Friends Without Benefits? Contact Does Not Predict Weaker Status Bias.

The often-implicit definition of prejudice as outgroup prejudice has been criticized for its strong focus on group distinctions (e.g., intergroup or ingroup bias) while overlooking prejudices rooted in group-based hierarchies, which are often shared among both ingroup and outgroup members. The latter has been described as status bias, the tendency to prefer high-status groups over low-status groups. Research on intergroup contact has so far not distinguished between the two biases, a blind spot of the field. This study investigates the potential of intergroup contact to reduce ingroup bias and status bias. Throughout a cross-sectional (Study 1, N = 571), longitudinal (Study 2; N = 6,995), and a vignette experiment (Study 3; N = 3,007), contact with various social groups and their evaluations were assessed. Results reveal that the largest effects across all studies were the direct associations of contact with group evaluation, irrespective of group membership and group status. Moreover, contact predicted weaker ingroup bias but stronger status bias cross-sectionally and longitudinally, indicating that status bias is a form of prejudice that contact cannot reduce. The effects of contact were particularly pronounced for belief-indicative but not status-indicative groups. These patterns have previously been unobserved due to the lack of distinction between biases. This study suggests that distinguishing between biases can help determine which prejudice is at hand in a given situation and whether a certain intervention is capable of reducing it – different biases may demand different interventions.