Chantelle Wood, Sofia Persson, Lilith Roberts, Oliver Allchin, Melanie Simmonds-Buckley
{"title":"面对偏见能减少群体间的偏见吗?荟萃分析综述。","authors":"Chantelle Wood, Sofia Persson, Lilith Roberts, Oliver Allchin, Melanie Simmonds-Buckley","doi":"10.1037/bul0000466","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><p>Confronting prejudice is a promising strategy for reducing intergroup bias. The current meta-analysis estimated the effects of confronting prejudice on intergroup bias in the confronted person and examined the impact of potential moderators. Eligible studies measured intergroup bias in participants confronted versus not confronted for intergroup bias. A three-level mixed-effects analysis on 91 effect sizes found a significant, medium-sized effect of confronting prejudice on reducing intergroup bias (g<sub>+</sub> = 0.54). There was only limited evidence of publication bias. Confrontation was differentially effective at reducing different types of intergroup bias with a medium-to-large effect on using or endorsing stereotypes, small-to-medium effects on behavior and behavioral intentions, and no significant effects on cognitive prejudice. Effects were otherwise largely robust to differences in confrontation, sample, and study design characteristics. Yet, studies predominantly focused on whether confronting the use of stereotypes reduced subsequent use of stereotypes in artificial settings, and primarily sampled U.S.-based, young, White adults, making it difficult to generalize effects to other forms of intergroup bias and populations, particularly in real-world settings. Studies also tended to measure intergroup bias immediately after confrontation, so the duration of effects over longer periods is less clear. To better evaluate the potential of confrontation as a prejudice reduction technique, future research should examine whether confronting prejudice reduces different forms of intergroup bias in more diverse participant samples and settings, over longer periods, and further test theoretical mediators of these effects. (PsycInfo Database Record (c) 2025 APA, all rights reserved).</p>","PeriodicalId":20854,"journal":{"name":"Psychological bulletin","volume":"151 2","pages":"192-216"},"PeriodicalIF":17.3000,"publicationDate":"2025-02-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Does confronting prejudice reduce intergroup bias? A meta-analytic review.\",\"authors\":\"Chantelle Wood, Sofia Persson, Lilith Roberts, Oliver Allchin, Melanie Simmonds-Buckley\",\"doi\":\"10.1037/bul0000466\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"<p><p>Confronting prejudice is a promising strategy for reducing intergroup bias. The current meta-analysis estimated the effects of confronting prejudice on intergroup bias in the confronted person and examined the impact of potential moderators. Eligible studies measured intergroup bias in participants confronted versus not confronted for intergroup bias. A three-level mixed-effects analysis on 91 effect sizes found a significant, medium-sized effect of confronting prejudice on reducing intergroup bias (g<sub>+</sub> = 0.54). There was only limited evidence of publication bias. Confrontation was differentially effective at reducing different types of intergroup bias with a medium-to-large effect on using or endorsing stereotypes, small-to-medium effects on behavior and behavioral intentions, and no significant effects on cognitive prejudice. Effects were otherwise largely robust to differences in confrontation, sample, and study design characteristics. Yet, studies predominantly focused on whether confronting the use of stereotypes reduced subsequent use of stereotypes in artificial settings, and primarily sampled U.S.-based, young, White adults, making it difficult to generalize effects to other forms of intergroup bias and populations, particularly in real-world settings. Studies also tended to measure intergroup bias immediately after confrontation, so the duration of effects over longer periods is less clear. To better evaluate the potential of confrontation as a prejudice reduction technique, future research should examine whether confronting prejudice reduces different forms of intergroup bias in more diverse participant samples and settings, over longer periods, and further test theoretical mediators of these effects. (PsycInfo Database Record (c) 2025 APA, all rights reserved).</p>\",\"PeriodicalId\":20854,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Psychological bulletin\",\"volume\":\"151 2\",\"pages\":\"192-216\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":17.3000,\"publicationDate\":\"2025-02-01\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Psychological bulletin\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"102\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.1037/bul0000466\",\"RegionNum\":1,\"RegionCategory\":\"心理学\",\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"Q1\",\"JCRName\":\"PSYCHOLOGY\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Psychological bulletin","FirstCategoryId":"102","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1037/bul0000466","RegionNum":1,"RegionCategory":"心理学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q1","JCRName":"PSYCHOLOGY","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0
摘要
面对偏见是减少群体间偏见的一种有希望的策略。当前的荟萃分析估计了面对偏见对面对者群体间偏见的影响,并检查了潜在调节因子的影响。符合条件的研究测量了面临组间偏倚和未面临组间偏倚的参与者的组间偏倚。对91个效应量的三水平混合效应分析发现,面对偏见对减少组间偏见有显著的中等效应(g+ = 0.54)。只有有限的证据表明存在发表偏倚。对抗对减少不同类型的群体间偏见有不同的效果,对刻板印象的使用或赞同有中等到较大的影响,对行为和行为意图有中等到中等的影响,对认知偏见没有显著影响。除此之外,效应在对抗、样本和研究设计特征上的差异很大程度上是稳健的。然而,研究主要集中在面对刻板印象的使用是否会减少在人工环境中对刻板印象的后续使用,并且主要以美国的年轻白人成年人为样本,因此很难将影响推广到其他形式的群体间偏见和人群,特别是在现实环境中。研究还倾向于在对抗后立即测量组间偏见,因此在较长时间内影响的持续时间不太清楚。为了更好地评估对抗作为一种减少偏见技术的潜力,未来的研究应该检查在更多样化的参与者样本和环境中,面对偏见是否会在更长的时间内减少不同形式的群体间偏见,并进一步测试这些影响的理论中介。(PsycInfo Database Record (c) 2025 APA,版权所有)。
Does confronting prejudice reduce intergroup bias? A meta-analytic review.
Confronting prejudice is a promising strategy for reducing intergroup bias. The current meta-analysis estimated the effects of confronting prejudice on intergroup bias in the confronted person and examined the impact of potential moderators. Eligible studies measured intergroup bias in participants confronted versus not confronted for intergroup bias. A three-level mixed-effects analysis on 91 effect sizes found a significant, medium-sized effect of confronting prejudice on reducing intergroup bias (g+ = 0.54). There was only limited evidence of publication bias. Confrontation was differentially effective at reducing different types of intergroup bias with a medium-to-large effect on using or endorsing stereotypes, small-to-medium effects on behavior and behavioral intentions, and no significant effects on cognitive prejudice. Effects were otherwise largely robust to differences in confrontation, sample, and study design characteristics. Yet, studies predominantly focused on whether confronting the use of stereotypes reduced subsequent use of stereotypes in artificial settings, and primarily sampled U.S.-based, young, White adults, making it difficult to generalize effects to other forms of intergroup bias and populations, particularly in real-world settings. Studies also tended to measure intergroup bias immediately after confrontation, so the duration of effects over longer periods is less clear. To better evaluate the potential of confrontation as a prejudice reduction technique, future research should examine whether confronting prejudice reduces different forms of intergroup bias in more diverse participant samples and settings, over longer periods, and further test theoretical mediators of these effects. (PsycInfo Database Record (c) 2025 APA, all rights reserved).
期刊介绍:
Psychological Bulletin publishes syntheses of research in scientific psychology. Research syntheses seek to summarize past research by drawing overall conclusions from many separate investigations that address related or identical hypotheses.
A research synthesis typically presents the authors' assessments:
-of the state of knowledge concerning the relations of interest;
-of critical assessments of the strengths and weaknesses in past research;
-of important issues that research has left unresolved, thereby directing future research so it can yield a maximum amount of new information.