流动和城市儿童元刻板印象的特点及其对群际关系的影响
|
摘要
长期以来,流动儿童作为处境不利的人群之一,受到社会各界的广泛关注由户籍制度产生的流动和城市儿童群体显现出鲜明的群际属性,然而对这两个群体的群际关系的研究却稍显匮乏。由于流动和城市儿童关于“他群”如何看待“我群”的信念是其开展群际接触、建立群际关系的重要因素之一,所以在群际水平下探讨双方的元刻板印象及其对群际关系的影响具有重要意义。
本研究综合问卷调查与情境实验等研究方法,以初一、二年级的流动和城市儿童为研究对象,从外表外貌、个性特征、行为习惯、学习特征和人际交往5个方面,揭示出两个群体元刻板印象的内容和性质,明确了元刻板印象对群际接触的作用机制,并通过创设不同的接触情境,考察了操纵元刻板印象的性质对群际关系的影响。本研究得出以下主要结论：
(1)流动和城市儿童元刻板印象兼具积极和消极属性。具体而言,流动儿童元刻板印象呈现显著消极的特征,而城市儿童则偏向积极特征。
(2)流动和城市儿童的元刻板印象和群际焦虑存在显著差异,流动儿童的元刻板印象比城市儿童更消极,且群际焦虑水平更高。但双方的群际接触数量和质量的差异不显著,两者的接触数量均较少,且质量一般。
(3)流动时间在元刻板印象、群际焦虑和群际接触数量上的主效应显著。这表明随着流动时间的增加,元刻板印象的消极性、群际焦虑水平逐渐减少、群际接触的数量也呈增多的趋势。事后比较发现,流动1年左右是重要的时间转折点。
(4)中介效应分析显示,流动和城市儿童的群际焦虑在元刻板印象与群际接触间起部分中介作用。其中,流动和城市儿童的中介效应量分别为0.224和0.157,两群体的中介效应占总效应的比例分别为48.2%和37.2%。
(5)有中介的调节效应分析显示,无限制模型和限制模型均拟合良好,卡方值改变量不显著。这表明两模型无显著区别,提示我们群体成员身份对中介效应的调节作用不显著。
(6)元刻板印象的改变、群体成员身份和群际接触情境均未对群际关系的认知层面产生显著影响,这说明其表现出相对稳定的特征。
(7)不同性质元刻板印象信息对群际关系的情感层面有显著影响,积极组对外群体的喜欢程度高于消极组。
(8)在群际关系的情感层面,元刻板印象信息分别与群体成员身份和群际接触情境存在显著的交互作用。这两次交互作用的简单效应检验表明：(a)对流动儿童呈现积极信息,能显著增加其对外群体的喜欢程度。(b)在竞争情境中呈现积极信息可以显著提高被试对外群体的喜欢程度。
(9)群体成员身份在群际关系的行为层面上的主效应显著,流动儿童与外群体接触的意愿显著低于城市儿童。
For a long time, migrant children as one of disadvantaged groups have aroused widespread attention of the whole society. Migrant children and urban children generated by the household registration system show distinct intergroup feature, but the research on intergroup relations of these two groups has been rare. Because the beliefs regarding the stereotype that outgroup members hold about his or her own group have a significant impact on intergroup contact, it's important to examine the characteristics of meta-stereotype and its Influence on the intergroup relations of migrant children and urban Children under the level of intergroup.
Based on questionnaire and situation experiment, migrant children and urban children were selected to participate in the research. In terms of appearance, personality, behavior, learning and interpersonal, this study revealed the content and nature of meta-stereotypes, defined functional mechanism of meta-stereotype on intergroup contact, and examined the effect of meta-stereotype manipulations on intergroup relations under different contact situations. Through three parts of the research, we get the following conclusions:
(1) Meta-stereotypes of migrant children and urban children had both positive and negative attributes. Specifically, migrant children held a significant negative meta-stereotype, and urban children showed a positive bias.
