1. The impact of different dimensions of intergroup contact in reducing prejudice Rhiannon Turner University of Leeds 9 March 2009, CRONEM Seminar Series 9 March 2009, CRONEM Seminar Series University of Surrey

2. Background to the research Prejudice continues to thrive in the UK Prejudice continues to thrive in the UK Ethnic prejudiceEthnic prejudice In 2007-2008, police recorded over 35,000 incidences of racially aggravated harassment, common assault and wounding in England and Wales (Home Office statistics, 2008) In 2007-2008, police recorded over 35,000 incidences of racially aggravated harassment, common assault and wounding in England and Wales (Home Office statistics, 2008) AgeismAgeism Age Concern (2006) found that people reported suffering from more age discrimination than any other form of discrimination Age Concern (2006) found that people reported suffering from more age discrimination than any other form of discrimination HomophobiaHomophobia 2/3 gay respondents bullied at school on grounds of sexuality, (YouGov poll, 2008) 2/3 gay respondents bullied at school on grounds of sexuality, (YouGov poll, 2008)

3. Background to the research In the UK…. In the UK…. 4.6 million people (8% of UK population) belong to a minority ethnic group4.6 million people (8% of UK population) belong to a minority ethnic group 3.6 million people (6% of UK population) are gay or lesbian3.6 million people (6% of UK population) are gay or lesbian 11.6 million people (19% of UK population) are of pensionable age (60 for women, 65 for men)11.6 million people (19% of UK population) are of pensionable age (60 for women, 65 for men)

4. Background to the research Segregated communities Segregated communities 47% ethnic minorities live in London47% ethnic minorities live in London 13.5% in West Midlands13.5% in West Midlands North East, Wales, and South West almost exclusively WhiteNorth East, Wales, and South West almost exclusively White Distribution has barely changed since the 1960sDistribution has barely changed since the 1960s Lack of meaningful contact between different communities Lack of meaningful contact between different communities

5. Intergroup contact hypothesis Contact between members of different groups will lead to more harmonious intergroup relations (Allport, 1954) Contact between members of different groups will lead to more harmonious intergroup relations (Allport, 1954) Cooperation to achieve common goalsCooperation to achieve common goals Equal statusEqual status Institutional supportInstitutional support Extensive evidence to date Extensive evidence to date Pettigrew & Tropp (2006) –meta-analysis of 515 studiesPettigrew & Tropp (2006) –meta-analysis of 515 studies

6. The current research 3 key questions 3 key questions What types of contact reduce prejudice?What types of contact reduce prejudice? What processes underlie these relationships?What processes underlie these relationships? What consequences do they have for intergroup relations?What consequences do they have for intergroup relations?

7. The current research Face-to-face contact Face-to-face contact Cross-group friendship Cross-group friendship Indirect forms of contact Indirect forms of contact Extended contactExtended contact Imagined contactImagined contact Implications and Applications Implications and Applications

8. Cross-group friendship Pettigrew (1997) found that friendships that cross group boundaries reduced prejudice more than neighbour and co-worker contact Pettigrew (1997) found that friendships that cross group boundaries reduced prejudice more than neighbour and co-worker contact Interactions are close and positiveInteractions are close and positive Exchange of intimate informationExchange of intimate information Extensive and repeated contactExtensive and repeated contact Automatically meets key conditions of contact hypothesis, e.g., common goals and cooperationAutomatically meets key conditions of contact hypothesis, e.g., common goals and cooperation

9. Cross-group friendship: Mediators Self-disclosure Self-disclosure Interpersonal relations literatureInterpersonal relations literature The voluntary provision of significant aspects of oneself, or information that is of an intimate or personal nature, to another person The voluntary provision of significant aspects of oneself, or information that is of an intimate or personal nature, to another person Prominent feature of theories of friendship development (e.g., Altman & Taylor, 1973; Reis & Shaver, 1988) Prominent feature of theories of friendship development (e.g., Altman & Taylor, 1973; Reis & Shaver, 1988)

10. Cross-group friendship: Mediators Self-disclosure Self-disclosure Disclosure should be a particularly important component of cross-group friendships Disclosure should be a particularly important component of cross-group friendships Crucial aspect of interpersonal friendships that leads to interpersonal attraction Crucial aspect of interpersonal friendships that leads to interpersonal attraction Follows that in the context of a close intergroup relationship, it should lead to intergroup attraction – more positive outgroup attitudes Follows that in the context of a close intergroup relationship, it should lead to intergroup attraction – more positive outgroup attitudes

