Cecilia Hyunjung Mo and Katharine M.Conn While the formulation of intergroup contact the- rect contact)-which allows for personal relationships ory in Allport (1954)has inspired extensive research to form-as well as the duration of exposure (contact over the past half century to determine whether inter- over time),as prolonged contact allows for greater op- group contact can increase perspective-taking and re- portunities for individuals to learn about the out-group. duce intergroup prejudice,it is perhaps not surprising change their own behavior,develop affective ties,and that the effects of contact have been mixed given the re-appraise their in-group(Pettigrew 1998).Theoreti- range of what "contact"can mean (Amir 1969;Ford cally,greater perspective-taking toward disadvantaged 1986;Hopkins,Reicher,and Levine 1997;McClendon Americans could take hold when advantaged Amer- 1974).So what are the conditions for propitious inter- icans "walk a mile in someone else's shoes"rather group contact?Allport's (1954)formulation of inter- than a meager step by having extended and meaningful group contact theory maintained that ideal contact be- interactions with disadvantaged Americans.The TFA tween groups requires four optimal conditions:equal two-year service experience,in which the participant is status between the groups within the situation;com- tasked to interact with the "out-group"as a full-time mon goals;intergroup cooperation;and support of au- teacher in their school meets both criteria of poten- thorities,law,or custom.National service programs like tially cohesion-enhancing intergroup contact:duration TFA foster contact that largely meet these conditions. and depth. With an aim to assist communities in need,the goals Additionally,the particular context in which inter- of participants are not in conflict with the goals of the group contact occurs matters profoundly.Institutional community members,and there is no intergroup com- and societal norms structure the form and impacts of petition.As evident in the history of prominent na- contact situations (Kinloch 1981,1991).Indeed,All- tional service programs like the Peace Corps,TFA,and port(1954)noted the importance of a supportive en- AmeriCorps,national service programs are supported vironment in which there is authority sanction and a by political elites,the law,and custom.One might argue cooperative context.For instance,consider the effects that the status between groups is not necessarily equal of living in a racially mixed neighborhood in South as the advantaged group could be in a position of au- Africa with the apartheid policy of racial segregation. thority (e.g.,teachers)in relation to the disadvantaged The context of state-condoned systemic discrimination population(e.g.,students and their parents).However, was found to poison intergroup contact,as interactions Allport emphasized status within situations as opposed between white and black South Africans were neither to status generally.In a national service context,par- cooperative nor discouraged (Russell 1961).Beyond ticipants of the program are evaluated based upon the a context of cooperation and authority sanction,what conditions of the community they are serving.As such. if contact with the out-group occurred with a service- participants may not view themselves as having higher orientation toward the out-group?Consider the ef- status within the service situation.With that said fects of contact between nurses and patients in hospi contact theory research suggests that while Allport's tals that not only condone but commit to serving low- scope conditions facilitate prejudice reduction,all of income communities.Redman and Clark(2016)exam- them are by no means necessary(Pettigrew and Tropp ined the case of preservice nurses in low-income areas 2006). and observed that as these nurses interacted with low- Meta-analyses on intergroup contact has highlighted income individuals in the context of being a service the import of Allport's scope conditions(Paluck and provider,they critically reflected on the social justice is- Green 2009:Paluck.Green.and Green 2018):however. sues of their patient population and "began to grapple are there other conditions that could help foster op- with causes and explanations of the disproportionate timal intergroup contact?Two additional conditions share of social and health risks concentrated in par- that have the potential to increase the likelihood of en- ticular segments of society";they thus "experienced" gendering empathy and reducing prejudice are as fol- rather than solely "intellectualized"inequality and so- lows:(1)extended contact with regards to duration and cial injustice(p.446).As such,it matters if intergroup depth and(2)contact within a service context. contact occurs in a setting where both the structures Research examining the potency of cross-group in which people are disadvantaged and remain disad- friendships in reducing prejudice demands a fifth con- vantaged are more likely to be visible to the advan- dition for the contact hypothesis:the contact situa- taged,and the social norms in which the interaction oc- tion must provide participants with the opportunity to curs have a mission to help advance the disadvantaged form an intimate relationship,like friendship.Living in out-group. a neighborhood with an out-group member that one Deep prolonged contact,which is contextualized might bump into is quite different from contact with a in a service context where inequality is a salient roommate or workmate with whom you have to reg- problem that needs to be tackled,can lead to en- ularly interact.Having an opportunity to closely see hanced understanding that has advantaged individu- the life of an individual and their families,hear their als see the world more through the lens of the dis- stories,and develop a causal understanding of their advantaged segment of society.We hereafter refer life history can be a more powerful form of contact to this form of context as extended contextualized (Amir 1976;Patchen 1999;Pettigrew 1998;Pettigrew intergroup contact.Extant research on perspective- and Tropp 2006).Contact with diversity has been found taking over the last five decades indicates that to be a more positive and cohesion-enhancing experi- perspective-taking translates to real shifts in atti- ence with both greater depth of exposure(regular di- tudes and beliefs,as "the representation of the 724Cecilia Hyunjung Mo and Katharine M. Conn While the formulation of intergroup contact the￾ory in Allport (1954) has inspired extensive research over