of school desegregation: An evaluation 30 years after Brown. In M. J. Saks & L. Saxe (Eds.), Advances in applied social psychology (vol. 3, pp. 181-206). Hillsdale, NJ: Erlbaum.</ref> Furthermore, "''Studies generally gauge the attitudes of white students towards blacks before and after attending integrated schools. A summary of results shows that after integration, whites are as likely to have a worse view of blacks as they are to have an improved view. These, moreover, are the findings for whites who have stayed in integrated schools, and are probably more likely than those who left to have a favorable view of blacks.''"<ref name=ihf1>Integration Has Failed (Part I) https://www.amren.com/news/2008/10/integration_has/</ref>

	This despite a general trend during this time period towards increasing [[politically correct]] propaganda, in, for example, fictional depictions in ~~tbe~~ [[mass media]] of races and race relations.		This despite a general trend during this time period towards increasing [[politically correct]] propaganda, in, for example, fictional depictions in the [[mass media]] of races and race relations.

	Contrary to ~~tbe~~ assumption of many supporters, ~~tbe~~ [[mass immigration]] to Western countries has been followed by ~~tbe~~ growth of anti-immigration groups, ~~tbe~~ growth of groups supporting ~~tbe~~ various immigrant groups, and increasing political and ethnic/racial polarization. See ~~tbe~~ [[Political spectrum]] article, in particular ~~tbe~~ sections "Ethnic homogeneity/heterogeneity" and "Increasing polarization," on aspects such as increasing political polarization in ~~tbe~~ United States, argued to be related to ~~tbe~~ increasing ethnic heterogeneity. Race now outweighs all other demographic divides regarding which party to vote for, with factors such as income not even coming close.		Contrary to the assumption of many supporters, the [[mass immigration]] to Western countries has been followed by the growth of anti-immigration groups, the growth of groups supporting the various immigrant groups, and increasing political and ethnic/racial polarization. See the [[Political spectrum]] article, in particular the sections "Ethnic homogeneity/heterogeneity" and "Increasing polarization," on aspects such as increasing political polarization in the United States, argued to be related to the increasing ethnic heterogeneity. Race now outweighs all other demographic divides regarding which party to vote for, with factors such as income not even coming close.

	== The contact hypothesis and research on ethnic heterogeneity ==		== The contact hypothesis and research on ethnic heterogeneity ==
	The contact hypothesis and some related research may seem to contradict research results on [[ethnic heterogeneity]], which has found many negative effects (including increased intergroup conflicts and intergroup violence) from increased ethnic heterogeneity in an area and presumably also increased contacts between ~~tbe~~ different ethnic groups in this area. There are several possible explanations for this seeming contradiction:		The contact hypothesis and some related research may seem to contradict research results on [[ethnic heterogeneity]], which has found many negative effects (including increased intergroup conflicts and intergroup violence) from increased ethnic heterogeneity in an area and presumably also increased contacts between the different ethnic groups in this area. There are several possible explanations for this seeming contradiction:
	* The increasing real world contacts may not occur under ~~tbe~~ ideal conditions that are used in many laboratory experiments.		* The increasing real world contacts may not occur under the ideal conditions that are used in many laboratory experiments.
	* The contact effect is small even under ideal conditions. Thus, it may be by far too weak to counter opposition to other groups due to factors related to [[racial genetic interests]], competition regarding resources, crime and other negative behaviors by other groups, etc.		* The contact effect is small even under ideal conditions. Thus, it may be by far too weak to counter opposition to other groups due to factors related to [[racial genetic interests]], competition regarding resources, crime and other negative behaviors by other groups, etc.
	* Positive contacts may involve atypical individuals. Thus, individuals with higher education tend to report more positive attitudes towards other groups. One explanation is that such individuals tend to only have prolonged contact with out-group individuals that also have a higher education. In contrast, ~~tbe~~ contacts that average individuals have may be more negative.		* Positive contacts may involve atypical individuals. Thus, individuals with higher education tend to report more positive attitudes towards other groups. One explanation is that such individuals tend to only have prolonged contact with out-group individuals that also have a higher education. In contrast, the contacts that average individuals have may be more negative.
	* Reverse causality. Studies do have found that having more out-group friends is associated with more positive out-group attitudes. However, this may simply be a case of reverse causality - individuals who have more positive out-group attitudes become friends with more out-group individuals rather than having more out-group friends causing more positive attitudes.		* Reverse causality. Studies do have found that having more out-group friends is associated with more positive out-group attitudes. However, this may simply be a case of reverse causality - individuals who have more positive out-group attitudes become friends with more out-group individuals rather than having more out-group friends causing more positive attitudes.
	* Another example of reverse causality is that negative contacts may be terminated quickly and future contacts avoided, while positive contacts may be prolonged and repeated in ~~tbe~~ future. This may cause ~~tbe~~ illusion of more contact causing more positive attitudes, when ~~tbe~~ causality is instead that positive attitude causes more contact.		* Another example of reverse causality is that negative contacts may be terminated quickly and future contacts avoided, while positive contacts may be prolonged and repeated in the future. This may cause the illusion of more contact causing more positive attitudes, when the causality is instead that positive attitude causes more contact.

