The reflection of social norms in prejudice: Connecting intergroup contact, perceived social norms and prejudice toward immigrants

Abstract

The positive effect of intergroup contact on prejudice towards minorities is well documented. However, the conditions under which contact occurs may sometimes render it ineffective, or even lead to the opposite effect. Even though several studies have recently pointed out the importance of broader context in which contact takes place, such as prevailing norms in the society, the role of normative climate in intergroup relations is rarely studied on the individual level. In this pilot exploratory study, we examined the interplay of intergroup contact and perceived social norms in shaping attitudes towards immigrants. We measured perceived peer and country norms related to attitudes towards immigrants, as well as reported contact with immigrants, on a sample of young adults (N = 174). Our results showed that, as expected, the more intergroup contact with immigrants participants had, the less prejudice they reported. Even though both peer and country norms were related to prejudice, peer norms were more strongly associated with prejudice. Furthermore, our results indicate that perceived peer norms may facilitate the relationship between contact and attitudes. However, the quality of contact seems to be the decisive factor in predicting intergroup attitudes. We discuss the implications for prejudice reduction methods based on a normative approach. Interventions aimed at shifting social norms may have the potential to be an effective tool in combating prejudice.

Full text

1
Institute of Applied Psychology
Faculty of Social and Economic Sciences
Comenius University in Bratislava
Community Psychology in Slovakia 2020
Proceedings from 7th Conference of Community Psychology in Slovakia 2020
30th November - 1st December 2020 Bratislava
Martina Baránková (Editor)
2020
Bratislava

2
© Institute of Applied Psychology, Faculty of Social and Economic Sciences, Comenius
University in Bratislava, Bratislava, Slovakia 2020
Organizers:
Mgr. Martina Baránková, PhD.
Institute of Applied Psychology, Faculty of Social and Economic Sciences, Comenius
University in Bratislava, Slovakia
European Community Psychology Association (ECPA)
The Society for Community and Action Research (SCRA) Division 27 American Psychological
Association
Reviewers:
Mgr. Katarína Křížová, PhD.
Institute of Applied Psychology, Faculty of Social and Economic Sciences, Comenius
University in Bratislava
Mgr. Jana Koróniová, PhD.
Institute of Experimental Psychology, Slovak Academy of Sciences, Bratislava
Mgr. Juraj Petrík, PhD.
Department of Psychology and Pathopsychology, Faculty of Education, Comenius University
in Bratislava
The authors of each contribution are responsible for the professional and language design.
The publication did not pass the language correction.
Comenius University in Bratislava
ISBN 978-80-223-5034-1

130
The reflection of social norms in prejudice: Connecting intergroup contact,
perceived social norms and prejudice toward immigrants
Mgr. Xenia Daniela Poslon
Institute for Research in Social Communication, Slovak Academy of Sciences, Bratislava,
Slovakia
Email: xenia-daniela.poslon@savba.sk
Mgr. Barbara Lášticová, PhD.
Institute for Research in Social Communication, Slovak Academy of Sciences, Bratislava,
Slovakia
Email: barbara.lasticova@savba.sk
Abstract: The positive effect of intergroup contact on prejudice towards minorities is well
documented. However, the conditions under which contact occurs may sometimes render it
ineffective, or even lead to the opposite effect. Even though several studies have recently
pointed out the importance of broader context in which contact takes place, such as prevailing
norms in the society, the role of normative climate in intergroup relations is rarely studied on
the individual level. In this pilot exploratory study, we examined the interplay of intergroup
contact and perceived social norms in shaping attitudes towards immigrants. We measured
perceived peer and country norms related to attitudes towards immigrants, as well as reported
contact with immigrants, on a sample of young adults (N = 174). Our results showed that, as
expected, the more intergroup contact with immigrants participants had, the less prejudice they
reported. Even though both peer and country norms were related to prejudice, peer norms were
more strongly associated with prejudice. Furthermore, our results indicate that perceived peer
norms may facilitate the relationship between contact and attitudes. However, the quality of
contact seems to be the decisive factor in predicting intergroup attitudes. We discuss the
implications for prejudice reduction methods based on a normative approach. Interventions
aimed at shifting social norms may have the potential to be an effective tool in combating
prejudice.
Keywords: immigrants, intergroup contact, peer norms, prejudice, social norms

