intergroup contact, media exposure, and racial attitudes
TRANSCRIPT
This article was downloaded by: [New York University]On: 26 October 2014, At: 19:43Publisher: RoutledgeInforma Ltd Registered in England and Wales Registered Number: 1072954 Registeredoffice: Mortimer House, 37-41 Mortimer Street, London W1T 3JH, UK
Journal of Intercultural CommunicationResearchPublication details, including instructions for authors andsubscription information:http://www.tandfonline.com/loi/rjic20
Intergroup Contact, Media Exposure,and Racial AttitudesSrividya RamasubramanianPublished online: 24 Jul 2012.
To cite this article: Srividya Ramasubramanian (2013) Intergroup Contact, Media Exposure,and Racial Attitudes, Journal of Intercultural Communication Research, 42:1, 54-72, DOI:10.1080/17475759.2012.707981
To link to this article: http://dx.doi.org/10.1080/17475759.2012.707981
PLEASE SCROLL DOWN FOR ARTICLE
Taylor & Francis makes every effort to ensure the accuracy of all the information (the“Content”) contained in the publications on our platform. However, Taylor & Francis,our agents, and our licensors make no representations or warranties whatsoever as tothe accuracy, completeness, or suitability for any purpose of the Content. Any opinionsand views expressed in this publication are the opinions and views of the authors,and are not the views of or endorsed by Taylor & Francis. The accuracy of the Contentshould not be relied upon and should be independently verified with primary sourcesof information. Taylor and Francis shall not be liable for any losses, actions, claims,proceedings, demands, costs, expenses, damages, and other liabilities whatsoever orhowsoever caused arising directly or indirectly in connection with, in relation to or arisingout of the use of the Content.
This article may be used for research, teaching, and private study purposes. Anysubstantial or systematic reproduction, redistribution, reselling, loan, sub-licensing,systematic supply, or distribution in any form to anyone is expressly forbidden. Terms &Conditions of access and use can be found at http://www.tandfonline.com/page/terms-and-conditions
Intergroup Contact, Media Exposure,and Racial Attitudes
Srividya Ramasubramanian
The present investigation uses intergroup contact and media systems’ dependencytheories to illuminate the relative significance of various sources of information in
shaping Caucasian-American attitudes toward African-Americans. It uses empiricaldata from an exploratory survey of college students to build a chain of related variablesthat link primary sources of information (face-to-face versus mediated) to stereotypical
beliefs, perceived internal causal attributions for African-Americans’ failures, andprejudicial feelings toward African-Americans. Results suggest that face-to-face sources
of racial/ethnic out-group information are more effective than mediated sources inprejudice reduction. The discussion includes theoretical and practical implications of the
findings.
Keywords: Intergroup Contact; Media Effects; Contact Hypothesis; Racial Stereotypes;
Intercultural Communication
(Received 1 March 2012; final version received 27 June 2012)
In the course of the past few decades, several studies illuminated socialization of
racial/ethnic out-groups’ cultural stereotypes through a variety of sources—family,
friends, acquaintances, and media. Real-world opportunities for spontaneous
meaningful inter-racial contact in homes, at work, and in academic settings have
increased in the United States due to changing racial demographics and policies, such
as affirmative action and desegregation. Yet many individuals rely quite heavily on
media sources: news reports or fictional entertainment, for most of their insight into
racial/ethnic out-groups. The present investigation uses intergroup contact and
media systems’ dependency theories to understand the relative significance of various
Srividya Ramasubramanian earned her PhD in Mass Communication from the Pennsylvania State University in
2004. She is currently an Associate Professor of Communication at Texas A&M University. Her research
interests are in the areas of media stereotyping of race and gender, positive media psychology, and media
literacy. Correspondence to Srividya Ramasubramanian, 202D Bolton Hall, Department of Communication,
MS 4234, Texas A&M University, College Station, TX 77843, USA. Email: [email protected]
� 2013 World Communication Association
http://dx.doi.org/10.1080/17475759.2012.707981Journal of Intercultural Communication ResearchVol. 42, No. 1, 54–72,
, 2013
Dow
nloa
ded
by [
New
Yor
k U
nive
rsity
] at
19:
43 2
6 O
ctob
er 2
014
sources of information (mediated sources versus face-to-face interpersonal sources)
in shaping Caucasian-American attitudes toward African-Americans.Considering the sheer amount of exposure, mass media serves as an active agent of
socialization for shaping audiences’ social realities. Mediated information is
especially likely to be influential in attitudinal formation when direct inter-racial
experience is negligible. Media dependency theory (Ball-Rokeach, 1976) posits that
viewers who depend heavily on mediated sources of information are likely to hold
worldviews of social reality that are similar to the media’s ‘‘reality.’’ Thus, individuals
who depend mainly on the media to gain insight into racial/ethnic out-groups might
have more media-consistent, stereotypical views of those groups when lacking direct
experience from face-to-face interactions with out-groups’ members.Along with mass media, interpersonal communication with friends, family,
colleagues, and acquaintances are also important sources of information that shape
attitudes and beliefs, especially relating to those from ethnic/racial groups not within
everyday social circles. According to intergroup contact theory, contact between
members of various social groups, especially through intergroup friendships, leads to
positive outcomes, such as mutual respect and friendliness. Most of the research on
contact hypothesis has focused almost exclusively on interpersonal communication
between people of different groups without significantly attending to other forms of
contact in promoting attitudinal change and leading to prejudice-reduction.
Although intergroup contact has more recently been expanded beyond traditional
face-to-face interactions to also include mediated contact (Harwood, 2010; Ortiz &
Harwood, 2007; Park, 2012), very few studies have simultaneously compared the role
of face-to-face contact with mass-mediated contact.The present study aims to bridge these two theoretical bodies of literature:
interpersonal face-to-face contact and mediated intergroup contact. The study
attempts to reconcile the relative impact of interpersonal versus mediated sources of
information in shaping majority members’ attitudes toward out-groups. The
contribution to scholarship occurs through comparing the racial attitudes of
Caucasian-Americans, whose primary sources of information regarding African-
Americans is media (television, movies, newspapers, etc.), with those whose primary
sources is non-mediated (face-to-face interactions) (family, friends, and acquain-
tances). The research uses empirical data from an exploratory survey of college
students to build a chain of related variables that link primary sources of information
to relevant variables of interest, such as Caucasian-Americans’ real-world stereo-
typical beliefs, perceived internal causal attributions for African-Americans’ failures,
and prejudicial feelings toward African-Americans.