11. Cross-group friendship: Mediators Intergroup anxiety Intergroup anxiety Negative arousal generated at the prospect of an intergroup encounter: Fear of incompetence, fear of rejection  contact avoidanceNegative arousal generated at the prospect of an intergroup encounter: Fear of incompetence, fear of rejection  contact avoidance Arousal depletes cognitive resources to process information  narrowed focus of attention, increased stereotyping Arousal depletes cognitive resources to process information  narrowed focus of attention, increased stereotyping Anxious body language is interpreted as dislike / racism by outgroup member Anxious body language is interpreted as dislike / racism by outgroup member

12. Cross-group friendship: Mediators Intergroup anxiety Intergroup anxiety Arises when minimal previous contact and large intergroup status differences (Stephan & Stephan, 1985)Arises when minimal previous contact and large intergroup status differences (Stephan & Stephan, 1985)But… High quality intergroup contact  lower intergroup anxiety  reduced prejudice (e.g., Paolini et al., 2004)High quality intergroup contact  lower intergroup anxiety  reduced prejudice (e.g., Paolini et al., 2004)

13. Cross-group friendship: Consequences Explicit attitudes Explicit attitudes Conscious, deliberative, and controllableConscious, deliberative, and controllable Captured by self-report measuresCaptured by self-report measures Implicit attitudes Implicit attitudes Unintentionally activated by mere presence (actual or symbolic) of an attitude objectUnintentionally activated by mere presence (actual or symbolic) of an attitude object Unconscious or difficult to controlUnconscious or difficult to control

14. Cross-group friendship 1: Research White primary school children aged 7-11 completed the IAT and measures regarding their experiences with Asian people, N = 60 Predictor variable Cross-group friendship: How many Asian friends do you have? Mediator variables Intergroup anxiety: To what extent would you feel tense, worried, relaxed, scared if you had to work with a group of Asian students Self-disclosure: If you had a problem you were worried about, how likely is it that you would tell someone Asian? Criterion variables Explicit outgroup attitude: To what extent do you think the following about Asians: positive – negative, nice – horrible Implicit outgroup attitude: Implicit association test (Greenwald, McGhee, & Schwartz, 1998), adapted for primary school children

15. Cross-group friendship 1: Findings Data from: Turner, R. N., Hewstone, M., & Voci, A. (2007, Study 1). Reducing explicit and implicit prejudice via direct and extended contact: The mediating role of self-disclosure and intergroup anxiety. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 93, 369-388 Implicit outgroup attitude (IAT) Intergroup anxiety Self-disclosure.29* -.44***.41***.56*** R 2 =.07 Cross-group friendship -.26* Explicit outgroup attitude R 2 =.57

16. Cross-group friendship 2: Background What type of disclosure works best? What type of disclosure works best? Social penetration theorySocial penetration theory Close relationships develop as a result of a gradual escalation of the breadth and intimacy of information disclosed Close relationships develop as a result of a gradual escalation of the breadth and intimacy of information disclosed In an intergroup contextIn an intergroup context Breadth and intimacy of disclosure during cross- group friendships should both be associated with more positive intergroup relations Breadth and intimacy of disclosure during cross- group friendships should both be associated with more positive intergroup relations BUT…quality / intimacy of contact is more effective at reducing prejudice than less intimate forms of contact (Pettigrew, 1997) BUT…quality / intimacy of contact is more effective at reducing prejudice than less intimate forms of contact (Pettigrew, 1997) So we expect intimacy of disclosure to be more important than breadth… So we expect intimacy of disclosure to be more important than breadth…