131
Introduction
Even though the number of immigrants in European countries, including both incoming people
that are born outside the EU, as well as people migrating within the EU, increases with each
year (Eurostat 2017), we are also witnessing a steady rise of public support for far-right and
extremist parties (e.g. Wodak & Krzyżanowski, 2017). Recent populist political campaigns,
especially in the Visegrad countries, seem to foster the growing intolerance towards
immigration and ethnic minorities (Kende & Krekó, 2020). Compared to the rest of European
countries, Slovakia has a relatively low percentage of immigrant population, reaching only
2.22% in 2018 (Statistical Office of the Slovak Republic, 2018), which is the sixth lowest
proportion of foreigners in the EU according to Eurostat (2018). However, over the past couple
of years, the attitudes of Slovak public towards immigrants have significantly changed.
Whereas in 2014, exactly one year before the refugee crisis, approximately two-thirds of
Slovaks reported negative attitudes towards illegal immigrants, in 2016 nearly 87 percent had
strongly, or at least slightly, agreed that immigrants pose a threat to Europe (Krivý, 2017). Yet
another survey showed that, in 2015, as high as 70 percent of the participants feared the arrival
of immigrants, while the biggest reasons for concern were the potential increase in criminality
as well as the possibility that they would refuse to assimilate to our way of life (Bahna &
Klobucký, 2016).
One of the most influential theories in social psychology, the intergroup contact
hypothesis (Allport, 1954), states that positive encounters with members of an outgroup lead to
reduction of prejudice and improved intergroup relations. More than 60 years later, Allport’s
theory has inarguably received substantial empirical support (Pettigrew & Tropp, 2006) and
social psychologists have primarily focused on designing prejudice reduction interventions
based on contact between groups. Initially, Allport emphasized the importance of several
conditions that are necessary for the effectiveness of intergroup contact - equal status between
groups, common goals, cooperation and institutional support - and the success of such
interventions was also shown to depend on the conditions under which the contact occurs
(Paluck & Green, 2009). However, the meta-analysis examining the contact-prejudice link by
Pettigrew and Tropp (2006) suggested that, compared to other conditions, institutional context
could be particularly important in enhancing the positive effects of contact on outgroup
attitudes.
Even though institutional support is most often interpreted as the implementation of
specific integration policies or the approval of public authorities, Allport (1954) suggested a
wider context of contact, claiming that “the effect is greatly enhanced if this contact is

132
sanctioned by institutional supports (i.e. by law, custom, or local atmosphere), and provided it
is of a sort that leads to the perception of common interests and common humanity between
members of the two groups” (p. 281). Formally, immigrant inclusion policies and laws are
crucial for successful integration of immigrants on the country level. However, on the
individual level, institutional support is reflected in perceived social norms. Moreover,
perceived normative climate is also influenced by factors other than policies, such as media or
political discourse (Poslon et al., 2020; see also Kóczé, 2018). Therefore, we argue that
perceived social norms related to immigration should shape the relation between contact and
people’s attitudes. Moreover, the quality of intergroup contact was shown to be particularly
effective for reducing prejudice (e.g. Binder et al., 2009; Davies et al., 2011). When interpreting
intergroup contact, individuals are sensitive to the normative climate, determined by
institutional support and reflected in injunctive norms. But appraisal of everyday encounters
with outgroup members may also depend on their ingroup norms, such as descriptive norms of
how the majority of their ingroup thinks or behaves, regardless of the norms how one should
think or behave. Although there are numerous studies investigating the effect of intergroup
contact on reduced prejudice, to date, there is little understanding how perceived social
normative context shapes this relationship.
Social norms and prejudice
The effect of social norms on prejudice was identified early in prejudice research.
According to Sherif and Sherif’s (1953) group norm theory, social norms are “formed in group
situations and subsequently serve as standards for the individual’s perception and judgment
when he is not in the group situation” (p. 202). Even though the initial emphasis of prejudice
researchers was primarily upon norm-based theories in which prejudice was seen as a shared
social construct within ingroups, intergroup contact approaches later became more influential,
drawing on assumption that prejudice is dependent on contact with members of outgroups,
rather than through shared ingroup norms (Sechrist et al., 2005). Recently, norm theories have
again started to draw researchers’ attention and newer studies confirm that the attitudes of
members of individuals’ ingroups influence the formation, maintaining, and potentially
changing the intergroup attitudes of individuals (Tankard & Paluck, 2016). For example, Paluck
(2009) demonstrated that radio soap opera, that depicted likable characters engaging in positive
intergroup behaviours, reduced intergroup conflict in Rwanda and changed listeners’ perceived
norms with respect to reconciliation with the outgroup. The influence of norms on attitudes may
also depend on the opportunities for personal contact. Sechrist and Strangor (2001) found that