Media Exposure, Racial Stereotypes, and Causal Attributions
Historically, criticism of the media focuses on deficient, stereotypical, and
unfavorable portrayals of racial/ethnic out-groups. Among other demeaning
characterizations, prominent portrayal of African-Americans in mainstream media
55Journal of Intercultural Communication Research
Dow
nloa
ded
by [
New
Yor
k U
nive
rsity
] at
19:
43 2
6 O
ctob
er 2
014
emphasizes unlawful, unmotivated, and clownish behavior (Bogle, 2001; Dixon &
Linz, 2000; Entman, 1990; Stroman, Merritt, & Matabane, 1989). Although
contemporary media content appears to include more African-American characters,
the portrayals of African-Americans continue to be stereotypical and uni-
dimensional. Generation after generation, mainstream media reproduce the White
racial frame through cognitive schemas, visual imagery, feelings, and metaphors that
privilege and rationalize White superiority (Feagin, 2006). For instance, news reports
frequently use subtle cues and code words, such as welfare queens and inner-city
residents that implicitly reinforce societal stereotypes of African-Americans as ‘‘bad
minorities’’ who are disruptive and inferior. All these factors lend credence to
concerns raised by media scholars for the overall quality of portraits of African-
Americans in the media.
Mounting evidence supports the view that exposure to overwhelmingly negative
media imagery of African-Americans primes Caucasian-American audiences’
unfavorable social judgments toward the out-group (Dixon & Azocar, 2007;
Ford, 1997; Gilliam & Iyengar, 2000). Not only does stereotypical media contact
prime real-world stereotypical beliefs they also activate negative prejudicial
feelings such as dislike, fear, and discomfort (Bodenhausen, Gaelick, & Wyer,
1987; Ramasubramanian, 2011; Tan, Fujioka, & Lucht, 1997).
As if representing African-Americans using negative stereotypical attributes in and
of themselves are not problematic enough, media depictions routinely frame these
depictions in ways that blame African-Americans’ subordinate status in society on
their personal deficiencies rather than on societal factors such as discrimination and
lack of access to opportunities (Pan & Kosicki, 1998; Peffley, Hurwitz, & Sniderman,
1997; Ramasubramanian, 2010). According to the perspective of causal attributional
theory, failures of African-Americans arise from internal rather than external factors.
Dominant media frames, such as ‘‘The American Dream,’’ reinforce symbolic,
modern forms of racist myths that racism is non-existent in contemporary America
and that if racial/ethnic minorities are unsuccessful, the reason is their insufficient
ambition or tenacity (Entman, 1990; Sears, 1988). Although there is an increasing
focus on the study of the effects of media stereotypes on audiences’ racial attitudes,
little of research’s attention has examined the influence of the types of contacts with
out-groups’ on racial attitudes and causal attributions. The current study will
examine how the type of intergroup contact (mediated or face-to-face) influences
Caucasian-American audiences’ stereotypical beliefs, prejudicial feelings, and internal
causal attributions of failures of African-Americans as a whole.
Mediated Intergroup Contact and Prejudice Reduction
Although intergroup contact theory has not been studied extensively within media
effects scholarship, some researchers have described related processes such as
‘‘vicarious contact’’ (Fujioka, 1999), ‘‘parasocial contact’’ (Schiappa, 2005), and
mediated interpersonal contact (Ortiz & Harwood, 2007) (see Park, 2012 for a
56 S. Ramasubramanian
Dow
nloa
ded
by [
New
Yor
k U
nive
rsity
] at
19:
43 2
6 O
ctob
er 2
014
detailed explication). Vicarious contact draws from social cognitive theory and refers
to intergroup contact experienced through media exposure. In Fujioka’s study(1999), vicarious contact with African-Americans was higher for Caucasian-
American students as compared to Japanese international students in the sample.Parasocial contact, in contrast, focuses on in-group media consumers forming strong
emotional bonds with out-group media characters. For example, Schiappa (2005)and colleagues found that when audiences form friendship-like, intimate relation-
ships with out-group media characters, their attitudes toward the entire out-groupmight become more positive than before. Here the audience member identifiesdirectly with the out-group media character. However, in the ‘‘mediated
interpersonal contact’’ described by Ortiz and Harwood (2007), audience membersobserve and identify with an in-group media character that is a friend of and interacts
positively with an out-group character. Recently, there have been efforts to explicate,clarify, and synthesize these various terms relating to mediated intergroup contact
(see Harwood, 2010; Park, 2012). The current study conceptualizesmediated intergroup contact that is more in line with Fujioka’s definition of
‘‘vicarious contact,’’ focusing on intergroup contact through media consumptionregardless of whether parasocial relationships are formed with the out-groupcharacters
Mediated contact might play an especially instrumental role in influencing racialattitudes when direct interpersonal contact is lacking (Armstrong, Neuendorf, &
Brentar, 1992; Fujioka, 1999; Tan et al., 1997). According to media dependencytheory (Ball-Rokeach, 1976), the more people depend upon media for information,
the greater the chance that media’s messages will modify people’s stereotypicalattitudes, beliefs, and behaviors. When individuals believe that their personal first-
hand experiences are sufficient for making decisions concerning out-groups, thenmedia might not have any effect on influencing attitudes except by reinforcing
existing beliefs. However, media information is especially likely to be influential whenissues are outside the realm of immediate personal experience (Gamson, Croteau,Hoynes, & Sasson, 1992; Sotirovic, 2001).
Similarly, the cultivation hypothesis suggests that among individuals who lackdirect real-world experience with out-groups and those whose daily exposure to
media is very high depend on the media to a significantly greater degree for formingopinions and shaping attitudes (Armstrong et al., 1992; Fujioka, 1999; Tan et al.,
1997). These media viewers use recent and frequent media exemplars as primaryinformation for maintaining their schemas of racial/ethnic out-groups (Busselle &
Crandall, 2002). For example, a survey conducted by Mastro and colleaguessuggested that interpersonal intergroup contact might moderate the cultivationeffects of media exposure on real-world stereotypical beliefs(Mastro,
Behm-Morawitz, & Ortiz, 2007). Overall, within media effects scholarshiprelating to prejudice-reduction, there has been an increasing interest in mediated
intergroup contact. The present study will compare mediated intergroup contactwith non-mediated contact to understand their comparative effects on
racial attitudes.
57Journal of Intercultural Communication Research
Dow
nloa
ded
by [
New
Yor
k U
nive
rsity
] at
19:
43 2
6 O
ctob
er 2
014
Face-to Face Intergroup Contact and Prejudice Reduction
According to the original conceptualization of contact hypothesis, the focus was on
how interpersonal, face-to-face interactions between members of different groups
ameliorates prejudice and improves relations among groups. Allport (1954)
suggested four moderators that influence positive interactions among members of
different groups: equal status, cooperation rather than competition, potential for
long-term friendship, and institutional sponsorship. A meta-analytical study by
Pettigrew and Tropp (2006) supported the notion that increased intergroup contact
leads to prejudice reduction and also encourages positive relations between groups.
