General knowledge about an outgroup barely reduces prejudice, but individuating knowledge does

Evidence

“Learning about the outgroup” was originally considered to be a key process involved in reducing prejudice, because general knowledge about the outgroup as a whole was thought to counteract ignorance, and thus undermine stereotypes. Although meta-analytic findings (see Pettigrew & Tropp, ch. 16 this volume) reveal that increasing knowledge about the outgroup has some effect, it is not a primary mechanism by which contact changes intergroup attitudes. Nevertheless, other types of information, such as the acquisition of knowledge about unique attributes of specific individuals that distinguishes them from other group members, has been found to effectively reduce ingroup bias (e.g., Miller, Kenworthy, Stenstrom, & Canales, in press) by helping to disconfirm stereotypes about the outgroup. — John F. Dovidio, Peter Glick, Laurie A. Rudman, On the Nature of Prejudice, 1826

Categorization

• XREF: Connects to the contact hypothesis literature and stereotype disconfirmation work; also echoes the critique that ‘education fixes prejudice’ fails.
• SEED: Angle: the myth that mere exposure to facts about a group reduces prejudice, and why individuating detail works where general knowledge fails.
• corroborated: 2 independent passages support this claim — John F. Dovidio, Peter Glick, Laurie A. Rudman, On the Nature of Prejudice: Fifty Years…, 1826