17. Cross-group friendship 2: Method Cross-sectional questionnaire with 60 White undergraduate students (aged 18-22), regarding their attitudes towards and experiences with the Asian community Cross-sectional questionnaire with 60 White undergraduate students (aged 18-22), regarding their attitudes towards and experiences with the Asian community Predictor Variable:Predictor Variable: Cross-group friendship (2 items): e.g., “How many Asian friends do you have?” Cross-group friendship (2 items): e.g., “How many Asian friends do you have?” Mediator Variables:Mediator Variables: Intimacy of self-disclosure (4 items): e.g., How often do you talk to the Asian person you know best about personal / relationship / family issues etc Intimacy of self-disclosure (4 items): e.g., How often do you talk to the Asian person you know best about personal / relationship / family issues etc Breadth of self-disclosure (4 items): e.g., Thinking of the nature of topics you discuss with the Asian person you know best, are they very specific – (i.e. only one topic discussed) – very broad (i.e., many and varied topics discussed) Breadth of self-disclosure (4 items): e.g., Thinking of the nature of topics you discuss with the Asian person you know best, are they very specific – (i.e. only one topic discussed) – very broad (i.e., many and varied topics discussed) Criterion Variables:Criterion Variables: Explicit outgroup attitude (5 items): e.g., My feelings towards Asian people are negative-positive, bad-good etc” Explicit outgroup attitude (5 items): e.g., My feelings towards Asian people are negative-positive, bad-good etc”

18. Cross-group Friendship 2: Findings 1234 1Friendship-- 2Intimacy.62**-- 3Breadth.06.14-- 4Attitude.28*.46**.12-- N = 60, *p <.05, **p <.01

19. Cross-group friendship 2: Findings Cross-group friendship Outgroup Attitude Intimacy of self-disclosure  =.52, p =.033  = -.03, p =.926  =.36, p =.003  =.623, p =.001 Z = 2.75, p =.005

20. Cross-group friendship 3: Background  Why should self-disclosure in cross-group friendships reduce intergroup prejudice?  It generates empathy  It is perceived to be of personal importance  It promotes reciprocal trust

21. Cross-group friendship 3: Background Empathy is a vicarious emotional state triggered by witnessing and understanding the thoughts and feelings of another Empathy is a vicarious emotional state triggered by witnessing and understanding the thoughts and feelings of another Self-disclosure increases intimacy and attraction because it leads the discloser to believe that they are understood, accepted and appreciatedSelf-disclosure increases intimacy and attraction because it leads the discloser to believe that they are understood, accepted and appreciated Empathy in an intergroup context has been shown to generate more positive attitudes towards the outgroup (Batson et al., 1997)Empathy in an intergroup context has been shown to generate more positive attitudes towards the outgroup (Batson et al., 1997)

22. Cross-group friendship 3: Background Perceived-importance Perceived-importance Self-expansion model: People engage in friendship in order to increase the social resources, perspectives, and identities, to facilitate their achievement of personal goals (Aron et al., 2001) Self-expansion model: People engage in friendship in order to increase the social resources, perspectives, and identities, to facilitate their achievement of personal goals (Aron et al., 2001) Van Dick et al. (2004): Cross-group friendships reduced prejudice because they were perceived as being personally important, valuable in helping to achieve certain goals, e.g., Van Dick et al. (2004): Cross-group friendships reduced prejudice because they were perceived as being personally important, valuable in helping to achieve certain goals, e.g., Development of new social skillsDevelopment of new social skills New experiences, learning about different culturesNew experiences, learning about different cultures According to the self-expansion model, much of this personal development in a friendship is achieved through self-disclosure. According to the self-expansion model, much of this personal development in a friendship is achieved through self-disclosure.

23. Cross-group friendship 3: Background Trust: Expression of confidence in another person or group that one will not be put at risk or harmed by their actions Trust: Expression of confidence in another person or group that one will not be put at risk or harmed by their actions The more we learn about someone (e.g., through disclosure), the more certain we can be about how they will behave in critical, integrity-testing situations The more we learn about someone (e.g., through disclosure), the more certain we can be about how they will behave in critical, integrity-testing situations Evidence Evidence Kerr, Stattin, and Trost (1999): Children’s self-disclosure predicted parental trustKerr, Stattin, and Trost (1999): Children’s self-disclosure predicted parental trust Relationship between self-disclosure and trust is likely to be reciprocal Relationship between self-disclosure and trust is likely to be reciprocal People like and trust those who trust them People like and trust those who trust them