Applying these conditions to the context of mediated intergroup contact, it can be
hypothesized that development of parasocial relationships with out-group characters
are facilitated by identification with the character, potential for long-term exposure
to the media character, positive/cooperative behaviors displayed by the out-group
character, and cues within the media narrative that encourage viewer–character
relationships. Park (2012) interprets institutional support in mediated contexts as
social approval provided for the parasocial contact and also suggests that the
facilitator ‘‘potential for long-term friendship’’ in terms of repeated exposure to the
media character is especially important in mediated contexts. However, these
moderating variables have not been fully tested empirically within mediated contact
contexts. Some recent research suggests that exposure to intergroup friends in the
context of television can lead to positive changes in racial attitudes towards out-
groups (Ortiz & Harwood, 2007; Schiappa, 2005). Other viewer-related variables
such as empathy, perspective-taking, intergroup anxiety, and perceived typicality
have been identified as the potential moderators that could be tested in future
research (Park, 2012).Studies showed that, when children mature in multi-racial educational settings and
more racially diverse neighborhoods that allow for opportunities for inter-racial
contact, these children are more likely to have friends from racial/ethnic out-groups
later in life (Emerson, Kimbro, & Yancey, 2002). Research also suggested that
intercultural contact is most effective, leading to positive outcomes among groups,
when associations involve meaningful interactions such as intimate friendships
(Brown, 2005; Pettigrew & Tropp, 2006).The literature on interpersonal aspects of
communicational contact focuses mainly on examining relational aspects of the
development of inter-racial friendships over time. These studies operate from the
perspective of social penetration on the level of self-disclosure and from the angle of
uncertainty reduction (Martin, Trego, & Nakayama, 2010).Perhaps, face-to-face intergroup contact is an important, contingent factor in
determining the effects of media messages. From the perspective of social cognition,
internalization and selection of media’s depictions of racial discrimination creates
real-life models (Bandura, 1983). Vicarious learning from media could lead to
abstract modeling of racist behaviors/attitudes expressed in the media. However,
some evidence suggests that face-to-face, direct observations of social roles
can dampen mediated, vicarious learning (Armstrong et al., 1992; Greenberg &
58 S. Ramasubramanian
Dow
nloa
ded
by [
New
Yor
k U
nive
rsity
] at
19:
43 2
6 O
ctob
er 2
014
Atkin, 1982). Prior research demonstrated that willingness to express prejudice
without compunction depends on situational factors, such as perceived social norms,
motives, and focus of attention (Blair, 2002; Devine, Monteith, Zuwerink, & Elliot,
1991). Arguably, racist behavior toward non-Whites, presented in popular media
gains perception of shared cultural norms, leading audiences to interpret these
depictions as in-groups’ consensus and display less inhibition to display similar
behaviors in inter-racial interactions (Tan et al. 2001). That is, negative media
portrayals not only serve as models but also assist justification of prejudice
as normative.Several reasons exist to support face-to-face intercultural contact, compared to
mediated contact, as more effective in reduction of prejudice among people in
advantaged groups. For individuals who perceive stereotypical beliefs as exaggerated
generalizations, not based on factual information, exposure to counter-stereotypical
exemplars can influence shifting attitudes. Source credibility also influences the
relative impact of mediated and non-mediated sources of information.
An interpersonal source may represent more or less credibility for a given issue
when compared to mediated sources of information. According to Chaffee (1986),
individuals decide the value of a source of information based on topic, timing, and
accessibility. The trustworthiness of the source influences the level of acceptance of
new information. Direct, face-to-face contacts also offer richer, interactive
communicative experiences, compared to more passive mediated experiences.
Different forms of communication vary in their information-richness in terms of
both verbal and non-verbal cues relating to social presence, opportunities for
immediate feedback, numbers of modalities involved, and levels of personalization
(Daft, 1984; Harwood, 2010; Rice, 1992). Harwood (2010) in an excellent essay on
‘‘contact space,’’ distinguishes between various types of contact based on two
dimensions: the extent to which one’s self is involved in the contact context and the
level of richness of the contact experience. Communication is most effective when
the level of richness or social presence of a medium matches the complexity of the
communicative task. Face-to-face intergroup contact might offer a richer media
environment than mediated contact for a complex task such as reducing prejudice
and changing attitudes.
Present Study
Acknowledging that individuals could gain awareness of out-groups through
multiple channels and contact contexts, the present study’s exploration of
prejudice-reduction through intergroup contact depends on whether or not such
contact occurs via mass media or through face-to-face interactions. Specifically, the
research examines the relative importance of mediated versus face-to-face
informational sources for influencing Caucasian-Americans’ stereotypical attitudes,
prejudicial feelings, and causal attributions for failures of African-Americans as a
racial/ethnic out-group.
59Journal of Intercultural Communication Research
Dow
nloa
ded
by [
New
Yor
k U
nive
rsity
] at
19:
43 2
6 O
ctob
er 2
014
By merging contact hypothesis with media dependency perspective, the
expectation is that individuals who are more dependent on media for information
of out-groups, compared to people who have opportunities for direct, face-to-face
interpersonal contact with out-groups, are more likely to hold negative, stereotypical
beliefs of out-groups, internal causal attributions for out-groups’ failures, and
hostile feelings toward out-groups. Aligned with this expectation, the proposed
hypothesis is:
Hypothesis: Individuals, exposed primarily to mediated rather than non-mediatedsources of information will report greater stereotypical perceptions, strongerinternal, causal attributions, and more prejudicial feelings toward out-groups.
Method
Sample
Undergraduate students attending communication classes and recruited from a
predominantly White, large public university in the Southern part of United Statesare this study’s participants. Including Caucasian-American college students in this
convenience sample had the goal of encompassing a wide range of opportunities for
inter-racial interactions via mass media and interpersonal contact in dorms,
classrooms, student organizations, and with family, friends, and acquaintances.
Perceptions of, objectives for, and barriers to interpersonal communication during
contact and audiences’ reception of portrayals of racial/ethnic minorities vary greatly
depending on group membership (in-groups versus out-groups). Since the focus of
the present study is prejudice-reduction, the final analysis only includes members ofthe dominant group (Caucasian-Americans). The initial pool of 431 respondents
returned 345 completed, usable questionnaires. Of those who responded to ethnic
identity, 83.9% (N¼ 287), were Caucasian, non-Hispanic; 2.3% were Black, non-
Hispanic; 9.3 % were Hispanic; 2.0% were Asian; 2% used the identity, ‘‘Other.’’
Females represented 85.7% of participants (N¼ 246). The average age was 20.67
(SD¼ 1.104). Since this study’s main interest is prejudice-reduction among
Caucasian-Americans, the final analysis included only those participants who
self-identified as White, non-Hispanic.
Procedure
Participants completed a self-administered survey in exchange for nominal extra
credit in their communication courses. An alternative assignment was available for
those unable or unwilling to participate. With the permission of the instructors,
announcements concerning the study occurred during class time. After this
announcement, instructors received, by email, a link to the online survey, which
they forwarded, along with a solicitation for participation, to all enrolled students.
