GruplarArası Temasın İkincil Aktarım Etkisi Üzerine Bir Derleme

Yıl 2022, Cilt: 12 Sayı: 2, 1461 - 1500, 02.08.2022

Halime Ünver , Huseyin Cakal , Zafer Özkan , Büşra Kızık , Ertuğrul Gazi Eraslan

https://doi.org/10.48146/odusobiad.1081427

Cited By: 3

Öz

Araştırmalar, gruplar arası temasın, olumlu tutum ve güvenin artması gibi birçok olumlu değişiklikle beraber sosyal
uyumu artırabileceğini ve aynı zamanda temas halinde olan gruplara yönelik tehdidin azalmasını sağlayabileceğini
gösterdi. Ancak, gruplar arası çatışmaların hâkim olduğu ve grupların etnik, ırksal ve dinsel olarak ayrıştığı
toplumlarda yüz yüze temas imkânsız olabilir. Bu tip toplumlarda temasın olumlu etkisinden faydalanmak için
temasın dolaylı ve aktarılabilir etkileri bir fırsat olabilir. Temasın aktarılabilir etkilerinden birisi ikincil aktarım
etkisidir. İkincil aktarım etkisi, gruplar arası temasın etkilerinin, temas kurulan dış gruptan temas kurulmayan
diğer dış gruplara genellenmesi durumunu ifade etmektedir. Bundan dolayı ikincil aktarım etkisi, özellikle ayrışmış
ve çatışmalı toplumlarda gruplar arası önyargının azaltılması bakımından umut verici ve etkili bir strateji olarak
değerlendirilmektedir. Bu makalede, ikincil aktarım etkisi ile ilgili bir derleme sunmayı ve önceki derlemeleri ikincil
aktarım etkisi özelindeki problemler üzerinde durarak genişletmeyi amaçlıyoruz. Bu amaç doğrultusunda, ilk olarak
hem olumlu hem de olumsuz temasın ikincil aktarım etkisi üzerine ampirik kanıtları gözden geçirdikten sonra
devamında bu genelleme etkisinin altında yatan aracı ve düzenleyici mekanizmaları inceliyoruz. Üçüncü ve en
önemlisi, bu olgunun güvenirliğini ve sağlamlığını olumsuz anlamda etkileyebilecek, ikincil temas, sosyal istenirlik
ile seçim yanlılığı ve nedensellik silsilesi gibi problemlerin ve alandaki araştırma boşluğunun altını çiziyoruz. Son
olarak, teori, araştırma ve pratik ile ilgili mevcut problemler ve alan yazındaki boşluklar doğrultusunda gelecek
araştırmalar ve araştırmacılar için önerilerimizi sunuyoruz.

Anahtar Kelimeler

Gruplararası Temasın İkincil Aktarım Etkisi, Olumlu Temas, Olumsuz Temas

A Rewiew on the Secondary Transfer Effect of Intergroup Contact

Öz

Research showed that intergroup contact could increase social cohesion with many positive changes such as
improved positive attitudes and trust as well as a decreased threat towards the groups in contact. However, faceto-
face contact may be impossible in societies where intergroup conflicts are prevalent and groups are ethnically,
racially, and religiously segregated. In such societies, the indirect and transferable effects of contact can be an
opportunity to benefit from the positive effects of contact. One of the transferable effects of contact is the secondary
transfer effect. The secondary transfer effect (STE) refers to the generalisation of the effects of intergroup contact
from the encountered outgroup to outgroups that do not involve in the contact situation. Therefore, it is a
promising and effective strategy for prejudice reduction, particularly in ethnically, racially, and religiously
segregated societies. In this article, we aim to review the STE literature and extend previous reviews by focusing
on the problems in the STE. We first review evidence on the STE of positive versus negative contact, and then we
highlight the relevant underlying mechanism of the phenomenon, i.e., mediators and moderators of the STE.
Third, we underline the problems that may limit the robustness of the phenomenon and the research gap in the
STE literature. Finally, in line with the current issues with the theory, research and practice, we present
suggestions for future research.

