Unchecked intergroup contact allows glib we-they generalizations to persist.

Evidence

Allport observed that people universally and spontaneously separate themselves into homogeneous groups, into us and them categories. Being more comfortable with their own group, people rarely deal with other groups, allowing glib generalizations (“they” are all the same and different from “us”) with little risk of contradiction. Yet Allport (1954/1979) believed that categorization is necessary; “orderly living depends on it” (p. 20); “rubrics are essential to mental life” (p. 24), for five reasons: • Categories enable people to function in the world. — John F. Dovidio, Peter Glick, Laurie A. Rudman, On the Nature of Prejudice, 286

Allport observed that people universally and spontaneously separate themselves into homogeneous groups, into us and them categories. Being more comfortable with their own group, people rarely deal with other groups, allowing glib generalizations (“they” are all the same and different from “us”) with little risk of contradiction. Yet Allport (1954/1979) believed that categorization is necessary; “orderly living depends on it” (p. 20); “rubrics are essential to mental life” (p. 24), for five reasons: • Categories enable people to function in the world. — , Rudman, Laurie A - On the Nature of…, 286

Categorization

• XREF: Sets up the crux of contact theory — limited cross-group interaction sustains homogenizing we-they stereotypes, which is the gap contact is meant to close.
• corroborated: 4 independent passages support this claim — John F. Dovidio, Peter Glick, Laurie A. Rudman, On the Nature of Prejudice: Fifty Years…, 286; , Rudman, Laurie A - On the Nature of…, 286