	== See also ==		== See also ==

← Older revision		Revision as of 08:08, 26 April 2024
Line 2:		Line 2:
	{{Template:Ethnically divided societies}}		{{Template:Ethnically divided societies}}

	The '''contact hypothesis''' is a very popular and [[politically correct]] hypothesis that claims that increased contact between groups (assuming certain conditions) improves attitudes and relations between ~~the~~ groups. This has been argued to be supported by some studies.		The '''contact hypothesis''' is a very popular and [[politically correct]] hypothesis that claims that increased contact between groups (assuming certain conditions) improves attitudes and relations between tbe groups. This has been argued to be supported by some studies.

	One explanation for ~~the~~ claimed effect is that claimed incorrectly negative [[stereotyping]] of ~~the~~ other group is claimed to be diminished by contact. Another is that prolonged exposure is claimed to reduce anxiety to being in ~~the~~ presence of individuals from anther group. A third is that contact involving cooperation between individuals is claimed to increase positive attitudes.		One explanation for tbe claimed effect is that claimed incorrectly negative [[stereotyping]] of tbe other group is claimed to be diminished by contact. Another is that prolonged exposure is claimed to reduce anxiety to being in tbe presence of individuals from anther group. A third is that contact involving cooperation between individuals is claimed to increase positive attitudes.

	Such and similar ideas have a long history. However, ~~the~~ theory was formally introduced by Gordon W. Allport in his 1954 book ''The nature of prejudice''. Allport pointed out that not all contacts between groups improve attitudes and relations and argued that certain conditions must apply for ~~the~~ effect to occur. However, this is a distinction often ignored when ~~the~~ theory (or similar ideas) has been used to advocate for politically correct changes, such as [[desegregation]] and [[mass immigration]].		Such and similar ideas have a long history. However, tbe theory was formally introduced by Gordon W. Allport in his 1954 book ''The nature of prejudice''. Allport pointed out that not all contacts between groups improve attitudes and relations and argued that certain conditions must apply for tbe effect to occur. However, this is a distinction often ignored when tbe theory (or similar ideas) has been used to advocate for politically correct changes, such as [[desegregation]] and [[mass immigration]].

	Contrary to ~~the~~ assumption that these massive societal changes/"social experiments" would improve intergroup attitudes and relations, research and outcomes, such as increasing political and ethnic/racial polarization, instead support worsening intergroup attitudes and relations.		Contrary to tbe assumption that these massive societal changes/"social experiments" would improve intergroup attitudes and relations, research and outcomes, such as increasing political and ethnic/racial polarization, instead support worsening intergroup attitudes and relations.

	== Limitations ==		== Limitations ==
	Many of ~~the~~ supporting studies are artificial laboratory experiments with unclear real-world significance.		Many of tbe supporting studies are artificial laboratory experiments with unclear real-world significance.

	Many of ~~the~~ studies may involve groups that are similar. For example, studies involving increased contact between different European groups, between university students, between people living in ~~the~~ same area (and thus likely having similar incomes and education), between soldiers (and who often must pass IQ/education minimums and who live in an environment that deliberately minimizes differences between individuals), etc.		Many of tbe studies may involve groups that are similar. For example, studies involving increased contact between different European groups, between university students, between people living in tbe same area (and thus likely having similar incomes and education), between soldiers (and who often must pass IQ/education minimums and who live in an environment that deliberately minimizes differences between individuals), etc.

