Cross-group friendship especially reduces prejudice through intimacy and equal-status contact.

Evidence

As a secondary, indirect indicator of Allport’s conditions, we recorded whether cross-group friendship served as the measure of contact. Friendship typically involves cooperation and common goals as well as repeated equal-status contact over an extended period and across varied settings (Pettigrew, 1997). Many researchers have pointed to the role intimacy can play in reducing prejudice (Amir, 1976; Patchen, 1999; Williams, 1947), such that close, cross-group relationships may be especially likely to promote positive intergroup outcomes. — Thomas F. Pettigrew, Linda R. Tropp, A Meta-Analytic Test of Intergroup…, 98

Categorization

• XREF: Connects to Allport’s contact hypothesis and its conditions (cooperation, common goals, equal status) — central to the intergroup contact literature. — connects to: Shared combat training can erase racial and gendered hierarchies through bodily friendship. — Amit Singh, “Carnal conviviality” and the end of…, 32; Cross-group friendship is the most effective intergroup contact form for reconciliation. — Miles Hewstone and Joanne Hughes, Reconciliation in Northern Ireland: the…, 5; Cross-group friendships reduce prejudice partly by lowering intergroup anxiety. — Miles Hewstone and Joanne Hughes, Reconciliation in Northern Ireland: the…, 11 (+2 more)

Related

• Intergroup contact is an established general mechanism for reducing prejudice across group types. (similarity 0.90)
• Cross-group friendships reduce prejudice partly by lowering intergroup anxiety. (similarity 0.89)
• Cross-group friendship shapes positive intergroup attitudes more than casual contact does. (similarity 0.87)
• Mere knowledge that ingroup peers befriend outgroup members improves intergroup attitudes (similarity 0.87)
• Intergroup contact reduces prejudice across outgroups, and Allport’s conditions are helpful but not essential. (similarity 0.86)
• Cross-group friendship is the most effective intergroup contact form for reconciliation. (similarity 0.86)
• Allport’s optimal contact conditions are facilitating rather than essential (similarity 0.85)
• Contact reduces prejudice only under equal-status, intimate, stereotype-defying conditions (similarity 0.85)
• Intergroup contact reduces prejudice only under four specific optimal conditions. (similarity 0.85)
• Structured equal-status intergroup contact reduces prejudice when institutionally supported (similarity 0.85)
• Cross-group friendships cause later intergroup trust, not the reverse. (similarity 0.84)
• Allport’s optimal contact conditions facilitate but are not necessary for prejudice reduction (similarity 0.84)
• Intergroup contact research has expanded beyond prejudice to test trust, forgiveness, and ingroup perception. (similarity 0.84)
• Intergroup contact reduces prejudice even beyond the groups involved. (similarity 0.84)
• Observing ingroup friends interact with outgroups reduces one’s future intergroup anxiety (similarity 0.84)