The design of the survey’s link required no identifying information from respondents
allowing them to remain anonymous. The survey’s link was active for one week
60 S. Ramasubramanian
Dow
nloa
ded
by [
New
Yor
k U
nive
rsity
] at
19:
43 2
6 O
ctob
er 2
014
during which participants could complete the questionnaire in approximately 20 to
30 minutes. Respondents had the option of exiting the survey at any time or ignoring
any discomfiting questions. The survey encouraged participants to provide honest
opinions and contained assurances that questions had no right or wrong answers.
Once the participants completed the survey, a printed, completion form, submitted
in class, provided documentation of participation, and for extra credit due.
Survey Items
The questionnaire consisted of a range of questions relating to stereotypical beliefs,
prejudicial feelings, internal causal attributions for failures, and participants’ primary
sources of information regarding out-groups. The instrument also included
questions of perceptions of racial/ethnic out-groups (such as people living in
Africa and Asian-Americans), perceptions of the justice system, opinions of policies,
hours of media usage, and enjoyment of various television genres. These variables
were beyond the scope of the hypothesis examined here and have no further
elucidation in this particular study. The questionnaire, titled ‘‘Global
Communication and Social Identity,’’ allows accommodating filler-questions relating
to all socio-cultural groups (beyond African-Americans) for masking purposes.
Stereotypical perceptions. Grounded in prior research, the variable for stereotypical
perceptions asked participants to indicate the extent to which their perceptions
dictate various traits and characteristics to be typical stereotypes of African-
Americans (Mastro & Kopacz, 2006; Pan & Kosicki, 1998; Ramasubramanian, 2011).
The focus was for explicit stereotypical knowledge rather than implicit stereotypical
application (Devine, 1989; Wittenbrink, Judd, & Park, 1997). In other words, these
items’ assessments were participants’ knowledge of cultural stereotypes of African-
Americans rather than their explicit beliefs of these stereotypes. Participants
responded on a seven-point Likert-type scale ranging from 1 (strongly disagree) to
7 (strongly agree) to the question: ‘‘Indicate the extent to which you agree that the
following traits describe African-Americans/Black people in general. Please be honest
in your responses.’’A factor analysis was conducted using principal axis extraction to reduce the items
into manageable clusters and varimax rotation was used to make the extracted factors
more interpretable. As per convention, eigenvalue of 1.0 was used as a cut-off and
items that loaded on more than one factor (as indicated by a factor loadings differing
by less than 1.5) or had loadings lesser than 0.33 were dropped from the analysis (see
Tabachnick & Fiddell, 2007 for more details). Although participants had a broad
range of positive traits (such as athletic and musical), negative traits (such as criminal
and lazy), and neutral traits (such as polite and nerdy) for responses, the participants
indicated that the dominant stereotypical traits associated with this racial/ethnic out-
group were mostly negative in nature. Specifically, the following eight items clustered
in a single index labeled ‘‘Stereotypical Perceptions’’: criminal, violent, lazy, drug
dealer, drug user, poor, dirty, and uneducated, with a Cronbach’s alpha of 0.91.
61Journal of Intercultural Communication Research
Dow
nloa
ded
by [
New
Yor
k U
nive
rsity
] at
19:
43 2
6 O
ctob
er 2
014
The expectation was that the type of primary source of information about African-
Americans would influence the strength of participants’ negative, stereotypical
perceptions of this racial/ethnic out-group. Two other factors that emerged from the
analysis consisted of model minority stereotypes associated with another racial/ethnicout-group, Asian-Americans, beyond the scope of this paper. These factors were
labeled ‘‘Smartness Index’’ that included nerdy and smart, with a Cronbach’s alpha of
0.75 and ‘‘Politeness Index’’ that included friendly and polite with a Cronbach’salpha of 0.77.
Internal causal attributions. The variable for internal causal attributions focused ondetermining if respondents’ attributions for failures of African-Americans resulted
from individuals’ characteristics, such as laziness, rather than societal causes, such asdiscrimination (Pan & Kosicki, 1998; Ramasubramanian, 2011). Based on causal
attribution theory, the negative stereotypes applied to subordinate racial/ethnic
out-groups, such as African-Americans, might gain justification from Caucasian-
Americans by placing the blame for disadvantaged positions on personalshortcomings of individuals in out-groups rather than systemic factors. By
attributing the failures of out-groups’ members to personal shortcomings, the
responsibility or blame for differential status, power, and privilege betweenadvantaged and disadvantaged groups shift to the individual rather than the society
as a whole. To estimate the strength of such internal attributions, participants
responded to: ‘‘Please indicate the extent to which the following reasons account for
low-quality of life of African-Americans.’’ Respondents, on a seven-point scale,ranging from 1 (strongly disagree) to 7 (strongly agree), indicated the extent to which
each cause was responsible for out-groups’ failures. The ‘‘internal causal
attributions for failures’’ scale consisted of items: lack of motivation, lack of languageskills, laidback lifestyle, traditional beliefs, and lack of social skills (Cronbach’s
alpha¼ 0.78).
Prejudicial feelings. Much of the existing scholarship on the effects of media
stereotypes focused on cognitive beliefs without much attention to emotionalfeelings. The current study distinguishes stereotypical perceptions, such as traits and
characteristics, from prejudicial feelings such as dislike, anger, and fear. Drawing on
prior literature of anti-Black affect and aversive racism, this research recognizes that
antagonism toward racial/ethnic out-groups could manifest itself in ways beyondpure hostility and dislike to encompass feelings of discomfort, uneasiness,
nervousness, and even fear (Gaertner & Dovidio, 1986; Kinder & Sears, 1981).
To measure this broad range of prejudicial feelings, participants responded to:‘‘Please look at each of the following adjectives to indicate how well they describe
your feelings toward African-Americans in general. Please be frank in your
opinions.’’ A seven-point Likert-type scale, ranging from 1 (strongly disagree) to 7
(strongly agree), scored the extent to which each adjective described feelings.A factor analysis was conducted using principal axis factoring and varimax
rotation as described above under ‘‘Stereotypical Perceptions.’’ Six items clustered
62 S. Ramasubramanian
Dow
nloa
ded
by [
New
Yor
k U
nive
rsity
] at
19:
43 2
6 O
ctob
er 2
014
together into a single index labeled ‘‘Prejudicial Feelings.’’ They were dislike, disgust,
anger, fear, nervous, and discomfort (Cronbach’s alpha¼ 0.89). The expectation was
that the primary source of information would relate to the strength of prejudicial
feelings expressed toward African-Americans by Caucasian-American respondents.