133
social norms might have a bigger influence on beliefs about unfamiliar outgroups, with which
participants did not have much contact, compared to groups that were more present in their
everyday lives.
The interaction between intergroup contact and normative context
Moving beyond general processes of intergroup relations, and focusing more closely on
anti-immigrant attitudes, researchers have considered the effects of cultural diversity on
prejudice towards, and acceptance of, immigrants. Studies in this direction most often yielded
mixed results and sparked opposing theories (Fasel et al., 2013). Research building on the
intergroup threat theories (Riek et al., 2006) showed that increased percentage of immigrants
also increases competition and perceptions of threat, which in turn might negatively affect
prejudice (e.g. Green, 2009). Other findings, on the other hand, supported the intergroup contact
theory, demonstrating that a bigger presence of immigrants provides contact opportunities,
which lead to improved majority attitudes (e.g. Schlueter & Wagner, 2008). Fasel et al. (2013)
argue that interpretation of these mixed findings can benefit from considering normative context
- which they aptly define as ideological climate - that predicts anti-immigrant attitudes above
individual characteristics and provides the missing link in explaining majority’s responses to
cultural diversity. Institutional and normative characteristics of contexts are therefore likely to
determine whether cultural diversity elicits competition, threat, or encourages contact, yet there
is still a considerable lack of studies in this direction.
Several prior studies, often building on multilevel and/or cross-country datasets,
examined whether implemented immigrant integration policies within a country, that convey
institutional support, also encourage contact between national majority members and immigrant
population, and facilitate the effect on anti-immigrant attitudes. For example, most recent meta-
analysis of the association between contact and prejudice (Kende et al., 2018), taking cultural
context into consideration, showed that contact most effectively reduces prejudice in egalitarian
societies, while this effect is weaker or even missing in more hierarchical cultures. Green et al.
(2020) found that the connection between everyday contact with immigrants and intergroup
threat was stronger in countries that had more tolerant policies. Sarrasin et al. (2012) showed
that conservative ideological climates translate into prejudice towards immigrants, and when
opportunities for contact are rare, they are particularly predictive of people’s responses to
cultural diversity. These studies demonstrate that inclusive integration policies can support
contact between majority and immigrants and improve intergroup relations.

134
This stream of research typically considers the proportion of immigrants in communities
or whole regions, and draws on objective measures such as ESS data (e.g. Sarrasin et al., 2012)
or MIPEX scores of inclusive policies (e.g. Green et al., 2020). However, on the individual
level, objective measures such as integration policies, do not automatically translate into
individual perceptions. Moreover, the actual proportion of citizens that are immigrants does not
necessarily reflect the salience of their ethnic group in a given country or neighbourhood, or
the level or their symbolic integration (vs. segregation) in public life, which is more often
translated into individual perceptions that influence attitudes. In fact, an abrupt influx of
immigrants might receive more media attention and provoke feelings of threat (Hogan &
Haltinner, 2015), and subjective perceptions immigrant population size might predict anti-
immigrant attitudes better than the actual number of immigrants (e.g., Schlueter & Scheepers,
2010).
To date, there is scarce understanding of how the individual level perceptions of
normative context relate to intergroup contact and prejudice. Only few studies until now
addressed this issue, providing evidence from educational settings. Tropp et al. (2016), for
example, showed that when children and adolescents perceive that their teachers or peers
support intergroup contact, they seek out more contact with other ethnic groups in school and
develop more positive intergroup attitudes. In an intervention study, when participants
perceived institutional norms as more tolerant, contact with the Roma had a stronger effect on
reducing prejudice (Kende et al., 2017).
The aim of our research is to examine how perceived social norms shape everyday
contact, attitudes towards immigrants, as well as the relationship between contact and attitudes.
Using a correlational design, we examine the relation between peer and country norms, contact
experiences with immigrants, and intergroup attitudes. We conclude by discussing the
implications for prejudice reduction interventions.
Method
Participants. The online questionnaire was created via online software Surveymonkey
and disseminated in university and student Facebook groups. Data was collected during October
2020. 181 students filled out the questionnaire. Out of the initial sample, seven participants
failed to answer attention checks correctly, so they were excluded from the analysis. The final
sample consisted of 174 participants (128 women, 44 men, 2 choose not to respond; Mage =
22.30, age range: 18-33 years).