the past half century to determine whether inter￾group contact can increase perspective-taking and re￾duce intergroup prejudice, it is perhaps not surprising that the effects of contact have been mixed given the range of what “contact” can mean (Amir 1969; Ford 1986; Hopkins, Reicher, and Levine 1997; McClendon 1974). So what are the conditions for propitious inter￾group contact? Allport’s (1954) formulation of inter￾group contact theory maintained that ideal contact be￾tween groups requires four optimal conditions: equal status between the groups within the situation; com￾mon goals; intergroup cooperation; and support of au￾thorities,law, or custom. National service programs like TFA foster contact that largely meet these conditions. With an aim to assist communities in need, the goals of participants are not in conflict with the goals of the community members, and there is no intergroup com￾petition. As evident in the history of prominent na￾tional service programs like the Peace Corps, TFA, and AmeriCorps, national service programs are supported by political elites, the law, and custom.One might argue that the status between groups is not necessarily equal, as the advantaged group could be in a position of au￾thority (e.g., teachers) in relation to the disadvantaged population (e.g., students and their parents). However, Allport emphasized status within situations as opposed to status generally. In a national service context, par￾ticipants of the program are evaluated based upon the conditions of the community they are serving. As such, participants may not view themselves as having higher status within the service situation. With that said, contact theory research suggests that while Allport’s scope conditions facilitate prejudice reduction, all of them are by no means necessary (Pettigrew and Tropp 2006). Meta-analyses on intergroup contact has highlighted the import of Allport’s scope conditions (Paluck and Green 2009; Paluck, Green, and Green 2018); however, are there other conditions that could help foster op￾timal intergroup contact? Two additional conditions that have the potential to increase the likelihood of en￾gendering empathy and reducing prejudice are as fol￾lows: (1) extended contact with regards to duration and depth and (2) contact within a service context. Research examining the potency of cross-group friendships in reducing prejudice demands a fifth con￾dition for the contact hypothesis: the contact situa￾tion must provide participants with the opportunity to form an intimate relationship, like friendship. Living in a neighborhood with an out-group member that one might bump into is quite different from contact with a roommate or workmate with whom you have to reg￾ularly interact. Having an opportunity to closely see the life of an individual and their families, hear their stories, and develop a causal understanding of their life history can be a more powerful form of contact (Amir 1976; Patchen 1999; Pettigrew 1998; Pettigrew and Tropp 2006).Contact with diversity has been found to be a more positive and cohesion-enhancing experi￾ence with both greater depth of exposure (regular di￾rect contact)—which allows for personal relationships to form—as well as the duration of exposure (contact over time), as prolonged contact allows for greater op￾portunities for individuals to learn about the out-group, change their own behavior, develop affective ties, and re-appraise their in-group (Pettigrew 1998). Theoreti￾cally, greater perspective-taking toward disadvantaged Americans could take hold when advantaged Amer￾icans “walk a mile in someone else’s shoes” rather than a meager step by having extended and meaningful interactions with disadvantaged Americans. The TFA two-year service experience, in which the participant is tasked to interact with the “out-group” as a full-time teacher in their school meets both criteria of poten￾tially cohesion-enhancing intergroup contact: duration and depth. Additionally, the particular context in which inter￾group contact occurs matters profoundly. Institutional and societal norms structure the form and impacts of contact situations (Kinloch 1981, 1991). Indeed, All￾port (1954) noted the importance of a supportive en￾vironment in which there is authority sanction and a cooperative context. For instance, consider the effects of living in a racially mixed neighborhood in South Africa with the apartheid policy of racial segregation. The context of state-condoned systemic discrimination was found to poison intergroup contact, as interactions between white and black South Africans were neither cooperative nor discouraged (Russell 1961). Beyond a context of cooperation and authority sanction, what if contact with the out-group occurred with a service￾orientation toward the out-group? Consider the ef￾fects of contact between nurses and patients in hospi￾tals that not only condone but commit to serving low￾income communities. Redman and Clark (2016) exam￾ined the case of preservice nurses in low-income areas and observed that as these nurses interacted with low￾income individuals in the context of being a service provider, they critically reflected on the social justice is￾sues of their patient population and “began to grapple with causes and explanations of the disproportionate share of social and health risks concentrated in par￾ticular segments of society”; they thus “experienced” rather than solely “intellectualized” inequality and so￾cial injustice (p. 446). As such, it matters if intergroup contact occurs in a setting where both the structures in which people are disadvantaged and remain disad￾vantaged are more likely to be visible to the advan￾taged, and the social norms in which the interaction oc￾curs have a mission to help advance the disadvantaged out-group. Deep prolonged contact, which is contextualized in a service context where inequality is a salient problem that needs to be tackled, can lead to en￾hanced understanding that has advantaged individu￾als see the world more through the lens of the dis￾advantaged segment of society. We hereafter refer to this form of context as extended contextualized intergroup contact. Extant research on perspective￾taking over the last five decades indicates that perspective-taking translates to real shifts in atti￾tudes and beliefs, as “the representation of the 724 Downloaded from https://www.cambridge.org/core. Shanghai JiaoTong University, on 26 Oct 2018 at 03:53:05, subject to the Cambridge Core terms of use, available at https://www.cambridge.org/core/terms. https://doi.org/10.1017/S0003055418000412