	The result may be different if increasing contact between more typical groups, such as between an average White and an average Black. More generally, contact with similar persons from another group may possibly decrease false negative stereotyping, but contact with dissimilar persons from another group may possibly decrease false positive stereotyping.		The result may be different if increasing contact between more typical groups, such as between an average White and an average Black. More generally, contact with similar persons from another group may possibly decrease false negative stereotyping, but contact with dissimilar persons from another group may possibly decrease false positive stereotyping.

	Many of ~~the~~ studies involve working with members from another group towards a common goal. In reality, groups often have different and competing goals.		Many of tbe studies involve working with members from another group towards a common goal. In reality, groups often have different and competing goals.

	Many studies involve pleasurable interactions. In reality, this may not always apply.		Many studies involve pleasurable interactions. In reality, this may not always apply.

	Many of ~~the~~ studies have a clear authority who enforces cooperation between individuals. In reality, different groups often have different and competing leaders.		Many of tbe studies have a clear authority who enforces cooperation between individuals. In reality, different groups often have different and competing leaders.

	Many of ~~the~~ studies make it more or less clear to ~~the~~ participants that they are expected to become more friendly to one another and that this is ~~the~~ morally correct outcome. This may influence ~~the~~ results.		Many of tbe studies make it more or less clear to tbe participants that they are expected to become more friendly to one another and that this is tbe morally correct outcome. This may influence tbe results.

	The size of ~~the~~ effect is small, according to a 2006 meta-analysis, and even smaller if ~~the~~ conditions are less than ideal.<ref>Pettigrew TF, Tropp LR (2006) A meta-analytic test of intergroup contact theory. ''J Pers Soc Psychol'' 90 (5):751-83. http://dx.doi.org/10.1037/0022-3514.90.5.751 http://pubmed.gov/16737372</ref>		The size of tbe effect is small, according to a 2006 meta-analysis, and even smaller if tbe conditions are less than ideal.<ref>Pettigrew TF, Tropp LR (2006) A meta-analytic test of intergroup contact theory. ''J Pers Soc Psychol'' 90 (5):751-83. http://dx.doi.org/10.1037/0022-3514.90.5.751 http://pubmed.gov/16737372</ref>

	== Real world applicability ==		== Real world applicability ==
	That increased contact does not necessarily improve attitudes in ~~the~~ real world was demonstrated after ~~the~~ desegregation of schools in ~~the~~ United States. A review of studies conducted during and after school desegregation found that 46% of ~~the~~ studies reported an increase in "prejudice" among White students, 17% reported a decline in "prejudice", and ~~the~~ remainder reported no change.<ref>Stephan, W. G. (1986). The effects of school desegregation: An evaluation 30 years after Brown. In M. J. Saks & L. Saxe (Eds.), Advances in applied social psychology (vol. 3, pp. 181-206). Hillsdale, NJ: Erlbaum.</ref> Furthermore, "''Studies generally gauge ~~the~~ attitudes of white students towards blacks before and after attending integrated schools. A summary of results shows that after integration, whites are as likely to have a worse view of blacks as they are to have an improved view. These, moreover, are ~~the~~ findings for whites who have stayed in integrated schools, and are probably more likely than those who left to have a favorable view of blacks.''"<ref name=ihf1>Integration Has Failed (Part I) https://www.amren.com/news/2008/10/integration_has/</ref>		That increased contact does not necessarily improve attitudes in tbe real world was demonstrated after tbe desegregation of schools in tbe United States. A review of studies conducted during and after school desegregation found that 46% of tbe studies reported an increase in "prejudice" among White students, 17% reported a decline in "prejudice", and tbe remainder reported no change.<ref>Stephan, W. G. (1986). The effects of school desegregation: An evaluation 30 years after Brown. In M. J. Saks & L. Saxe (Eds.), Advances in applied social psychology (vol. 3, pp. 181-206). Hillsdale, NJ: Erlbaum.</ref> Furthermore, "''Studies generally gauge tbe attitudes of white students towards blacks before and after attending integrated schools. A summary of results shows that after integration, whites are as likely to have a worse view of blacks as they are to have an improved view. These, moreover, are tbe findings for whites who have stayed in integrated schools, and are probably more likely than those who left to have a favorable view of blacks.''"<ref name=ihf1>Integration Has Failed (Part I) https://www.amren.com/news/2008/10/integration_has/</ref>

	This despite a general trend during this time period towards increasing [[politically correct]] propaganda, in, for example, fictional depictions in ~~the~~ [[mass media]] of races and race relations.		This despite a general trend during this time period towards increasing [[politically correct]] propaganda, in, for example, fictional depictions in tbe [[mass media]] of races and race relations.

