When is computer-mediated intergroup contact most promising? Examining the effect of out-group members' anonymity on prejudice

Abstract Computer-mediated intergroup contact (CMIC) is a valuable strategy to reduce negative sentiments towards members of different social groups. We examined whether characteristics of communication media that facilitate intergroup encounters shape its effect on out-group attitudes. Specifically, we propose that concealing individuating cues about out-group members during CMIC increases prejudice, as interaction partners are perceived as less socially present. To assess these hypotheses, we conducted two mixed-factorial experiments. Participants engaged in synchronous text-chat with out-group members ( Study 1 ) and a confederate ( Study 2 ) who either shared or concealed their name and photo. Overall, CMIC reduced negative out-group sentiments. Study 2 showed, however, that out-group members' anonymity decreased perceived social presence, which was associated with less positive evaluations of the CMIC and higher prejudice. In conclusion, CMIC can contribute to conflict resolution interventions, preparing individuals for direct intergroup contact, if its affordances or conversation topics enhance interaction partners' social presence.

[1]  Yair Amichai-Hamburger,et al.  The Contact Hypothesis Reconsidered: Interacting via the Internet , 2006, J. Comput. Mediat. Commun..

[2]  K. Douglas,et al.  Identifiability and self-presentation: computer-mediated communication and intergroup interaction. , 2001, The British journal of social psychology.

[3]  Kristopher J Preacher,et al.  Mediation Analysis in Social Psychology: Current Practices and New Recommendations , 2011 .

[4]  M. Brewer,et al.  Cooperative Interaction in Desegregated Settings: A Laboratory Analogue , 1985 .

[5]  J. Dovidio,et al.  Intergroup Contact: The Past, Present, and the Future , 2003 .

[6]  R. Crisp,et al.  Attributional processes underlying imagined contact effects , 2011 .

[7]  Linda R. Tropp,et al.  A meta-analytic test of intergroup contact theory. , 2006, Journal of personality and social psychology.

[8]  A. Hayes Beyond Baron and Kenny: Statistical Mediation Analysis in the New Millennium , 2009 .

[9]  AlvídrezSalvador,et al.  Intergroup contact in computer-mediated communication , 2015 .

[10]  J. Pennebaker,et al.  Linguistic styles: language use as an individual difference. , 1999, Journal of personality and social psychology.

[11]  D. Capozza,et al.  Increasing outgroup trust, reducing infrahumanization, and enhancing future contact intentions via imagined intergroup contact. , 2012 .

[12]  Ronit Kampf,et al.  Do computer games enhance learning about conflicts? A cross-national inquiry into proximate and distant scenarios in Global Conflicts , 2015, Comput. Hum. Behav..

[13]  Sara B. Kiesler,et al.  The Equalization Phenomenon: Status Effects in Computer-Mediated and Face-to-Face Decision-Making Groups , 1991, Hum. Comput. Interact..

[14]  Hisham M. Abu-Rayya,et al.  Improving Intergroup Relations in the Internet Age: A Critical Review , 2015 .

[15]  T. Postmes,et al.  A Social Identity Model of Deindividuation Phenomena , 1995 .

[16]  J. Pennebaker,et al.  Psychological aspects of natural language. use: our words, our selves. , 2003, Annual review of psychology.

[17]  Hisham M. Abu-Rayya,et al.  Achieving twelve-months of intergroup bias reduction: The dual identity-electronic contact (DIEC) experiment , 2014 .

[18]  Norman Miller,et al.  Personalization and the Promise of Contact Theory , 2002 .

[19]  Net intergroup contact , 2010, ICIC '10.

[20]  Frank Biocca,et al.  The Cyborg's Dilemma: Progressive Embodiment in Virtual Environments , 2006, J. Comput. Mediat. Commun..

[21]  P. Sweeney,et al.  An evaluation of the impact of social presence through Group size and the use of collaborative software on Group member "Voice" in face-to-face and computer-mediated task Groups , 2006, IEEE Transactions on Professional Communication.

[22]  Kimberly M. Christopherson The positive and negative implications of anonymity in Internet social interactions: "On the Internet, Nobody Knows You're a Dog" , 2007, Comput. Hum. Behav..

[23]  Miri Shonfeld,et al.  Computer-mediated communication and the reduction of prejudice: A controlled longitudinal field experiment among Jews and Arabs in Israel , 2015, Comput. Hum. Behav..

[24]  Tom Postmes,et al.  The psychological dimensions of collective action, online , 2007 .

[25]  D. Lakens Equivalence Tests , 2017, Social psychological and personality science.

[26]  B WaltherJoseph,et al.  Computer-mediated communication and the reduction of prejudice , 2015 .

[27]  Richard J. Crisp,et al.  Elaboration enhances the imagined contact effect , 2010 .

[28]  Rupert Brown,et al.  An integrative theory of intergroup contact , 2005 .

[29]  David A. Sbarra,et al.  Experiential connectedness in children's attachment interviews: An examination of natural word use , 2011 .

