Control groups in contact studies often already have outgroup contact, weakening outcomes.
Evidence
We also rated the type of control group used in studies with between-subjects designs (e.g., no, some, or considerable earlier contact with the outgroup). We found that many of these control groups actually had prior contact with the target group; such “leakage” obviously renders these groups as less adequate controls. — Thomas F. Pettigrew, Linda R. Tropp, A Meta-Analytic Test of Intergroup…, 77
Categorization
- QUESTION: How widespread is control-group leakage in other intergroup or prejudice research fields beyond contact theory?
Related
- Contact studies with cleaner control groups show larger effects. (similarity 0.86)
- No meta-analysis of intergroup contact research existed before this study. (similarity 0.83)
- Early skeptics judged intergroup contact research premature and methodologically weak. (similarity 0.82)
- Stronger contact effects in rigorous studies would confirm the contact-prejudice link. (similarity 0.82)
- Negative factors limiting contact’s prejudice reduction remain the least understood (similarity 0.81)
- Contact’s prejudice-reducing effect is causal, not a selection or publication artifact. (similarity 0.81)
- Intergroup contact research has expanded beyond prejudice to test trust, forgiveness, and ingroup perception. (similarity 0.81)
- Contact effects persist beyond the immediate contact situation. (similarity 0.81)
- Intergroup contact reduces prejudice across outgroups, and Allport’s conditions are helpful but not essential. (similarity 0.80)
- Theorists now seek what is necessary, not just helpful, for contact success (similarity 0.80)
- Demographic controls do not explain intergroup contact effects on reconciliation. (similarity 0.79)
- Contact studies vary in how they generalize findings beyond immediate settings. (similarity 0.79)
- Intergroup contact theory originated in a 1947 synthesis of 102 propositions. (similarity 0.79)
- Intergroup contact reduces prejudice even beyond the groups involved. (similarity 0.79)
- More rigorous contact studies show larger prejudice-reduction effects. (similarity 0.79)