135
Measures. At the beginning of the questionnaire, the term immigrant was explained as
referring to anyone who has left their home country in order to come and live in Slovakia. We
measured attitudes toward immigrants on a feeling thermometer (which has been widely
applied to in prejudice research; e.g., Verkuyten & Reijerse, 2008; Lášticová & Findor, 2016):
“If feelings could be described with a thermometer with a scale from 0 to 100, how would you
describe your own feelings towards immigrants?” (zero denoting extremely negative feelings
and 100 for extremely positive feelings; measured on a slider).
We adapted measures for intergroup contact frequency (“How often do you spend time
with immigrants (people that moved to Slovakia from other countries)? They can be, for
example, your friends, your friends’ parents, neighbours...”; measured on a 7-point scale
ranging from never to always) and intergroup contact quality (“How do you usually feel about
it?”; 1 = very uncomfortable, 7 = very comfortable) from INTERMIN questionnaire (Lášticová
& Findor, 2016).
Finally, we created new scales for measuring social norms, each consisting of three
items: perceived peer norms (“Most of my friends have positive attitude towards immigrants”;
“Most of my friends often say that immigrants have negative characteristics (e.g. that they are
violent, or they lie)” (reverse-coded); “Most of my friends have nothing against immigrants”;
α = .912) and perceived country norms (“Most young people in Slovakia have positive attitudes
towards immigrants”; “Most young people in Slovakia think, that immigrants have negative
characteristics (e.g. that they are violent, or they lie)” (reverse-coded); “Most young people in
Slovakia have nothing against immigrants”; α = .867). They were measured on a 7-point Likert
scale (1 = completely disagree, 7 = completely agree); higher values indicate more positive
social norms. Items within question blocks were randomized, as well as the order of peer and
country norms.
Results
Descriptive analysis showed that overall, participants reported having less contact with
immigrants, but the contact itself was most often reported as pleasant (see Table 1). Perceived
social norms and attitudes towards immigrants were also generally more positive than negative
in our sample. As expected, bivariate correlations revealed that the more frequent and the more
pleasant contact participants had with immigrants, the more positive attitudes they reported on
the feeling thermometer. Contact frequency and contact quality were also positively associated.
Similarly, perceived peer and country norms were positively related to intergroup attitudes.

136
Table 1
Descriptive statistics and bivariate correlations
1
2
3
4
5
1. Attitudes towards
immigrants
1
2. Contact frequency
0.30***
1
3. Contact quality
0.57***
0.34***
1
4. Perceived peer
norms
0.48***
0.29***
0.26**
1
5. Perceived country
norms
0.30***
0.09
0.22**
0.43***
1
M
63.4
2.86
5.42
4.73
3.87
SD
22.9
1.70
1.17
1.35
1.16
Note. Values in boldface are statistically significant.
N = 174, * p < .05, ** p < .01, *** p < .001
Given that 25 participants reported that they never had contact with immigrants, we first
ran hierarchical regression analysis with the whole sample and without the contact quality
variable. A multiple regression analysis was conducted with attitudes towards immigrants as
the criterion variable (see Table 2). At step 1, the results showed that frequency of the contact
and perceived peer norms were significant predictors of attitudes towards immigrants, but
perceived country norms were not significant. These variables accounted for a significant
amount of variance in attitudes towards immigrants, R2 = .272, F(3, 170) = 21.1, p < .001. In
the next step, we tested whether perceived social norms moderated the relationship between
intergroup contact and attitudes by adding the interaction term to the regression model. We
found that the interaction between intergroup contact frequency and perceived peer norms
yielded a significant effect on intergroup attitudes and improved the model fit (ΔR2 = .02, p =
.02). Adding the interaction between perceived country norms and contact did not further
improve the model.

137
Decomposition of the interaction between perceived peer norms and contact frequency based
on simple slope analysis showed that contact was positively associated with attitudes towards
immigrants for participants that perceived highly positive peer norms (+1 SD), B = 4.10, SE =
1.12, p < .001, 95% CI = [1.90, 6.30], but not for participants that perceived less positive norms
(−1 SD), B = −.87, SE = 1.52, p = 0.567, 95% CI = [−3.85, 2.11].
Table 2
Model 1 - Multiple regression analysis predicting attitudes towards immigrants (without
contact quality)
Step 1
Step 2
Contact frequency
2.48 (.923) ** [.04, .31]
-6.22 (3.85) [-.01, .27]
Peer norms
6.22 (1.287) *** [.21, .51]
1.79 (2.28) [.24, .53]
Country norms
2.74 (1.44) [-.00, .28]
2.26 (1.43) [-.02, .25]
Peer norms x contact
frequency
1.69 (.726) * [.02, .31]
R2
.272
.294
Note. Unstandardized B coefficients, (standard errors), and [95% confidence intervals] are
reported. Values in boldface are statistically significant.
N = 174, * p < .05, ** p < .01, *** p < .001
We then ran the same analysis using only the subset of participants that reported having
contact with immigrants and answered the question regarding contact quality (N = 149).
Including contact quality to the regression analysis changed the pattern of our results. As we
can see in Table 3, these variables again accounted for a significant amount of variance in
attitudes towards immigrants, R2 = .456, F(4, 144) = 30.2, p < .001, however only contact
quality and perceived peer norms were significant predictors of intergroup attitudes.
Furthermore, the interactions between perceived norms and both contact frequency and quality
were not significant, and adding them did not further improve the model.