Anahtar Kelimeler

Secondary Transfer Effect of Intergroup Contact, Positive Contact, Negative Contact

Kaynakça

• Aberson, C. L. (2019). Indirect effects of threat on the contact-prejudice relationship. Social Psychology, 50(2), 105–126. https://doi.org/https://doi.org/10.1027/1864-9335/a000364
• Andrews, N. P., Yogeeswaran, K., Walker, M. J., & Hewstone, M. (2018). Effect of valenced vicarious online contact on out-group prejudice and perceived out-group variability: A study of online poker. Journal of Applied Social Psychology, 48(10), 571–581. https://doi.org/10.1111/jasp.12548
• Boin, J., Rupar, M., Graf, S., Neji, S., Spiegler, O., & Swart, H. (2021). The generalization of intergroup contact effects: Emerging research, policy relevance, and future directions. Journal of Social Issues, 77(1), 105–131. https://doi.org/10.1111/josi.12419
• Bowman, N. A., & Griffin, T. M. (2012). Secondary transfer effects of interracial contact: The moderating role of social status. Cultural Diversity and Ethnic Minority Psychology, 18(1), 35–44. https://doi.org/10.1037/a0026745
• Brown, R., & Hewstone, M. (2005). An integrative theory of intergroup contact. Advances in Experimental Social Psychology, 37(37), 255–343. Retrieved from http://linkinghub.elsevier.com/retrieve/pii/S0065260105370055
• Brylka, A., Jasinskaja-Lahti, I., & Mähönen, T. A. (2016). The majority influence on interminority attitudes: The secondary transfer effect of positive and negative contact. International Journal of Intercultural Relations, 50, 76–88. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ijintrel.2015.12.007
• Çakal, H., Halabi, S., Cazan, A. M., & Eller, A. (2021). Intergroup contact and endorsement of social change motivations: The mediating role of intergroup trust, perspective-taking, and intergroup anxiety among three advantaged groups in Northern Cyprus, Romania, and Israel. Group Processes and Intergroup Relations, 24(1), 48–67. https://doi.org/10.1177/1368430219885163
• Daiber, C. (2017). Attitude and Intergroup Anxiety Generalisation as Mediators of the Secondary Transfer Effect of the Contact-Prejudice Relationship among White South African Stellenbosch University Students.
• Davies, K., Tropp, L. R., Aron, A., Pettigrew, T. F., & Wright, S. C. (2011). Cross-group friendships and intergroup attitudes: A meta-analytic review. Personality and Social Psychology Review, 15(4), 332–351. https://doi.org/10.1177/1088868311411103
• De Beer, H. (2015). Attitude and empathy generalisation as mediators of the secondary transfer effect amongst white South African students at Stellenbosch University. Retrieved from https://scholar.sun.ac.za/handle/10019.1/96892%5Cnhttp://scholar.sun.ac.za/handle/10019.1/96892%5Cnhttps://scholar.sun.ac.za/bitstream/10019.1/96892/2/debeer_attitude_2015.pdf
• De Coninck, D., Rodríguez-de-Dios, I., & d’Haenens, L. (2020). The contact hypothesis during the European refugee crisis: Relating quality and quantity of (in)direct intergroup contact to attitudes towards refugees. Group Processes and Intergroup Relations. https://doi.org/10.1177/1368430220929394
• Dixon, J., Durrheim, K., & Tredoux, C. (2007). Intergroup contact and attitudes toward the principle and practice of racial equality. Psychological Science, 18(10), 867–872. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1467-9280.2007.01993.x
• Dixon, J., Levine, M., Reicher, S., & Durrheim, K. (2012). Beyond prejudice: Are negative evaluations the problem and is getting us to like one another more the solution? Behavioral and Brain Sciences, 35, 411–425. https://doi.org/10.1017/S0140525X11002214
• Eller, A., & Abrams, D. (2004). Come together : Longitudinal comparisons of Pettigrew ’ s reformulated intergroup contact model and the Common Ingroup Identity Model in Anglo-French and Mexican-American context. European Journal of Social Psychology, 34, 229–256. https://doi.org/10.1002/ejsp.194
• Filippou, G. (2012). Secondary Transfer Effect of Contact: A Study among Greek Cypriot University Students. The Cyprus Research Facts, 3.