Two other factors—‘‘Pity index’’ and ‘‘Pride index’’—which are typically associated
with people living in Africa and with in-group Caucasian-Americans, respectively,
also emerged from the analysis but were beyond the scope of this paper that focused
on attitudes toward African-Americans. ‘‘Pity index’’ consisted of sadness, guilt, and
pity, with a Cronbach’s alpha of 0.86 and the ‘‘pride index’’ consisted of admiration,
respect, and pride, with a Cronbach’s alpha of 0.73.
Primary source of information. Prior research, within a single study, has very rarelyexamined mediated versus non-mediated sources of information regarding racial/
ethnic out-groups. Much of the literature of mediated contact focused on
distinguishing exposure to news media from entertainment media (Armstrong
et al., 1992; Sotirovic, 2001). Similarly, the literature on interpersonal contact via
face-to-face interactions largely focused on relational development and self-
disclosure without much attention to mediated contact. The present study
incorporates a relative emphasis on mediated or non-mediated contacts for each
individual. Participants responded to: ‘‘Please indicate your primary source of
information about the following groups of people.’’ Participants indicated if their
main sources of information were family, friends, acquaintances, television, movies,
magazines, or newspapers. Grouping these categories created a dichotomous variable
with non-mediated and mediated sources of information as the categories’ labels.
Non-mediated sources included family, friends, and acquaintances, and mediated
sources included the other sources.
Results
Data Analysis Steps
After gleaning the data to remove incomplete questionnaires, the first step in analysis
was bivariate correlational analyses to examine the relationships among key variables.
These analyses identified the extent to which the dependent variables correlate with
one another. Following this step, a multivariate analysis of variance assessed the
effects of the independent variable on the dependent variables. This step determined
which dependent variables significantly correlate with the independent variables and
examined the dependent variables’ relative effects on the predictor variable. Finally,
to examine, simultaneously, the direct and indirect effects of the exogenous variables
on the endogenous variables, path analysis used the AMOS software. The path
analysis assisted building a chain of relationships among exogenous and endogenous
variables.
63Journal of Intercultural Communication Research
Dow
nloa
ded
by [
New
Yor
k U
nive
rsity
] at
19:
43 2
6 O
ctob
er 2
014
Results from Preliminary Analyses
Descriptive statistics. An analysis of the descriptive statistics reveals that the meansfor the dependent variables, stereotypical beliefs (M¼ 4.60, SD¼ 1.07), internal
causal attributions (M¼ 4.42, SD¼ 1.31), and prejudicial feelings (M¼ 3.02,
SD¼ 1.43) clustered around the mid-point on a seven-point Likert scale, ranging
from 1 (strongly disagree) to 7 (strongly agree). As expected, the average scores were
highest for stereotypical perceptions since their framing is in terms of cultural
stereotypical knowledge as compared to prejudicial feelings and internal causal
attributions, which focused on measuring the participants’ own beliefs and feelings.
Correlational analysis. A bivariate correlation analysis revealed the dependentvariables’—stereotypical perceptions, internal causal attributions, and prejudicial
feelings—correlations with one another. The Pearson’s correlation coefficients
among the dependent variables indicate significant, positive correlations among all
the variables: stereotypical beliefs and internal causal attributions (r¼ 0.45; p50.01),
internal causal attribution and prejudicial feelings (r¼ 0.44; p50.01), and
stereotypical beliefs and prejudicial feelings (r¼ 0.51; p50.01). Prior research also
documented similar positive correlations among these variables. Since the
magnitudes of the correlations represent moderate levels (Pearson’s correlations
are in the 0.3 to 0.7 range), they appear to be theoretically distinct, although
correlated. Therefore, the next step, conducting a Multivariate Analysis of Variance,
is appropriate.
Multivariate analysis of variance. A multivariate analysis of variance examines theeffects of the independent variable (primary source of information about African-
Americans) on the three dependent variables (stereotypical beliefs, internal causal
attributions, and prejudicial feelings). Although the results suggest that the overall
model is not statistically significant, Wilk’s �¼ 0.98, F (3, 280); p¼ 0.14; R2¼ 0.02,
examining the individual one-way ANOVA, results as a follow-up, suggests that the
type of primary source of information about African-Americans (mediated or face-
to-face) did influence stereotypical beliefs. In particular, as Table 1 illustrates,
Table 1. Differences in Scores as a Function of Primary Source of Information (Face-to-face or Mediated).
Face-to-Face Mediated
Variables M SD M SD F(1, 282) R2
Stereotypical perceptions 4.52* 0.07 4.87* 0.13 5.04 0.02Internal causal attributions 4.40 0.09 4.54 0.17 0.55 0.00Prejudicial feelings 2.99 0.10 3.11 0.18 0.33 0.00
Wilk’s �¼ 0.98; F(3, 280); p¼ 0.14; R2¼ 0.02.
Note: * indicates that the scores were significantly different at p50.05.
64 S. Ramasubramanian
Dow
nloa
ded
by [
New
Yor
k U
nive
rsity
] at
19:
43 2
6 O
ctob
er 2
014
Caucasian-American participants whose primary sources of information are
mediated (M¼ 4.87; SD¼ 0.13) had significantly higher stereotypical perceptions
of African-Americans compared to White-American participants whose primary
contacts are face-to-face with African-Americans (M¼ 4.52; SD¼ 0.07); F
(1, 282)¼ 5.04; p50.05.
Results from Path Analysis
The final step, a path analysis, used AMOS to simultaneously examine the direct and
indirect effects of the exogenous variable (primary source of information: mediated
or face-to-face) on the exogenous variables (stereotypical beliefs, internal causal
attributions, and prejudicial feelings). The exogenous variable assigned dummy-
codes: 0 to face-to-face primary source and 1 to mediated source. The initial model
uses the observed variable approach to hypothesize direct and indirect correlations
among all endogenous variables with the exogenous variable. The model eliminates
all paths that are not statistically significant at p50.05. Rather than use the
traditional chi-square statistic as the only measure for determining goodness of fit of
the final model, examination includes the root mean square of approximation
(RMSEA), if less than 0.06, and comparative fit index (CFI) if greater than 0.95 (Hu
& Bentler, 1999). The final developed path model has a good fit with the data as
evidenced by �2¼ 0.46; CFI¼ 1.00, and RMSEA¼ 0.000 (0.000 to 0.075).
Examination of the individual paths in the final model in Figure 1 reveals that
when primary source of information about African-Americans is mediated rather
than face-to-face, a direct path to stereotypical perceptions exists with a significant,
positive correlation (�¼ 0.34; p50.05). That is, when the primary source of
information of African-Americans is through mediated contact rather than face-to-
face contact, negative stereotypical perceptions of the out-groups are significantly
stronger. In the next step of the final path diagram, stereotypical perceptions
correlate with prejudicial feelings through two paths: one direct and the other
indirect. The direct path between stereotypical perceptions and prejudicial feelings
Stereotypicalperceptions
Primary source ofinformation#
Prejudicialfeelings
Internal causalattributions
0.34*
0.29***0.56***
0.52***
Figure 1 Model relating Primary Source of Information (Face-to-Face or Mediated) withStereotypical Beliefs, Internal Causal Attributions, and Prejudicial Feelings towardAfrican-Americans. (�2
¼ 0.46; df¼ 2; p¼ 0.79; CFI¼ 1.00; NFI¼ 0.997; RMSEA¼ 0.000[0.000 to 0.075]).Notes: (1) *p50.05; ***p50.001. (2) #face-to-face¼ 0; mediated¼ 1.