24. Cross-group friendship 3: Method 148 White British undergraduate students, aged 17-26, Target Group: Asian 148 White British undergraduate students, aged 17-26, Target Group: Asian Predictor Variable: Cross-group friendship (2 items): e.g., ‘How many Asian friends do you have at University?’Cross-group friendship (2 items): e.g., ‘How many Asian friends do you have at University?’ Mediator Variables: Self-Disclosure (6 items): e.g., How often do you talk about how you are feeling to someone Asian?’Self-Disclosure (6 items): e.g., How often do you talk about how you are feeling to someone Asian?’ Empathy (2 items): e.g., “If I hear about the misfortunes of Asians, it usually disturbs me a great deal”Empathy (2 items): e.g., “If I hear about the misfortunes of Asians, it usually disturbs me a great deal” Importance of contact (5 items): e.g., “How valuable / rewarding our the interactions you have with Asian people?”Importance of contact (5 items): e.g., “How valuable / rewarding our the interactions you have with Asian people?” Trust (4 items): e.g., “I can trust Asian people with personal information about myself”Trust (4 items): e.g., “I can trust Asian people with personal information about myself” Criterion Variables: Outgroup attitude (4 items): e.g., “To what extent do you feel warm- cold, friendly-hostile, respect-contempt, admiration-disgust towards AsiansOutgroup attitude (4 items): e.g., “To what extent do you feel warm- cold, friendly-hostile, respect-contempt, admiration-disgust towards Asians

25. Cross-group friendship 3: Findings Cross-group friendship.63***.28*** R 2 =.43 Self-disclosure Intergroup trust Empathy.47*** x1x1 y7y7 y8y8 y1y1 y3y3 y4y4 Importance of disclosure y5y5 y6y6 y9y9 y 10 y2y2.59***.24**.18(*).41*** Explicit outgroup attitude χ2 (8) = 12.58, p =.13; RMSEA =.06, SRMR =.019, CFI =.99 Data from: Turner, R. N., Hewstone, M., & Voci, A. (2007, Study 4). Reducing explicit and implicit prejudice via direct and extended contact: The mediating role of self-disclosure and intergroup anxiety. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 93, 369-388

26. But what about when cross-group friendship is not possible? Reliant on opportunity for contact (Phinney et al., 1997) Reliant on opportunity for contact (Phinney et al., 1997) Many examples of intergroup contexts where no such opportunities Many examples of intergroup contexts where no such opportunities Northern Ireland: Segregated Catholic and Protestant communitiesNorthern Ireland: Segregated Catholic and Protestant communities Bradford: Segregated Asian and White communitiesBradford: Segregated Asian and White communities

27. Extended contact Extended contact Extended contact Knowing ingroup members who have outgroup friends can reduce outgroup prejudice (Wright et al., 1997)Knowing ingroup members who have outgroup friends can reduce outgroup prejudice (Wright et al., 1997) Benefits for intergroup relations… Not reliant on opportunity for contactNot reliant on opportunity for contact Lowers intergroup anxiety because contact is not experienced first handLowers intergroup anxiety because contact is not experienced first hand

28. Conducted in 2002, a year after clashes between the National Front and the Anti- Nazi League led to riots in Bradford, largely involving Asian and White youths. Conducted in 2002, a year after clashes between the National Front and the Anti- Nazi League led to riots in Bradford, largely involving Asian and White youths. One of the worst riots ever seen in the UK: 36 arrested, 300 injured, estimated £10 million damage One of the worst riots ever seen in the UK: 36 arrested, 300 injured, estimated £10 million damage Extended contact

29. The Cantle Report: People in Bradford were living “parallel lives” in which Asians and Whites “do not seem to touch at any point, let alone overlap and produce any meaningful interchange” (Lord Ouseley)The Cantle Report: People in Bradford were living “parallel lives” in which Asians and Whites “do not seem to touch at any point, let alone overlap and produce any meaningful interchange” (Lord Ouseley) In our study…In our study… Can extended contact reduce prejudice in this segregated and conflicted setting? Can extended contact reduce prejudice in this segregated and conflicted setting? Comparison with cross-group friendship Comparison with cross-group friendship What role does opportunity for contact play?What role does opportunity for contact play? What mediating mechanisms are involved?What mediating mechanisms are involved?