(2) There were significant differences of meta-stereotypes and intergroup anxieties between migrant children and urban children, meta-stereotype of migrant children was more negative than that of urban children, and migrant children reported higher levels of intergroup anxiety when they contacted with urban children. However, there were no significant differences of quantities and qualities of intergroup contact between migrant children and urban children.
(3) There was main effect of migrating time in meta-stereotype, intergroup anxiety and quantity of contact. This indicated that as migrating time goes by, the levels of negative meta-stereotype and intergroup anxiety tended to reduce, and quantity of contact was an increasing trend. Post hoc comparisons found that one year is an important turning point in migrating time.
(4) Mediating effect analysis showed that meta-stereotypes of migrant children and urban children were negatively associated with intergroup contacts and the relationships were partially mediated by intergroup anxieties. The sizes of mediating effect of migrant children and urban children were 0.224 and 0.157 respectively, the proportion of the total effect of the two groups that was mediated were about 48.2% and 37.2%.
(5) Mediated moderating effect analysis found that both unrestricted model and restricted model had goodness of fit, the amount of chi-square value did not significantly change. This indicated that there was no significant difference between the two models, it was suggested that mediated moderating effect was not significant.
(6) There were no significant effects of meta-stereotype manipulations, group membership and contact situations on the cognitive aspects of intergroup relations, indicating that cognitive dimension had stability.
(7) There was a significant impact of positive or negative meta-stereotype on the emotional aspects of intergroup relations, participants in positive group showed higher favorability and liking toward outgroup members than they were in negative group.
(8) There were significant interaction effects of both between meta-stereotype and group membership and between meta-stereotype and contact situations. A simple analysis indicated that (a) when migrant children received some positive information, their favorability and liking toward outgroup members could be significantly increased. (b) participants who obtained positive information in the competitive situation could significantly improve their favorability and liking toward outgroup members.
(9) There was main effect of group membership in the behavioral aspects of intergroup relations, migrant children's desire to contact with outgroup members was significantly lower than urban children's.
本研究综合问卷调查与情境实验等研究方法,以初一、二年级的流动和城市儿童为研究对象,从外表外貌、个性特征、行为习惯、学习特征和人际交往5个方面,揭示出两个群体元刻板印象的内容和性质,明确了元刻板印象对群际接触的作用机制,并通过创设不同的接触情境,考察了操纵元刻板印象的性质对群际关系的影响。本研究得出以下主要结论：
(1)流动和城市儿童元刻板印象兼具积极和消极属性。具体而言,流动儿童元刻板印象呈现显著消极的特征,而城市儿童则偏向积极特征。
(2)流动和城市儿童的元刻板印象和群际焦虑存在显著差异,流动儿童的元刻板印象比城市儿童更消极,且群际焦虑水平更高。但双方的群际接触数量和质量的差异不显著,两者的接触数量均较少,且质量一般。
(3)流动时间在元刻板印象、群际焦虑和群际接触数量上的主效应显著。这表明随着流动时间的增加,元刻板印象的消极性、群际焦虑水平逐渐减少、群际接触的数量也呈增多的趋势。事后比较发现,流动1年左右是重要的时间转折点。
(4)中介效应分析显示,流动和城市儿童的群际焦虑在元刻板印象与群际接触间起部分中介作用。其中,流动和城市儿童的中介效应量分别为0.224和0.157,两群体的中介效应占总效应的比例分别为48.2%和37.2%。
(5)有中介的调节效应分析显示,无限制模型和限制模型均拟合良好,卡方值改变量不显著。这表明两模型无显著区别,提示我们群体成员身份对中介效应的调节作用不显著。
(6)元刻板印象的改变、群体成员身份和群际接触情境均未对群际关系的认知层面产生显著影响,这说明其表现出相对稳定的特征。
(7)不同性质元刻板印象信息对群际关系的情感层面有显著影响,积极组对外群体的喜欢程度高于消极组。
(8)在群际关系的情感层面,元刻板印象信息分别与群体成员身份和群际接触情境存在显著的交互作用。这两次交互作用的简单效应检验表明：(a)对流动儿童呈现积极信息,能显著增加其对外群体的喜欢程度。(b)在竞争情境中呈现积极信息可以显著提高被试对外群体的喜欢程度。
(9)群体成员身份在群际关系的行为层面上的主效应显著,流动儿童与外群体接触的意愿显著低于城市儿童。
For a long time, migrant children as one of disadvantaged groups have aroused widespread attention of the whole society. Migrant children and urban children generated by the household registration system show distinct intergroup feature, but the research on intergroup relations of these two groups has been rare. Because the beliefs regarding the stereotype that outgroup members hold about his or her own group have a significant impact on intergroup contact, it's important to examine the characteristics of meta-stereotype and its Influence on the intergroup relations of migrant children and urban Children under the level of intergroup.
