4.2 Article

The contact hypothesis during the European refugee crisis: Relating quality and quantity of (in)direct intergroup contact to attitudes towards refugees

期刊

GROUP PROCESSES & INTERGROUP RELATIONS
卷 24, 期 6, 页码 881-901

出版社

SAGE PUBLICATIONS LTD
DOI: 10.1177/1368430220929394

关键词

contact hypothesis; direct intergroup contact; Europe; mass mediated contact; quality of contact; refugee attitudes

资金

  1. Belgian Science Policy Office (BELSPO) [BR/165/A4/IM2MEDIATE]
  2. KU Leuven Research Council [3H170314]

向作者/读者索取更多资源

Research indicates that interethnic contact can reduce prejudice towards refugees, with the quality of direct contact being more important for attitude formation than frequency. Exposure to news on refugees and public news consumption are positively associated with attitudes, while commercial news consumption is negatively related to attitudes.
Research shows that direct and indirect intergroup contact reduces levels of prejudice towards immigrants. However, no research so far has explored the association of these different forms of contact with attitudes towards refugees. The present study analyses the relationship between the frequency and valence of direct intergroup contact with people with a migration background, the frequency of indirect contact with news on refugees, and the perception of realistic and symbolic threat, and attitudes towards refugees among adults in four European countries (Belgium, France, the Netherlands, Sweden). Data were collected in 2017 via online questionnaires (N= 6,000). Using structural equation modelling, findings indicate that interethnic contact is positively related to attitudes towards refugees. Moreover, valence of direct contact is found to be more important to attitude formation than its frequency. Regarding indirect contact, exposure to news on refugees and public news consumption are positively related to attitudes, while commercial news consumption is negatively related to attitudes.

作者

我是这篇论文的作者
点击您的名字以认领此论文并将其添加到您的个人资料中。

评论

主要评分

4.2
评分不足

次要评分

新颖性
-
重要性
-
科学严谨性
-
评价这篇论文

推荐

暂无数据
暂无数据