Examining the Effects of Intergroup Contact & Affect on Peers’ Evaluations in Task Group Settings

• In Event: 30260 - Joint Roundtables: Section on Social Psychology and Section on Sociology of Emotions
  In Refereed Roundtable (90 minute): Table 4: Social Cohesion

Abstract

When making decisions in task group settings, unconscious status beliefs shape group members’ perceptions of one another’s competence and ability. As such, group members who are presumed to be more capable tend to be afforded more power and privileges, despite having no legitimate basis for being afforded those benefits. In racially diverse groups, this translates to group members who identify as white being afforded more power and privilege than group members who identify as persons of color, which ultimately perpetuates systemic racial inequalities at the interpersonal and group levels. Alternatively, research on intergroup contact suggests that peers’ evaluations of one another will be influenced by their previous experiences with people who identify in the same way (i.e., past experiences will influence current evaluations). This discrepancy in cause and effect raises an interesting question about the connection between status beliefs and intergroup contact, namely whether one has greater influence on the outcome of peer evaluations compared to the other.

The purpose of this study is to offer an initial response to this question. Using data from a controlled laboratory experiment involving racially diverse task groups, we test a series of predictions about the relationship between specific performance evaluations, specific character evaluations, general contact, and general affect, with regard to participants’ racial identity. Specifically, we predict that as contact or affect increases for either racial group, performance and character evaluations for group members who identify the same way will also increase. We further predict that these patterns hold, whether or not the evaluator and evaluated share the same racial identity. Preliminary results suggest that contact and affect are positively and significantly correlated (consistent with existing research); however, their respective influence not only varies in terms of the type of evaluation (performance vs. character), but also in terms of who is evaluating whom.

Authors

• Grace Min, California State University, Long Beach

• Chantrey J. Murphy, California State University-Long Beach