30. Method 49 Asian and 49 White British secondary school students, aged 11-15 49 Asian and 49 White British secondary school students, aged 11-15 Predictor Variables:Predictor Variables: Opportunity for contact, e.g., ‘What % of people in your neighbourhood from other community?’ Opportunity for contact, e.g., ‘What % of people in your neighbourhood from other community?’ Cross-group friendship, e.g., ‘How many friends do you have from the other community?’ Cross-group friendship, e.g., ‘How many friends do you have from the other community?’ Extended contact, e.g., ‘How many people from your community do you know who have friends from the other community?’ Extended contact, e.g., ‘How many people from your community do you know who have friends from the other community?’ Mediator Variables:Mediator Variables: Intergroup Anxiety, e.g., ‘How nervous do you feel about mixing socially with Asians?’ Intergroup Anxiety, e.g., ‘How nervous do you feel about mixing socially with Asians?’ Out-group Self-Disclosure, e.g., How often do you talk about how you are feeling to someone from the other community?’ Out-group Self-Disclosure, e.g., How often do you talk about how you are feeling to someone from the other community?’ Criterion Variables:Criterion Variables: Explicit outgroup attitude (4 items) Explicit outgroup attitude (4 items) Implicit outgroup attitude (Greenwald et al., 1998; IAT) Implicit outgroup attitude (Greenwald et al., 1998; IAT)

31. Findings Opportunity for contact Cross-group friendship Explicit Outgroup attitude Extended contact Implicit outgroup attitude (IAT).33**.37***.30** -.18*.28** R 2 =.13 R 2 =.50 -.31**.25*.34*** Intergroup anxiety Self- disclosure Data from: Turner, R. N., Hewstone, M., & Voci, A. (2007, Study 2). Reducing explicit and implicit prejudice via direct and extended contact: The mediating role of self-disclosure and intergroup anxiety. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 93, 369-388

32. But what about when extended contact isn’t possible? Extended contact can be useful where face-to-face contact is not possible Extended contact can be useful where face-to-face contact is not possible But there may be contexts where there is highly pervasive, long term segregation But there may be contexts where there is highly pervasive, long term segregation In such cases, could simply imagining intergroup contact be sufficient to reduce prejudice? In such cases, could simply imagining intergroup contact be sufficient to reduce prejudice?

33. Imagining social contexts Garcia, Weaver, Moskowitz, and Darley (2002): Imagining the presence of others leads to a bystander apathy effect Garcia, Weaver, Moskowitz, and Darley (2002): Imagining the presence of others leads to a bystander apathy effect Why? Why? Social context priming: Increases accessibility of abstract concepts and feelings associated with the social contextSocial context priming: Increases accessibility of abstract concepts and feelings associated with the social context

34. Imagined intergroup contact Automatic processes Automatic processes Activates concepts associated with successful interactions with outgroup membersActivates concepts associated with successful interactions with outgroup members Feeling more comfortable Feeling more comfortable Less apprehension Less apprehension Deliberative processes Deliberative processes What would they learn?What would they learn? How would they feel during interaction?How would they feel during interaction? How would this influence perceptions of outgroup?How would this influence perceptions of outgroup?

35. Imagined intergroup contact Imagination condition Imagination condition “We would like you to take a minute to imagine yourself meeting [an outgroup] stranger for the first time. Imagine that the interaction is positive, relaxed and comfortable.”“We would like you to take a minute to imagine yourself meeting [an outgroup] stranger for the first time. Imagine that the interaction is positive, relaxed and comfortable.” Control condition Control condition “We would like you to take a minute to imagine an outdoor scene. Try to imagine aspects of the scene about you (e.g., is it a beach, a forest, are there trees, hills, what’s on the horizon).”“We would like you to take a minute to imagine an outdoor scene. Try to imagine aspects of the scene about you (e.g., is it a beach, a forest, are there trees, hills, what’s on the horizon).” But for recent studies, participants simply imagine meeting ‘a stranger’ (group membership not specified)But for recent studies, participants simply imagine meeting ‘a stranger’ (group membership not specified)

36. Imagined contact 1: Results Data from: Turner, R. N., Crisp, R. J., & Lambert, E. (2007; Experiment 1). Imagining intergroup contact can improve intergroup attitudes. Group Processes and Intergroup Relations, 10, 427-441. Task x Target interaction F (1, 26) = 4.50 p =.044 When young people imagine contact with the elderly….

37. How does imagined contact work? Face-to-face contact reduces prejudice via Face-to-face contact reduces prejudice via reduced anxiety (Turner et al., 2007b)reduced anxiety (Turner et al., 2007b) Does imagined contact work via similar process? Does imagined contact work via similar process?