65Journal of Intercultural Communication Research
Dow
nloa
ded
by [
New
Yor
k U
nive
rsity
] at
19:
43 2
6 O
ctob
er 2
014
toward African-Americans is significantly positive (�¼ 0.52; p50.001) suggesting
that as negative stereotypical perceptions increase, prejudicial feelings also increase.
The indirect path, mediated by the ‘‘Internal causal attributions’’ variable
demonstrates that stereotypical perceptions positively correlate with internal causal
attributions (�¼ 0.56; p50.001), which in turn positively correlates with prejudicial
feelings (�¼ 0.29; p50.001). Notably, no direct paths exist among the primary
source of information and either internal causal attributions or prejudicial feelings.
Overall, the model suggests that the source for out-group information (mediated or
face-to-face) influences stereotypical perceptions, which in turn influences internal
causal attributions for failures of the out-group and prejudicial feelings toward the
out-group.Secondary analyses were conducted to examine whether in line with the cultivation
hypothesis, the amount to which media exposure would moderate the effects of the
source of information on racial attitudes. Specifically, a multiple group analysis was
conducted that examined the equivalence of the model for heavy versus light media
consumers. No statistically significant effects were observed between these two
groups of media users, suggesting that the model was the same regardless of media
exposure for this sample.
Discussion
Prior research focused almost entirely on interpersonal friendships or on media
exposure without reconciling both of these important sources for out-group
information. The extent to which the literature developed these separate domain
results in somewhat contradictory findings of the relative role of mediated versus
face-to-face forms of intergroup contacts in engendering prejudice reduction among
members of the majority group. On the one hand, research from interpersonal
communication supported the notion that face-to-face interactions are much richer
than mediated contacts, offering more opportunities to disconfirm media
stereotypes. Conversely, some studies showed counter-stereotypical media exemplars
might reduce prejudice when direct contact is lacking (Armstrong et al., 1992;
Fujioka, 1999; Ortiz & Harwood, 2007). Mediated contact might offer an
opportunity to overcome intergroup anxiety often accompanying face-to-face out-
group interactions (Islam & Hewstone, 1993; Stephan & Stephan, 1985). Mediated
contact allows viewers to learn, observe, and indirectly interact with out-group
members, and consequently might effectively reduce intergroup anxiety arising from
direct contact.
The current study attempts to understand the comparative role of face-to-face and
mediated inter-racial contact with African-Americans leading to prejudice reduction
among Caucasian-Americans. The research compares face-to-face intergroup
contacts with mediated contacts in terms of their relative influence on stereotypical
attitudes, prejudicial feelings, and causal attributions. The findings suggest that the
primary source from which individuals derive insight of racial/ethnic out-groups
66 S. Ramasubramanian
Dow
nloa
ded
by [
New
Yor
k U
nive
rsity
] at
19:
43 2
6 O
ctob
er 2
014
influences racial attitudes. Specifically, when the primary source of information of
African-Americans is from mass media rather than interpersonal sources,participants report more negative stereotypes related to higher internal attributions
for failures and more prejudicial feelings toward African-Americans. Aligned withcultivation effects, individuals who reported media as their primary sources of
information of out-groups were likely to have media-consistent racial beliefs andattitudes in the absence of relevant direct, real-world experiences with racial/ethnic
out-groups. Apparently, greater instance reliance exists for relying on negativemediated stereotypes in attitude formation, causal interpretations, and affectiveorientation toward out-groups when face-to-face contact is not a primary source of
information.The take-away message is not necessarily that all types of mediated contact
increases prejudice. Mediated contact with out-groups has the potential to provideopportunities for lowering intergroup anxieties by the vicarious observation of
mediated inter-racial contact, but such an effect is only observable if media’sportrayals depict minority groups in favorable light. Some recent studies suggested
that positive media exemplars, although rare in popular media, can serve as usefultools to promote positive intergroup attitudes (Ortiz & Harwood, 2007;Ramasubramanian, 2011; Schiappa, 2005). As the review of scholarship on
African-American portrayals in mainstream media demonstrates, media does notyet provide a rich variety of complex, multi-dimensional characters from racial/
ethnic out-groups. Consistent with contact theory, merely increasing the number ofracial/ethnic out-group characters in the media is ineffective for prejudice reduction
unless the overall quality of portrayals improves among all media formats. Whenstructural and socio-cultural barriers inhibit face-to-face meaningful, long-term
friendships, media will continue to provide vicarious learning opportunitiesregarding racial/ethnic out-groups.
Notably, internal causal attribution for failures of African-Americans mediated thestereotype-prejudice relationship in the final model that emerged. This is animportant contribution to the literature in terms of understanding the functions
underlying stereotyping processes. The finding suggests that media portrayals mightactivate contemptuous prejudice by portraying out-groups as not trying hard enough
(too laidback, unmotivated) rather than framing social issues, such as poverty andcrime, caused by the societal factors of racial discrimination and lack of equal
opportunities for success. Journalists and other news content creators shouldcontinue to be conscious of their frames for news stories while reporting an issue and
the implications of such framing on both majority and minority audiences.Future research should continue to examine mediated and non-mediated sources
simultaneously to understand the mechanisms through which to influence one
another. The results of this study showed that there were no statistically significantdifferences between heavy and light users of media. This finding suggests that more
research is needed to understand the complex ways in which mediated and non-mediated sources of information might work in tandem or in opposition to one
another to influence racial attitudes toward an out-group. Perhaps direct contact acts
67Journal of Intercultural Communication Research
Dow
nloa
ded
by [
New
Yor
k U
nive
rsity
] at
19:
43 2
6 O
ctob
er 2
014
as a buffer or a conditional factor in the effect of media messages. In turn, perhaps,
mediated contact could moderate direct inter-racial contact. Social cognitive theoryand uses and gratification approaches suggested that information from non-media
sources may mitigate media’s impacts. That is, positive inter-racial contact mightmoderate the negative effects of exposure to media stereotypes of racial minorities.