	Contrary to ~~the~~ assumption of many supporters, ~~the~~ [[mass immigration]] to Western countries has been followed by ~~the~~ growth of anti-immigration groups, ~~the~~ growth of groups supporting ~~the~~ various immigrant groups, and increasing political and ethnic/racial polarization. See ~~the~~ [[Political spectrum]] article, in particular ~~the~~ sections "Ethnic homogeneity/heterogeneity" and "Increasing polarization," on aspects such as increasing political polarization in ~~the~~ United States, argued to be related to ~~the~~ increasing ethnic heterogeneity. Race now outweighs all other demographic divides regarding which party to vote for, with factors such as income not even coming close.		Contrary to tbe assumption of many supporters, tbe [[mass immigration]] to Western countries has been followed by tbe growth of anti-immigration groups, tbe growth of groups supporting tbe various immigrant groups, and increasing political and ethnic/racial polarization. See tbe [[Political spectrum]] article, in particular tbe sections "Ethnic homogeneity/heterogeneity" and "Increasing polarization," on aspects such as increasing political polarization in tbe United States, argued to be related to tbe increasing ethnic heterogeneity. Race now outweighs all other demographic divides regarding which party to vote for, with factors such as income not even coming close.

	== The contact hypothesis and research on ethnic heterogeneity ==		== The contact hypothesis and research on ethnic heterogeneity ==
	The contact hypothesis and some related research may seem to contradict research results on [[ethnic heterogeneity]], which has found many negative effects (including increased intergroup conflicts and intergroup violence) from increased ethnic heterogeneity in an area and presumably also increased contacts between ~~the~~ different ethnic groups in this area. There are several possible explanations for this seeming contradiction:		The contact hypothesis and some related research may seem to contradict research results on [[ethnic heterogeneity]], which has found many negative effects (including increased intergroup conflicts and intergroup violence) from increased ethnic heterogeneity in an area and presumably also increased contacts between tbe different ethnic groups in this area. There are several possible explanations for this seeming contradiction:
	* The increasing real world contacts may not occur under ~~the~~ ideal conditions that are used in many laboratory experiments.		* The increasing real world contacts may not occur under tbe ideal conditions that are used in many laboratory experiments.
	* The contact effect is small even under ideal conditions. Thus, it may be by far too weak to counter opposition to other groups due to factors related to [[racial genetic interests]], competition regarding resources, crime and other negative behaviors by other groups, etc.		* The contact effect is small even under ideal conditions. Thus, it may be by far too weak to counter opposition to other groups due to factors related to [[racial genetic interests]], competition regarding resources, crime and other negative behaviors by other groups, etc.
	* Positive contacts may involve atypical individuals. Thus, individuals with higher education tend to report more positive attitudes towards other groups. One explanation is that such individuals tend to only have prolonged contact with out-group individuals that also have a higher education. In contrast, ~~the~~ contacts that average individuals have may be more negative.		* Positive contacts may involve atypical individuals. Thus, individuals with higher education tend to report more positive attitudes towards other groups. One explanation is that such individuals tend to only have prolonged contact with out-group individuals that also have a higher education. In contrast, tbe contacts that average individuals have may be more negative.
	* Reverse causality. Studies do have found that having more out-group friends is associated with more positive out-group attitudes. However, this may simply be a case of reverse causality - individuals who have more positive out-group attitudes become friends with more out-group individuals rather than having more out-group friends causing more positive attitudes.		* Reverse causality. Studies do have found that having more out-group friends is associated with more positive out-group attitudes. However, this may simply be a case of reverse causality - individuals who have more positive out-group attitudes become friends with more out-group individuals rather than having more out-group friends causing more positive attitudes.
	* Another example of reverse causality is that negative contacts may be terminated quickly and future contacts avoided, while positive contacts may be prolonged and repeated in ~~the~~ future. This may cause ~~the~~ illusion of more contact causing more positive attitudes, when ~~the~~ causality is instead that positive attitude causes more contact.		* Another example of reverse causality is that negative contacts may be terminated quickly and future contacts avoided, while positive contacts may be prolonged and repeated in tbe future. This may cause tbe illusion of more contact causing more positive attitudes, when tbe causality is instead that positive attitude causes more contact.

	== See also ==		== See also ==