38. Imagined contact 2: Results Data from: Turner, R. N., Crisp, R. J., & Lambert, E. (2007, Experiment 3). Imagining intergroup contact can improve intergroup attitudes. Group Processes and Intergroup Relations, 10, 427-441. t (25) = -3.71 p =.001 When straight men imagine contact with gay men…. t (25) = -2.10, p =.046

39. Imagined contact 2: Results Data from: Turner, R. N., Crisp, R. J., & Lambert, E. (2007; Experiment 3). Imagining intergroup contact can improve intergroup attitudes. Group Processes and Intergroup Relations, 10, 427-441. When straight men imagine contact with gay men…. Outgroup Evaluation Intergroup Anxiety  = -.388, p =.046  = -.006, p =.975  = -.641, p =.003  =.596, p =.001 Control vs. Imagined Contact Z = 2.47, p =.013

40. Alternative Explanations Priming and self-regulation Priming and self-regulation Priming the category “elderly” or “gay” may have led to a conscious attempt to regulate behaviour and appear non- prejudiced (Devine & Monteith, 1999).Priming the category “elderly” or “gay” may have led to a conscious attempt to regulate behaviour and appear non- prejudiced (Devine & Monteith, 1999). Demand Characteristics Demand Characteristics Participants may have guessed the rationale and attempted to confirm our hypothesesParticipants may have guessed the rationale and attempted to confirm our hypotheses

41. Priming? Task x Target interaction F (1, 21) = 5.09, p =.035, Turner, R. N., Crisp, R. J., & Lambert, E. (2007, Experiment 2). Imagining intergroup contact can improve intergroup attitudes. Group Processes and Intergroup Relations, 10, 427-441.

42. Demand Characteristics? Data from: Turner, R. N., & Crisp, R. J. (in press; Study 1). Imagining contact can reduce implicit intergroup prejudice. British Journal of Social Psychology Task x Trial interaction F (1, 23) = 20.95 p =.0005

43. Another potential limitation? Would imagined contact really reduce prejudice towards more stigmatized groups? Would imagined contact really reduce prejudice towards more stigmatized groups? Yes! Yes! British teenagers attitudes and behavioural tendencies towards asylum seekers (Turner, Christie, & Stanton, 2009)British teenagers attitudes and behavioural tendencies towards asylum seekers (Turner, Christie, & Stanton, 2009) Non-Muslim students implicit attitudes (IAT) towards Muslims (Turner & Crisp, in press; Study 2, BJSP)Non-Muslim students implicit attitudes (IAT) towards Muslims (Turner & Crisp, in press; Study 2, BJSP)

44. Implications and applications Intergroup contact (in its various forms) is associated with a range of positive consequences for intergroup relations Intergroup contact (in its various forms) is associated with a range of positive consequences for intergroup relations More positive explicit and implicit outgroup attitudesMore positive explicit and implicit outgroup attitudes More positive behavioural tendenciesMore positive behavioural tendencies Underlying processes Underlying processes Self disclosure, intergroup anxiety, intergroup trust, empathySelf disclosure, intergroup anxiety, intergroup trust, empathy

45. Implications and applications Intergroup contact is flexible Intergroup contact is flexible Direct, face-to-face contact (friendship) Direct, face-to-face contact (friendship) Useful in multicultural contextsUseful in multicultural contexts When it arises has a powerful effect compared to indirect forms of contact (Paolini et al., 2008, PSPB)When it arises has a powerful effect compared to indirect forms of contact (Paolini et al., 2008, PSPB) But not useful in segregated settingsBut not useful in segregated settings Practically difficult to instigate (expensive, time consuming, no guarantee friendships will develop)Practically difficult to instigate (expensive, time consuming, no guarantee friendships will develop) Indirect contact (extended and imagined contact) Indirect contact (extended and imagined contact) Useful in segregated settingsUseful in segregated settings Practically easy to instigate (inexpensive, takes a few minutes, can be used in classroom etc)Practically easy to instigate (inexpensive, takes a few minutes, can be used in classroom etc) But effects tend to be fairly weakBut effects tend to be fairly weak

46. Thanks to… Miles Hewstone (University of Oxford) Miles Hewstone (University of Oxford) Richard Crisp (University of Kent) Richard Crisp (University of Kent) My project students at Leeds My project students at Leeds Sanchia BiswasSanchia Biswas Zara ChristieZara Christie Sophie StantonSophie Stanton