138
Table 3
Model 2 - Multiple regression analysis predicting attitudes towards immigrants (including
contact quality)
Contact frequency
.96 (.947) [-.06, .20]
Contact quality
8.88 (1.322) *** [.31, .58]
Peer norms
5.47 (1.22) *** [.18, .46]
Country norms
1.26 (1.4) [-.07, .20]
R2
.456
Note. Unstandardized B coefficients, (standard errors), and [95% confidence intervals] are
reported. Values in boldface are statistically significant.
N = 149, * p < .05, ** p < .01, *** p < .001
Discussion
The phenomenon of prejudice is surrounded by its historical context, intergroup and
power relations, which often go unacknowledged (Pettigrew, 1991). More social psychologists
have recently started to advocate for the pressing need to study normative context, seeing that
different social norms may only influence attitudes, but also facilitate or repress different forms
of prejudice expression (Kende & McGarty, 2019; see also Pettigrew, 2018). The aim of our
study was to explore the role of perceived social norms in intergroup attitudes, and specifically
their role in the relationship between intergroup contact and attitudes.
The results of our study confirm the expected positive association between intergroup
contact and prejudice towards outgroups. Even though both perceived peer and country norms
were also positively correlated to attitudes towards immigrants, only peer norms were found to
be significant predictor of attitudes. This finding is not surprising, given that the influence of
ingroup norms may depend on the strength of one’s ingroup identity (Abrams & Hogg, 1990;
see also Gabarrot & Falomir-Pichastor, 2017), and participants could have identified more
strongly with the more specific ingroup of their peers, than the national identity (young people
in Slovakia) as such. Future research should control for the strength of identification with the
reference group that acts as a norm carrier.
Our results further suggest that perceived norms appear to facilitate the contact-prejudice link.
This relationship was only found in the case of perceived peer norms, which further confirms

139
the importance of more proximal normative environments, compared to the distal country level
norms. However, we can’t suggest any causal link by our results given the correlational nature
of our data. Most importantly, our findings should be interpreted with care, given that overall
reported intergroup contact was low. People may form their attitudes based on social norms
more often when contact opportunities with the given outgroup are scarce (e.g. Sechrist &
Strangor, 2001). This is also suggested by Fasel et al. (2013), who found that the impact of
ideological climate is particularly strong when personal encounters with immigrants are rare.
In more diverse settings, the opposite may also hold - personal contact experiences, such as
friendships with outgroup members, could serve as a buffer against the negative effect of
intolerant normative climate (Visintin et al., 2020).
In the subset of participants that reported having contact with immigrants, the appraisal
of the contact itself seemed to be the most crucial factor in shaping intergroup attitudes. When
contact quality was added to our model, the frequency of contact was insignificant, and only
perceived peer norms appeared to be a second strong enough predictor. In this case we also
didn’t find any interactions between the contact and norms in predicting attitudes. This is in
line with previous research that emphasizes the importance of the nature of contact experiences
over the mere frequency - studies consistently show that negative contact is more strongly
associated with increased prejudice than positive contact is with prejudice reduction (Barlow et
al., 2012). On a much larger scale, Green et al. (2020) found that, despite contact frequency
being sensitive to normative context, contact quality is unrelated to tolerant policies on the
country level. They suggest that the nature and quality of contact experiences is associated with
reduced prejudice irrespective of the broader normative climate.
Future research should also examine the role of personality characteristics in the links
between normative climate, contact, and attitudes. For example, Visintin et al. (2019) showed
that the interaction between social dominance orientation and personal encounters with
immigrants influence the support for multicultural policies, such that contact appeared to be
especially beneficial among participants who more strongly endorsed social hierarchies. On the
other hand, Fasel et al. (2013) showed that cultural diversity fuelled anti-immigrant attitudes
among conservative individuals, whereas it stimulated tolerant attitudes in people that endorse
liberal ideologies. However, they also found that conservative ideologies have a mobilizing
effect, and may even impact previously liberal individuals.
Implications for interventions and policy
Even though Allport (1954) emphasized institutional context as one of the main
conditions of successful intergroup contact, this aspect of intervention studies is often