• Flores, A. R. (2015). Attitudes toward transgender rights: Perceived knowledge and secondary interpersonal contact. Politics, Groups, and Identities, 3(3), 398–416. https://doi.org/10.1080/21565503.2015.1050414
• Gaertner, S. L., Dovidio, J. F., Anastasio, P. A., Bachman, B. A., Rust, M. C., Gaertner, S. L., … Rust, M. C. (1993). The common ingroup identity model: Recategorization and the reduction of intergroup bias. European Review of Social Psychology, 4(1), 1–26. https://doi.org/10.1080/14792779343000004
• Ganster, D. C., Hennessey, H. W., & Luthans, F. (1983). Social Desirability Response Effects: Three Alternative Models. Academy of Management Journal, 26(2), 321–331. https://doi.org/10.5465/255979
• Green, E. G. T., Visintin, E. P., Sarrasin, O., & Hewstone, M. (2020). When integration policies shape the impact of intergroup contact on threat perceptions: a multilevel study across 20 European countries. Journal of Ethnic and Migration Studies, 46(3), 631–648. https://doi.org/10.1080/1369183X.2018.1550159
• Harwood, J., Paolini, S., Joyce, N., Rubin, M., & Arroyo, A. (2011). Secondary transfer effects from imagined contact: Group similarity affects the generalization gradient. British Journal of Social Psychology, 50(1), 180–189. https://doi.org/10.1348/014466610X524263
• Hässler, T., Uluğ, Ö. M., Kappmeier, M., & Travaglino, G. A. (2021). Intergroup contact and social change: An integrated Contact-Collective Action Model. Journal of Social Issues, 1–25. https://doi.org/10.1111/josi.12412
• Henrich, J., Heine, S. J., & Norenzayan, A. (2010). The weirdest people in the World? Behavioral and Brain Sciences, 33(2–3), 61–83. https://doi.org/10.2139/ssrn.1601785
• Hewstone, M. (2015). Consequences of diversity for social cohesion and prejudice: The missing dimension of intergroup contact. Journal of Social Issues, 71(2), 417–438. https://doi.org/10.1111/josi.12120
• Hindriks, P., Verkuyten, M., & Coenders, M. (2014). Interminority attitudes: The roles of ethnic and national identification, contact, and multiculturalism. Social Psychology Quarterly, 77(1), 54–74. https://doi.org/10.1177/0190272513511469
• Islam, M. R., & Hewstone, M. (1993). Dimensions of contact as predictors of intergroup anxiety, perceived out- group variability, and out-group attitude: An integrative model. Personality and Social Psychology Bulletin, 19(6), 700–710. https://doi.org/10.1177/0146167293196005
• Jasinskaja-Lahti, I., Vezzali, L., Ranta, M., Pacilli, M. G., Giacomantonio, M., & Pagliaro, S. (2020). Conditional secondary transfer effect: The moderating role of moral credentials and prejudice. Group Processes and Intergroup Relations, 1–19. https://doi.org/10.1177/1368430220940401
• Joyce, N., & Harwood, J. (2014). Improving Intergroup Attitudes through Televised Vicarious Intergroup Contact: Social Cognitive Processing of Ingroup and Outgroup Information. Communication Research, 41(5), 627–643. https://doi.org/10.1177/0093650212447944
• Kamans, E., Otten, S., & Gordijn, E. H. (2011). Power and threat in intergroup conflict : How emotional and behavioral responses depend on amount and content of threat. Group Processes & Intergroup Relations, 14(3), 293–310. https://doi.org/10.1177/1368430210372525
• Lemmer, G., & Wagner, U. (2015). Can we really reduce ethnic prejudice outside the lab? A meta-analysis of direct and indirect contact interventions. European Journal of Social Psychology, 45(2), 152–168. https://doi.org/10.1002/ejsp.2079
• Lissitsa, S., & Kushnirovich, N. (2018). Secondary transfer effect of positive and negative online contact between groups involved in high-intensity conflict. International Journal of Intercultural Relations, 67, 71–80. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ijintrel.2018.10.001
• Lolliot, S., Schmid, K., Hewstone, M., Al Ramiah, A., Tausch, N., & Swart, H. (2013). Generalised effects of intergroup contact: The secondary transfer effect. In G. Hodson & M. Hewstone (Eds.), Advances in Intergroup Contact (pp. 81–112). East Sussex: Psychology Press. https://doi.org/10.4324/9780203095461