From an attitude-integration perspective, media stereotypes are so pervasive anddeep-rooted that they are resistant to change even in the presence of contrary
information during interpersonal contact. During intergroup contact, pre-existingmediated stereotypical knowledge rather than individualistic information mayinfluence the interaction. When individuals encounter stereotypical, inconsistent
information in interpersonal contexts, they may, more likely than not, ignore suchinformation or simply subtype the out-groups in ways that leave existing
stereotypical beliefs intact (Bodenhausen, Schwarz, Bless, & Waenke, 1995;Hewstone, Hopkins, & Routh, 1992). Future studies could also explore self-
stereotyping effects, media avoidance/selective exposure to maintain positive groupesteem, and system justification perspectives that suggest that even minority groups
might adopt meritocracy and a hierarchy promoting the status quo.There are also some measurement-related limitations that need to be discussed.
One of the limitations of the survey methodology is that researchers assume that
individuals are fully cognizant of their behaviors and are able to report theirmotivations accurately. However, for questions such as ‘‘primary source of
information,’’ it is possible that respondents are not fully aware of the relativeimportance of mediated versus non-mediated sources of information and are not
able to articulate the combination of factors that influenced their attitudes. Followingup a survey study with other methods such as experiments might help overcome
these limitations.Another measure that needs further refinement is the one that relates to internal
causal attributions. Since the focus of this study was on attributions for failures, therelated survey question requested participants to identify the factors that lead to alower quality of life for African-Americans as compared to Caucasian-Americans.
The purpose of asking this question was to understand the factors that are attributedfor difference in quality of life, if such differences are perceived to exist. However, the
wording reflects an inherent bias that assumes that the quality of life in theUnited States is lower for African-Americans than it is for Caucasian-Americans.
In the future, this question should follow a more basic one that asks respondents fortheir opinions about differences in the quality of life between groups before asking
them to report the extent to which specific factors account for these differences.Another limitation of the study is that the majority (over 80%) of the respondents
were females. This is quite typical of college undergraduate samples in the United
States, especially while recruiting from Communication courses. It is likely that gendercould have affected the results. Future studies could consider a more balanced sample.
In terms of practical implications for this study, some fruitful avenues forexploration could be finding ways to remove structural barriers that prevent direct
meaningful inter-racial interactions: Initiate societal and institutional changes that
68 S. Ramasubramanian
Dow
nloa
ded
by [
New
Yor
k U
nive
rsity
] at
19:
43 2
6 O
ctob
er 2
014
allow greater opportunities for people from all races to form friendships and other
long-term relationships with racial/ethnic out-groups that improve race relations.
These findings reinforce the idea that public policies such as affirmative action and
desegregation, aimed at facilitating greater inter-racial contact opportunities at
school, work, and neighborhoods, are important, continuing initiatives even in the
context of living in a highly mediated world. Youth today, especially those who are in
college are especially likely to have several opportunities to share living spaces,
develop friendships, form romantic relationships with, and work with someone froma different racial/ethnic group. Simultaneously, improvement of the quality of media
representations of racial/ethnic minority groups should include a diverse range of
portrayals beyond the stereotypical. Programming such as reality shows offer
opportunities for viewers to interact vicariously with people different from
themselves, including diversities of race/ethnicity, sexual orientation, or other
aspects of cultural identity.Future research would benefit from exploring the reasons for face-to-face
interactions’ effectiveness in prejudice reduction as compared to mediated sources.
Research could seek respondents’ evaluations of the quality of both types of contact
(face-to-face and mediated) to determine if this variable moderates the relationship
between the primary sources of out-group information with racial attitudes.
Favorable rather than unfavorable contact situations in both mass media and
interpersonal communication could either challenge or reinforce existing stereo-
typical beliefs. Such inquiry would further distinguish face-to-face contact with peers
from those with family and acquaintances because the policy implications woulddiffer dramatically depending on which of these types of interpersonal sources
influences prejudice-reduction. A broadened scope of study would include non-
students. Students in large research universities, even predominantly White
institutions similar to this study’s venue, might provide more opportunities to
develop meaningful, long-term friendships with out-group members.Overall, this exploratory study examines the role of both mass-mediated contacts
and interpersonal contacts with racial/ethnic out-groups in reducing stereotypical
beliefs, prejudicial feelings, and internal attributions for out-group failures. The
findings from this Caucasian-American sample suggest that interpersonal contact
through friends, family, and acquaintances might be more effective than mediated
contacts through television, films, etc., for reducing prejudice toward African-
Americans. Media dependency, information richness, and cultivation theories offer
insights into the theoretical mechanisms that explain these preliminary findings and
suggest future directions for unraveling the complex ways in which mediated andinterpersonal communication with out-groups shape attitudes, feelings, and beliefs.
References
Allport, G.W. (1954). The nature of prejudice. Oxford: Addison-Wesley.Armstrong, G.B., Neuendorf, K.A., & Brentar, J.E. (1992). TV entertainment, news, and racial
perceptions of college students. Journal of Communication, 42, 153–176.
69Journal of Intercultural Communication Research
Dow
nloa
ded
by [
New
Yor
k U
nive
rsity
] at
19:
43 2
6 O
ctob
er 2
014
Ball-Rokeach, S.J. (1976). A dependency model of mass-media effects. Communication Research, 3,3–21.
Bandura, A. (1983). Psychological mechanism of aggression. In R.G. Green & E.I. Donnerstein(Eds.), Aggression: Theoretical and empirical reviews (Vol. 1, pp. 1–40). New York, NY:Academic Press.
Blair, I.V. (2002). The malleability of automatic stereotypes and prejudice. Personality and SocialPsychology Review, 6, 242–261.
Bodenhausen, G.V., Gaelick, L., & Wyer Jr, R.S. (1987). Affective and cognitive factors inintragroup and intergroup communication. In C. Hendrick (Ed.), Group processes andintergroup relations (Vol. 9, pp. 137–166). Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.
Bodenhausen, G.V., Schwarz, N., Bless, H., & Waenke, M. (1995). Effects of atypical exemplars onracial beliefs: Enlightened racism or generalized appraisals? Journal of Experimental SocialPsychology, 31, 48–63.
Bogle, D. (2001). Toms, coons, mulattoes, mammies, and bucks: An interpretive history of Blacks inAmerican films. New York, NY: Continuum.
Brown, R. (2005). An integrative theory of intergroup contact. Advances in Experimental SocialPsychology, 37, 255–255.
Busselle, R.W., & Crandall, H. (2002). Television viewing and perceptions about racedifferences in socioeconomic success. Journal of Broadcasting & Electronic Media, 46,265–282.
Chaffee, S.H. (1986). Perspectives on mass-communication research - A memorial festschrift.Communication Research, 13, 331–331.
Daft, R.L. (1984). Information richness: A new approach to managerial behavior and organizationaldesign. Research in Organizational Behavior, 6, 191–191.
Devine, P.G. (1989). Stereotypes and prejudice: Their automatic and controlled components.Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 56, 5–18.
Devine, P.G., Monteith, M.J., Zuwerink, J.R., & Elliot, A.J. (1991). Prejudice with and withoutcompunction. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 60, 817–830.