140
overlooked. As contact quality seems to be more important than the actual frequency of contact
with outgroups, and negative contact experiences can have not only the opposite, but also
stronger effect on prejudice (Barlow et al., 2012), practitioners and policy makers need to be
particularly careful when designing interventions to reduce prejudice and improve intergroup
relations. Rather than attempting to change individual attitudes, interventions can focus on
shaping the perceptions of the norms at the collective level and drive community change
(Tankard & Paluck, 2016). Our findings, also considered in the light of previous research,
suggest that tolerant normative climate might be particularly important in settings where the
opportunities for intergroup contact are scarce.
However, interventions based on changing social norms also require a thorough
understanding of how people select and interpret normative information (Tankard & Paluck,
2016). Focus theory of normative conduct (Cialdini et al., 1991) suggests that injunctive (what
people should do) and descriptive (what people actually do) norms have unique effects on the
perceiver’s behaviour when made selectively salient. Studying the different effects of injunctive
and descriptive normative information on attitudes and willingness to engage in contact with
outgroups may provide us with missing links in prejudice research. Normative approach allows
for pragmatic optimism (Crandall et al., 2002), seeing that instead of a challenging task of
reducing prejudice of millions of individuals, changing normative climate may be a powerful
and even more effective method of social change.
Acknowledgments
The research was supported by VEGA 2/0127/19. The work of X. D. Poslon was conducted
during her PhD studies at the Faculty of Social and Economic Sciences, Comenius University
in Bratislava in collaboration with Slovak Academy of Sciences. We would also like to thank
undergraduate students D. A. Čief and A. Trusiková for their help with the data collection.
References
Abrams, D., & Hogg, M. A. (1990). Social identification, self-categorization and social
influence. European review of social psychology, 1(1), 195-228.
https://doi.org/10.1080/14792779108401862
Allport, G. (1954). The nature of prejudice. Addison-Wesley.
Bahna, M. & Klobucký, R. (2016). Slovenská verejnosť a utečenecká kríza po roku: utečencov
sa menej obávame, stále im však chceme pomáhať len v úplne nevyhnutných prípadoch
[Press release]. Sociologický ústav SAV.

141
http://www.sociologia.sav.sk/cms/uploaded/2506_attach_tlacova_sprava_utecenci_201
6.pdf
Barlow, F. K., Paolini, S., Pedersen, A., Hornsey, M. J., Radke, H. R., Harwood, J., ... & Sibley,
C. G. (2012). The contact caveat: Negative contact predicts increased prejudice more than
positive contact predicts reduced prejudice. Personality and social Psychology bulletin,
38(12), 1629-1643. https://doi.org/10.1177/0146167212457953
Binder, J., Zagefka, H., Brown, R., Funke, F., Kessler, T., Mummendey, A., Maquil, A.,
Demoulin, S., & Leyens, J.-P. (2009). Does contact reduce prejudice or does prejudice
reduce contact? A longitudinal test of the contact hypothesis among majority and minority
groups in three european countries. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 96(4),
843–856. https://doi.org/10.1037/a0013470
Cialdini, R. B., Kallgren, C. A., & Reno, R. R. (1991). A focus theory of normative conduct: A
theoretical refinement and reevaluation of the role of norms in human behavior. Advances
in experimental social psychology, 24, 201-234. https://doi.org/10.1016/S0065-
2601(08)60330-5
Crandall, C. S., Eshleman, A., & O’Brien, L. (2002). Social norms and the expression and
suppression of prejudice: The struggle for internalization. Journal of personality and
social psychology, 82(3), 359-380. https://doi.org/10.1037/0022-3514.82.3.359
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
Eurostat (2017). Migration and Migrant Population Statistics.
https://ec.europa.eu/eurostat/statistics-
explained/index.php/Migration_and_migrant_population_statistics
Eurostat (2018). Population by citizenship and residence – Foreigners (Statistics as of 1
January 2018).
https://ec.europa.eu/eurostat/tgm/table.do?tab=table&init=1&language=en&pcode=tps0
0001&plugin=1
Fasel, N., Green, E. G., & Sarrasin, O. (2013). Facing Cultural Diversity: Anti-Immigrant
Attitudes in Europe. European Psychologist, 18(4), 253-262.
https://doi.org/10.1027/1016-9040/a000157
Gabarrot, F., & Falomir-Pichastor, J. M. (2017). Ingroup identification increases differentiation
in response to egalitarian ingroup norm under distinctiveness threat. International Review
of Social Psychology, 30(1). http://doi.org/10.5334/irsp.22