• Mähönen, T. A., & Jasinskaja-Lahti, I. (2016). Ramifications of positive and negative contact experiences among remigrants from Russia to Finland. Cultural Diversity and Ethnic Minority Psychology, 22(2), 247–255. https://doi.org/10.1037/cdp0000059
• Marrow, H. B., Tropp, L. R., Van Der Linden, M., Okamoto, D. G., & Jones-Correa, M. (2019). How does interracial contact among the U.S.-born shape white and black receptivity toward immigrants? Du Bois Review, 16(2), 385–416. https://doi.org/10.1017/S1742058X19000249
• McKeown, S., & Dixon, J. (2017). The “contact hypothesis”: Critical reflections and future directions. Social and Personality Psychology Compass, 11(1), 1–13. https://doi.org/10.1111/spc3.12295
• Meleady, R., & Forder, L. (2019). When contact goes wrong: Negative intergroup contact promotes generalized outgroup avoidance. Group Processes and Intergroup Relations, 22(5), 688–707. https://doi.org/10.1177/1368430218761568
• Paulhus, D. L. (1984). Two-component models of socially desirable responding. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 46, 598–609.
• Pettigrew, T. F. (1997). Generalized intergroup contact effects on prejudice. Personality and Social Psychology Bulletin, 23(2), 173–185.
• Pettigrew, T. F. (1998). Intergroup Contact Theory. Annual Review of Psychology, 49(1), 65–85. https://doi.org/10.1146/annurev.psych.49.1.65
• Pettigrew, T. F. (2009). Secondary transfer effect of contact: Do intergroup contact effects spread to noncontacted outgroups? Social Psychology, 40(2), 55–65. https://doi.org/10.1027/1864-9335.40.2.55
• Pettigrew, T. F., & Tropp, L. R. (2006). A meta-analytic test of intergroup contact theory. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 90(5), 751–783. https://doi.org/10.1037/0022-3514.90.5.751
• Pettigrew, T. F., & Tropp, L. R. (2008). How does intergroup contact reduce prejudice? Meta-analytic tests of three mediators. European Journal of Social Psychology Eur., 38(2008), 922–934. https://doi.org/10.1002/ejsp
• Pettigrew, T. F., Tropp, L. R., Wagner, U., & Christ, O. (2011). Recent advances in intergroup contact theory. International Journal of Intercultural Relations, 35(3), 271–280. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ijintrel.2011.03.001
• Ployhart, R. E., & MacKenzie Jr., W. I. (2015). Two waves of measurement do not a longitudinal study make. In More statistical and methodological myths and urban legends. (pp. 85–99). New York, NY, US: Routledge/Taylor & Francis Group.
• Roccas, S., & Brewer, M. B. (2002). Social Identity Complexity. Personality and Social Psychology Review, 6(2), 88–106. https://doi.org/10.1207/S15327957PSPR0602_01
• Schmid, K., Hewstone, M., Küpper, B., Zick, A., & Wagner, U. (2012). Secondary transfer effects of intergroup contact: A cross-national comparison in Europe. Social Psychology Quarterly, 75(1), 28–51. https://doi.org/10.1177/0190272511430235
• Schmid, K., Hewstone, M., & Tausch, N. (2014). Secondary transfer effects of intergroup contact via social identity complexity. British Journal of Social Psychology, 53(3), 443–462. https://doi.org/10.1111/bjso.12045
• Schulz, M., & Taylor, L. K. (2018). The processes underlying the quality of contact with the primary out-group and in-group importance on support for the Syrian resettlement in a post-accord context. Peace and Conflict, 24(3), 306–314. https://doi.org/10.1037/pac0000321
• Shook, N. J., Hopkins, P. D., & Koech, J. M. (2016). The effect of intergroup contact on secondary group attitudes and social dominance orientation. Group Processes and Intergroup Relations, 19(3), 328–342. https://doi.org/10.1177/1368430215572266
• Sidanius, J., & Pratto, F. (1999). Social Dominance: An Intergroup Theory of Social Hierarchy and Oppression (1st ed.). Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
• Stephan, W. G., Diaz-Loving, R., & Duran, A. (2000). Integrated threat theory and intercultural attitudes. Journal of Cross-Cultural Psychology, 31(2), 240–249. https://doi.org/10.1177/0022022100031002006 Stephan, W. G., & Stephan, C. W. (2000). An integrated threat theory of prejudice. Reducing Prejudice and Discrimination, 23–46.