[30]  Miles Hewstone,et al.  Reducing explicit and implicit outgroup prejudice via direct and extended contact: The mediating role of self-disclosure and intergroup anxiety. , 2007, Journal of personality and social psychology.

[31]  David W. Park,et al.  Interpersonal Effects in Computer-Mediated Interaction , 1994 .

[32]  Miles Hewstone,et al.  Intergroup Contact and Prejudice Toward Immigrants in Italy: The Mediational Role of Anxiety and the Moderational Role of Group Salience , 2003 .

[33]  T. Postmes,et al.  Breaching or Building Social Boundaries? , 1998 .

[34]  Tobias Greitemeyer,et al.  The world's biggest salad bowl: Facebook connecting cultures , 2015 .

[35]  Hisham M. Abu-Rayya,et al.  A dual identity-electronic contact (DIEC) experiment promoting short- and long-term intergroup harmony , 2012 .

[36]  Ulrich Wagner,et al.  Can we really reduce ethnic prejudice outside the lab? A meta‐analysis of direct and indirect contact interventions , 2015 .

[37]  Stefania Paolini,et al.  Grandparent-Grandchild Contact and Attitudes Toward Older Adults: Moderator and Mediator Effects , 2005, Personality & social psychology bulletin.

[38]  Miri Shonfeld,et al.  Information and Communication Technology (ICT) in the Service of Multiculturalism. , 2009 .

[39]  Jennifer C. Richardson,et al.  EXAMINING SOCIAL PRESENCE IN ONLINE COURSES IN RELATION TO STUDENTS' PERCEIVED LEARNING AND SATISFACTION , 2003, Online Learning.

[40]  Charles M. Judd,et al.  Out-group homogeneity: Judgments of variability at the individual and group levels. , 1988 .

[41]  Roger Austin,et al.  The global classroom: advancing cultural awareness in special schools through collaborative work using ICT , 2004 .

[42]  Nicholas Faulkner,et al.  Emotion expression and intergroup bias reduction between Muslims and Christians: Long-term Internet contact , 2015, Comput. Hum. Behav..

[43]  Tom Postmes,et al.  Two faces of anonymity: Paradoxical effects of cues to identity in CMC , 2007, Comput. Hum. Behav..

[44]  Ina Blau,et al.  How Do Personality, Synchronous Media, and Discussion Topic Affect Participation? , 2012, J. Educ. Technol. Soc..

[45]  Thomas F. Pettigrew,et al.  Relationships Between Intergroup Contact and Prejudice Among Minority and Majority Status Groups , 2005, Psychological science.

[46]  T. Pettigrew Intergroup contact theory. , 1998, Annual review of psychology.

[47]  T. Postmes,et al.  Deindividuation and antinormative behavior: A meta-analysis. , 1998 .

[48]  P. Zimbardo The human choice: Individuation, reason, and order versus deindividuation, impulse, and chaos. , 1969 .

[49]  Edgar Erdfelder,et al.  G*Power 3: A flexible statistical power analysis program for the social, behavioral, and biomedical sciences , 2007, Behavior research methods.

[50]  Massimo Zancanaro,et al.  The design of a collaborative interface for narration to support reconciliation in a conflict , 2009, AI & SOCIETY.

[51]  M. Hewstone,et al.  Intergroup Contact and Grandparent–Grandchild Communication: The Effects of Self-Disclosure on Implicit and Explicit Biases Against Older People , 2006 .

[52]  T. Postmes,et al.  Intergroup differentiation in computer-mediated communication: Effects of depersonalization , 2002 .

[53]  Richard J. Crisp,et al.  Imagining Intergroup Contact Can Improve Intergroup Attitudes , 2007 .

[54]  Jake Harwood,et al.  The Contact Space: A Novel Framework for Intergroup Contact Research , 2010 .

[55]  C. Gunawardena,et al.  Social presence as a predictor of satisfaction within a computer‐mediated conferencing environment , 1997 .

[56]  Carol Hostetter,et al.  Measuring up Online: The Relationship between Social Presence and Student Learning Satisfaction. , 2006 .

[57]  Norman Miller,et al.  The out-group must not be so bad after all: the effects of disclosure, typicality, and salience on intergroup bias. , 2002, Journal of personality and social psychology.

[58]  M. Hewstone,et al.  Direct and indirect crossgroup friendship effects: Evidence for the mediating role of an anxiety-reduction mechanism , 2004 .

[59]  Lindsey Cameron,et al.  Changing Children’s Intergroup Attitudes Toward Refugees: Testing Different Models of Extended Contact , 2022 .

[60]  G. Āllport The Nature of Prejudice , 1954 .

[61]  W. Stephan Intergroup Anxiety , 2014, Personality and social psychology review : an official journal of the Society for Personality and Social Psychology, Inc.

[62]  A. Hayes,et al.  Introduction to mediation, moderation, and conditional process analysis : , 2015 .