142
Green, E. G. (2009). Who can enter? A multilevel analysis on public support for immigration
criteria across 20 European countries. Group Processes & Intergroup Relations, 12(1),
41-60. https://doi.org/10.1177/1368430208098776
Green, E. G., 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
Hogan, J., & Haltinner, K. (2015). Floods, invaders, and parasites: Immigration threat narratives
and right-wing populism in the USA, UK and Australia. Journal of Intercultural Studies,
36(5), 520-543. https://doi.org/10.1080/07256868.2015.1072907
Kende, A., & Krekó, P. (2020). Xenophobia, prejudice, and right-wing populism in East-
Central Europe. Current Opinion in Behavioral Sciences, 34, 29-33.
https://doi.org/10.1016/j.cobeha.2019.11.011
Kende, A., & McGarty, C. (2019). A model for predicting prejudice and stigma expression by
understanding target perceptions: The effects of visibility, politicization, responsibility,
and entitativity. European Journal of Social Psychology, 49(5), 839-856.
https://doi.org/10.1002/ejsp.2550
Kende, A., Tropp, L., & Lantos, N. A. (2017). Testing a contact intervention based on
intergroup friendship between Roma and non‐Roma Hungarians: Reducing bias through
institutional support in a non‐supportive societal context. Journal of Applied Social
Psychology, 47(1), 47-55. https://doi.org/10.1111/jasp.12422
Kende, J., Phalet, K., Van den Noortgate, W., Kara, A., & Fischer, R. (2018). Equality revisited:
A cultural meta-analysis of intergroup contact and prejudice. Social Psychological and
Personality Science, 9(8), 887-895. https://doi.org/10.1177/1948550617728993
Kóczé, A. (2018). Race, migration and neoliberalism: distorted notions of Romani migration in
European public discourses. Social Identities, 24(4), 459-473.
https://doi.org/10.1080/13504630.2017.1335827
Krivý, V. (2017). Postoje slovenskej verejnosti k utečencom a k zjednocujúcim snahám EÚ
[Press release]. Sociologický ústav SAV.
http://www.sociologia.sav.sk/cms/uploaded/2543_attach_TB_Krivy_utecenci_EU.pdf
Lášticová, B., & Findor, A. (2016). Developing explicit measures of stereotypes and anti-Roma
prejudice in Slovakia: Conceptual and methodological challenges. Human Affairs, 26(3),
233-252. https://doi.org/10.1515/humaff-2016-0022

143
Paluck, E. L. (2009). Reducing intergroup prejudice and conflict using the media: A field
experiment in Rwanda. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 96(3), 574–587.
https://doi.org/10.1037/a0011989
Paluck, E. L., & Green, D. P. (2009). Prejudice reduction: What works? A review and
assessment of research and practice. Annual review of psychology, 60, 339-367.
https://doi.org/10.1146/annurev.psych.60.110707.163607
Pettigrew, T. F. (1991). Normative theory in intergroup relations: Explaining both harmony and
conflict. Psychology and Developing Societies, 3, 3–16.
https://doi.org/10.1177/097133369100300102
Pettigrew, T. F. (2018). The emergence of contextual social psychology. Personality and Social
Psychology Bulletin, 44(7), 963-971. https://doi.org/10.1177/0146167218756033
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
Poslon, X. D., Lášticová, B., Popper, M., Hargašová, L., & Belán D. (2020). D2.9 Národná
správa. Postoje, politický diskurz a kolektívne správanie majority voči Rómom na
Slovensku. Výsledky reprezentatívneho prieskumu v rámci projektu DG JUST PolRom.
http://polrom.eu/wp-content/uploads/2020/02/d2.9-country-report-slovakia-sk.pdf
Riek, B. M., Mania, E. W., & Gaertner, S. L. (2006). Intergroup threat and outgroup attitudes:
A meta-analytic review. Personality and social psychology review, 10(4), 336-353.
https://doi.org/10.1207/s15327957pspr1004_4
Sarrasin, O., Green, E. G., Fasel, N., Christ, O., Staerkle, C., & Clemence, A. (2012).
Opposition to anti-racism laws across Swiss municipalities: A multilevel analysis.
Political Psychology, 33, 659–681. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1467-9221.2012.00895.x
Schlueter, E., & Scheepers, P. (2010). The relationship between outgroup size and anti-
outgroup attitudes: A theoretical synthesis and empirical test of group threat-and
intergroup contact theory. Social Science Research, 39(2), 285-295.
https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ssresearch.2009.07.006
Schlueter, E., & Wagner, U. (2008). Regional differences matter: Examining the dual influence
of the regional size of the immigrant population on derogation of immigrants in Europe.
International Journal of Comparative Sociology, 49(2-3), 153-173.
https://doi.org/10.1177/0020815207088910