• Tausch, N., Hewstone, M., Kenworthy, J. B., Psaltis, C., Schmid, K., Popan, J. R., … Hughes, J. (2010). Secondary transfer effects of intergroup contact: Alternative accounts and underlying processes. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 99(2), 282–302. https://doi.org/10.1037/a0018553
• Tee, N., & Hegarty, P. (2006). Predicting opposition to the civil rights of trans persons in the United Kingdom. Journal of Community and Applied Social Psychology, 16(1), 70–80. https://doi.org/10.1002/casp.851
• Turner, R. N., & Feddes, A. R. (2011). How intergroup friendship works: A longitudinal study of friendship effects on outgroup attitudes. European Journal of Social Psychology, 41(7), 914–923. https://doi.org/10.1002/ejsp.843
• Ünver, H., Çakal, H., Güler, M., & Tropp, L. R. (2021). Support for rights of Syrian refugees in Turkey: The role of secondary transfer effects in intergroup contact. Journal of Community & Applied Social Psychology. https://doi.org/10.1002/casp.2562
• Van Laar, C., Levin, S., Sinclair, S., & Sidanius, J. (2005). The effect of university roommate contact on ethnic attitudes and behavior. Journal of Experimental Social Psychology, 41(4), 329–345. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jesp.2004.08.002
• Vezzali, L., Di Bernardo, G. A., Birtel, M. D., Stathi, S., & Brambilla, M. (2019). Outgroup morality perceptions mediate secondary transfer effects from direct and extended contact: Evidence from majority and minority group members. Group Processes and Intergroup Relations, 1–19. https://doi.org/10.1177/1368430219879223
• Vezzali, L., Di Bernardo, G. A., Cocco, V. M., Stathi, S., & Capozza, D. (2021). Reducing prejudice in the society at large: A review of the secondary transfer effect and directions for future research. Social and Personality Psychology Compass, 15(3), 1–36. https://doi.org/10.1111/spc3.12583
• Vezzali, L., Di Bernardo, G. A., Stathi, S., Cadamuro, A., Lášticová, B., & Andraščiková, S. (2018). Secondary transfer effect among children: The role of social dominance orientation and outgroup attitudes. British Journal of Social Psychology, 1–20. https://doi.org/10.1111/bjso.12248
• Vezzali, L., & Giovannini, D. (2011). Cross-Group Friendships, Social Dominance Orientation and Secondary Transfer Effect. Testing, Psychometrics, Methodology in Applied Psychology, 18(3), 181–194.
• Vezzali, L., & Giovannini, D. (2012). Secondary transfer effect of intergroup contact: The role of intergroup attitudes, intergroup anxiety and perspective taking. Journal of Community & Applied Social Psychology, 22(2), 125–144. https://doi.org/10.1002/casp
• Vezzali, L., Hewstone, M., Capozza, D., Giovannini, D., & Wölfer, R. (2014). Improving intergroup relations with extended and vicarious forms of indirect contact. European Review of Social Psychology, 25(1), 314–389. https://doi.org/10.1080/10463283.2014.982948
• Visintin, E. P., Birtel, M. D., & Crisp, R. J. (2017). The role of multicultural and colorblind ideologies and typicality in imagined contact interventions. International Journal of Intercultural Relations, 59, 1–8. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ijintrel.2017.04.010
• Žeželj, I. L., Ioannou, M., Franc, R., Psaltis, C., & Martinovic, B. (2017). The role of inter-ethnic online friendships in prejudice reduction in post-conflict societies: Evidence from Serbia, Croatia and Cyprus. Computers in Human Behavior, 76, 386–395. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.chb.2017.07.041
• Zezelj, I., Milošević-Đorđević, J., Van Niekerk, J., & Pavlović, Z. (2020). How to address the caveat of avoiding direct contact: Reducing prejudice towards gay and lesbian people in five Balkan countries. Journal of Social Psychology, 160(2), 190–203. https://doi.org/10.1080/00224545.2019.1611531
• Zingora, T., & Graf, S. (2019). Marry who you love: Intergroup contact with gay people and another stigmatized minority is related to voting on the restriction of gay rights through threat. Journal of Applied Social Psychology, 49(11), 684–703. https://doi.org/10.1111/jasp.12627