Dixon, T.L., & Azocar, C.L. (2007). Priming crime and activating Blackness: Understanding thepsychological impact of the overrepresentation of Blacks as lawbreakers on television news.Journal of Communication, 57, 229–253.
Dixon, T.L., & Linz, D. (2000). Overrepresentation and underrepresentation of AfricanAmericans and Latinos as lawbreakers on television news. Journal of Communication, 50,131–154.
Emerson, M.O., Kimbro, R.T., & Yancey, G. (2002). Contact theory extended: The effects of priorracial contact on current social ties. Social Science Quarterly, 83, 745–761.
Entman, R.M. (1990). Modern racism and the images of Blacks in local television news. CriticalStudies in Mass Communication, 7, 332–345.
Feagin, J.R. (2006). Systemic racism: A theory of oppression. New York, NY: Routledge/Taylor &Francis Group.
Ford, T.E. (1997). Effects of stereotypical television portrayals of African-Americans on personperception. Social Psychology Quarterly, 60, 266–275.
Fujioka, Y. (1999). Television portrayals and African-American stereotypes: Examination oftelevision effects when direct contact is lacking. Journalism & Mass Communication Quarterly,76, 52–75.
Gaertner, S.L., & Dovidio, J.F. (1986). The aversive form of racism. In J.F. Dovidio &S.L. Gaertner (Eds.), Prejudice, discrimination, and racism (pp. 61–89). Orlando, FL:Academic Press.
Gamson, W.A., Croteau, D., Hoynes, W., & Sasson, T. (1992). Media images and the socialconstruction of reality. Annual Review of Sociology, 18, 373–393.
Gilliam, F.D., & Iyengar, S. (2000). Prime suspects: The influence of local television news on theviewing public. American Journal of Political Science, 44, 560–573.
70 S. Ramasubramanian
Dow
nloa
ded
by [
New
Yor
k U
nive
rsity
] at
19:
43 2
6 O
ctob
er 2
014
Greenberg, B.S., & Atkin, C. (1982). Learning about minorities from television: A research agenda.
In G. Berry & C. Mitchell-Kernan (Eds.), Television and the socialization of the minority child
(pp. 215–243). New York, NY: Academic Press.Harwood, J. (2010). The contact space: A novel framework for intergroup contact research. Journal
of Language & Social Psychology, 29, 147–177.Hewstone, M., Hopkins, N., & Routh, D.A. (1992). Cognitive models of stereotype change: I.
Generalization and subtyping in young people’s views of the police. European Journal of Social
Psychology, 22, 219–234.Hu, L., & Bentler, P.M. (1999). Cutoff criteria for fit indexes in covariance structure analysis:
Conventional criteria versus. Structural Equation Modeling, 6(1), 1–55.Islam, M.R., & Hewstone, M. (1993). Dimensions of contact as predictors of intergroup anxiety,
perceived out-group variability, and out-group attitude: An integrative model. Personality and
Social Psychology Bulletin, 19(6), 700–710.Kinder, D.R., & Sears, D.O. (1981). Prejudice and politics: Symbolic racism versus racial threats to
the good life. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 40, 414–431.Martin, J.N., Trego, A.B., & Nakayama, T.K. (2010). College students’ racial attitudes and
friendship diversity. Howard Journal of Communications, 21, 97–118.Mastro, D.E., Behm-Morawitz, E., & Ortiz, M. (2007). The cultivation of social perceptions of
Latinos: A mental models approach. Media Psychology, 9, 347–365.Mastro, D.E., & Kopacz, M.A. (2006). Media representations of race, prototypicality, and policy
reasoning: An application of self-categorization theory. Journal of Broadcasting & Electronic
Media, 50, 305–322.Ortiz, M., & Harwood, J. (2007). A social cognitive theory approach to the effects of mediated
intergroup contact on intergroup attitudes. Journal of Broadcasting & Electronic Media, 51,
615–631.Pan, Z., & Kosicki, G. (1998). Assessing news media influences on the formation of Whites’ racial
policy preferences. Communication Research, 23, 147–178.Park, S.-Y. (2012). Mediated intergroup contact: Concept explication, synthesis, and application.
Mass Communication & Society, 15, 136–136.Peffley, M., Hurwitz, J., & Sniderman, P.M. (1997). Racial stereotypes and Whites’ political
views of Blacks in the context of welfare and crime. American Journal of Political Science, 41,
30–60.Pettigrew, T.F., & Tropp, L.R. (2006). A meta-analytic test of intergroup contact theory. Journal of
Personality and Social Psychology, 90, 751–783.Ramasubramanian, S. (2010). Television viewing, racial attitudes, and policy preferences: Exploring
the role of social identity and intergroup emotions in influencing support for affirmative
action. Communication Monographs, 77, 102–120.Ramasubramanian, S. (2011). The impact of stereotypical versus counterstereotypical media
exemplars on racial attitudes, causal attributions, and support for affirmative action.
Communication Research, 38, 497–516.Rice, R.E. (1992). Task analyzability, use of new media, and effectiveness: A multi-site exploration
of media richness. Organization Science, 3, 475–475.Schiappa, E. (2005). The parasocial contact hypothesis. Communication Monographs, 72, 15–37.Sears, D.O. (1988). Symbolic racism. In P. Katz & D. Taylor (Eds.), Eliminating racism: Profiles in
controversy (pp. 53–84). New York, NY: Plenum Press.Sotirovic, M. (2001). Media use and perceptions of welfare. Journal of Communication, 51, 750–774.Stephan, W.G., & Stephan, C.W. (1985). Intergroup anxiety. Journal of Social Issues, 41(3), 157–175.Stroman, C.A., Merritt, B.D., & Matabane, P.W. (1989). Twenty years after Kerner: The
portrayal of African Americans on prime-time television. Howard Journal of Communications,
2, 44–55.
71Journal of Intercultural Communication Research
Dow
nloa
ded
by [
New
Yor
k U
nive
rsity
] at
19:
43 2
6 O
ctob
er 2
014
Tabachnick, B.G., & Fidell, L.S. (2007). Using Multivariate Statistics. 5th ed. Boston, MA: Allyn andBacon.
Tan, A.S., Fujioka, Y., & Lucht, N. (1997). Native American stereotypes, TV portrayals, andpersonal contact. Journalism & Mass Communication Quarterly, 74, 265–284.
Tan, A.S., Tan, G., Avdeyeva, T., Crandall, H., Fukushi, Y., Nyandwi, A., Chin, H., & Wu, C.(2001). Changing negative racial stereotypes: The influence of normative peer information.Howard Journal of Communication, 12, 171–180.
Wittenbrink, B., Judd, C.M., & Park, B. (1997). Evidence for racial prejudice at the implicit leveland its relationship with questionnaire measures. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology,72, 262–274.
72 S. Ramasubramanian
Dow
nloa
ded
by [
New
Yor
k U
nive
rsity
] at
19:
43 2
6 O
ctob
er 2
014