[63]  S. Shyam Sundar,et al.  Can synchronicity and visual modality enhance social presence in mobile messaging? , 2015, Comput. Hum. Behav..

[64]  Thomas F. Pettigrew,et al.  How does intergroup contact reduce prejudice? Meta‐analytic tests of three mediators , 2008 .

[65]  Yaacov J. Katz,et al.  Internet-Based Group Relations: A High School Peace Education Project in Israel , 2001 .

[66]  Rhiannon N. Turner,et al.  Imagining intergroup contact reduces implicit prejudice. , 2010, The British journal of social psychology.

[67]  S. McFarland Authoritarianism, Social Dominance, and Other Roots of Generalized Prejudice , 2010 .

[68]  Adrian Furnham,et al.  The Positive Net , 2007, Comput. Hum. Behav..

[69]  G. Bente,et al.  Avatar-Mediated Networking: Increasing Social Presence and Interpersonal Trust in Net-Based Collaborations , 2008 .

[70]  Paul Benjamin Lowry,et al.  The CMC Interactivity Model: How Interactivity Enhances Communication Quality and Process Satisfaction in Lean-Media Groups , 2009, J. Manag. Inf. Syst..

[71]  R. Baron,et al.  Group polarization and choice‐dilemmas: how important is self‐categorization? , 2007 .

[72]  M. Hewstone,et al.  Inter-ethnic contact as a predictor of blatant and subtle prejudice: Tests of a model in four West European nations , 1997 .

[73]  Tom Postmes,et al.  Group Identity, Social Influence and Collective Action Online: Extensions and Applications of the SIDE Model , 2015 .

[74]  Tom Postmes,et al.  When are net effects gross products? The power of influence and the influence of power in computer-mediated communication. , 2002 .

[75]  Salvador Alvídrez,et al.  Intergroup contact in computer-mediated communication: The interplay of a stereotype-disconfirming behavior and a lasting group identity on reducing prejudiced perceptions , 2015, Comput. Hum. Behav..

[76]  Hans van Buuren,et al.  Determining Sociability, Social Space, and Social Presence in (A)synchronous Collaborative Groups , 2004, Cyberpsychology Behav. Soc. Netw..

[77]  Tom Postmes,et al.  Cognitive and strategic processes in small groups: effects of anonymity of the self and anonymity of the group on social influence. , 2002, The British journal of social psychology.

[78]  T. Postmes,et al.  Behavior Online: Does Anonymous Computer Communication Reduce Gender Inequality? , 2002 .

[79]  Stephen C. Wright,et al.  The extended contact effect: Knowledge of cross-group friendships and prejudice. , 1997 .

[80]  C. Judd,et al.  Do observer ratings validate self-reports of intergroup contact?: A round-robin analysis , 2011 .

[81]  C. Tu,et al.  The Relationship of Social Presence and Interaction in Online Classes , 2002 .

[82]  Susan C. Herring Interactional Coherence in CMC , 1999, J. Comput. Mediat. Commun..

[83]  BRENDESHA M. TYNES,et al.  Ethnic Identity, Intergroup Contact, and Outgroup Orientation among Diverse Groups of Adolescents on the Internet , 2008, Cyberpsychology Behav. Soc. Netw..

[84]  Katelyn Y. A. McKenna Psychological Aspects of Cyberspace: Influences on the Nature and Functioning of Online Groups , 2008 .

[85]  M. Hewstone,et al.  Contact with out-group friends as a predictor of meta-attitudinal strength and accessibility of attitudes toward gay men. , 2007, Journal of personality and social psychology.

[86]  Sabine Rüggenberg So nah und doch so fern. Soziale Präsenz und Vertrauen in der computervermittelten Kommunikation , 2007 .

[87]  Steven R. Aragon Creating Social Presence in Online Environments , 2003 .

[88]  Rhiannon N. Turner,et al.  Can imagined interactions produce positive perceptions? Reducing prejudice through simulated social contact. , 2009, The American psychologist.

[89]  Andy P. Field,et al.  Discovering Statistics Using Ibm Spss Statistics , 2017 .

[90]  J. Dovidio,et al.  Developing a More Inclusive Social Identity: An Elementary School Intervention , 2004 .

[91]  M. Hewstone,et al.  Stretching the boundaries: Strategic perceptions of intragroup variability , 2001 .

[92]  Norman Miller,et al.  The out-group must not be so bad after all: the effects of disclosure, typicality, and salience on intergroup bias. , 2002, Journal of personality and social psychology.

[93]  Ronit Kampf,et al.  Learning about Conflict and Negotiations through Computer Simulations: The Case of PeaceMaker† , 2014 .

[94]  Rupert Brown,et al.  Promoting children's positive intergroup attitudes towards stigmatized groups: Extended contact and multiple classification skills training , 2007 .

[95]  Yaacov B. Yablon Feeling close from a distance: peace encounters via Internet technology. , 2007, New directions for youth development.