144
Sechrist, G. B., Stangor, C., & Killen, M. (2005). Prejudice as social norms. In C. S. Crandall
& M. Schaller (Eds.), Social psychology of prejudice: Historical and contemporary issues
(pp. 163-183). Lawrence, KS: Lewinian.
Sherif, M., & Sherif, C. W. (1953). Groups in harmony and tension; an integration of studies
of intergroup relations. New York: Harper and Row.
Stangor, C., Sechrist, G. B., & Jost, J. T. (2001). Changing racial beliefs by providing consensus
information. Personality and Social Psychology Bulletin, 27(4), 486-496.
https://doi.org/10.1177/0146167201274009
Statistical Office of the Slovak Republic (2018). Stock of population in the SR on 31th
December 2018. https://www.susr.sk/wps/portal?urile=wcm:path:/obsah-en-inf-
akt/informativne-spravy/vsetky/53574f49-236a-4825-9db7-126a97ca429a
Tankard, M. E., & Paluck, E. L. (2016). Norm perception as a vehicle for social change. Social
Issues and Policy Review, 10(1), 181-211. https://doi.org/10.1111/sipr.12022
Tropp, L. R., O'Brien, T. C., González Gutierrez, R., Valdenegro, D., Migacheva, K., de
Tezanos‐Pinto, P., ... & Cayul, O. (2016). How school norms, peer norms, and
discrimination predict interethnic experiences among ethnic minority and majority youth.
Child Development, 87(5), 1436-1451. https://doi.org/10.1111/cdev.12608
Verkuyten, M., & Reijerse, A. (2008). Intergroup structure and identity management among
ethnic minority and majority groups: The interactive effects of perceived stability,
legitimacy, and permeability. European Journal of Social Psychology, 38(1), 106-127.
https://doi.org/10.1002/ejsp.395
Visintin, E. P., Berent, J., Green, E. G., & Falomir‐Pichastor, J. M. (2019). The interplay
between social dominance orientation and intergroup contact in explaining support for
multiculturalism. Journal of Applied Social Psychology, 49(5), 319-327.
https://doi.org/10.1111/jasp.12587
Visintin, E. P., Green, E. G., Falomir-Pichastor, J. M., & Berent, J. (2020). Intergroup contact
moderates the influence of social norms on prejudice. Group Processes & Intergroup
Relations, 23(3), 418-440. https://doi.org/10.1177/1368430219839485
Wodak, R., & Krzyżanowski, M. (2017). Right-wing populism in Europe & USA: Contesting
politics & discourse beyond ‘Orbanism’ and ‘Trumpism’. Journal of Language and
Politics, 16(4), 471-484. https://doi.org/10.1075/jlp.17042.krz

145
Title: Proceedings from 7th Conference of Community Psychology in Slovakia 2020,
30th November – 1st December 2020 Bratislava
Editor: Mgr. Martina Baránková, PhD.
Reviewers:
Mgr. Katarína Křížová, PhD.
Institute of Applied Psychology, Faculty of Social and Economic Sciences, Comenius
University in Bratislava
Mgr. Jana Koróniová, PhD.
Institute of Experimental Psychology, Slovak Academy of Sciences, Bratislava
Mgr. Juraj Petrík, PhD.
Department of Psychology and Pathopsychology, Faculty of Education, Comenius University
in Bratislava
The authors of individual contributions are responsible for the professional and linguistic
aspects. The publication has not been proofreaded.
Publisher: Comenius University in Bratislava, Comenius University for Applied Psychology,
Faculty of Social and Economic Sciences, Comenius University in Bratislava
Place of publication: Bratislava
Edition: 1st
Year of publication: 2020
Number of pages: 145
The proceedings are published as an electronic publication at:
https://fses.uniba.sk/pracoviska/ustavy/ustav-aplikovanej-
psychologie/komunitna-psychologia-na-slovensku/
© Institute of Applied Psychology, Faculty of Social and Economic Sciences, Comenius
University, Bratislava, Slovakia 2020
Comenius University in Bratislava
ISBN 978-80-223-5034-1