Based on questionnaire and situation experiment, migrant children and urban children were selected to participate in the research. In terms of appearance, personality, behavior, learning and interpersonal, this study revealed the content and nature of meta-stereotypes, defined functional mechanism of meta-stereotype on intergroup contact, and examined the effect of meta-stereotype manipulations on intergroup relations under different contact situations. Through three parts of the research, we get the following conclusions:
(1) Meta-stereotypes of migrant children and urban children had both positive and negative attributes. Specifically, migrant children held a significant negative meta-stereotype, and urban children showed a positive bias.
(2) There were significant differences of meta-stereotypes and intergroup anxieties between migrant children and urban children, meta-stereotype of migrant children was more negative than that of urban children, and migrant children reported higher levels of intergroup anxiety when they contacted with urban children. However, there were no significant differences of quantities and qualities of intergroup contact between migrant children and urban children.
(3) There was main effect of migrating time in meta-stereotype, intergroup anxiety and quantity of contact. This indicated that as migrating time goes by, the levels of negative meta-stereotype and intergroup anxiety tended to reduce, and quantity of contact was an increasing trend. Post hoc comparisons found that one year is an important turning point in migrating time.
(4) Mediating effect analysis showed that meta-stereotypes of migrant children and urban children were negatively associated with intergroup contacts and the relationships were partially mediated by intergroup anxieties. The sizes of mediating effect of migrant children and urban children were 0.224 and 0.157 respectively, the proportion of the total effect of the two groups that was mediated were about 48.2% and 37.2%.
(5) Mediated moderating effect analysis found that both unrestricted model and restricted model had goodness of fit, the amount of chi-square value did not significantly change. This indicated that there was no significant difference between the two models, it was suggested that mediated moderating effect was not significant.
(6) There were no significant effects of meta-stereotype manipulations, group membership and contact situations on the cognitive aspects of intergroup relations, indicating that cognitive dimension had stability.
(7) There was a significant impact of positive or negative meta-stereotype on the emotional aspects of intergroup relations, participants in positive group showed higher favorability and liking toward outgroup members than they were in negative group.
(8) There were significant interaction effects of both between meta-stereotype and group membership and between meta-stereotype and contact situations. A simple analysis indicated that (a) when migrant children received some positive information, their favorability and liking toward outgroup members could be significantly increased. (b) participants who obtained positive information in the competitive situation could significantly improve their favorability and liking toward outgroup members.
(9) There was main effect of group membership in the behavioral aspects of intergroup relations, migrant children's desire to contact with outgroup members was significantly lower than urban children's.
引文
[1]陈海贤,陈洁.(2008).贫困大学生希望特质、应对方式与情绪的结构方程模型研究.中国临床心理学杂志,16(4),392-394.
[2]陈晶,佐斌.(2004).群际接触理论介评.心理学探新,24(1),74-77.
[3]陈美芬.(2005).外来务工人员子女人格特征的研究.心理科学,28(6),178-180.
[4]程黎,高文斌,欧云,刘正奎,王文忠.(2007).流动儿童校园人际关系及相关因素的研究.中国临床心理学杂志,15(4),389-394.
[5]冯帮.(2007).流动儿童教育公平问题：基于社会排斥的分析视角.教育学术月刊,(9),97-100.
[6]方晓义,范兴华,刘杨.(2008).应对方式在流动儿童歧视知觉与孤独情绪关系上的调节作用
[7]贺雯.元刻板印象及其作用：基于不同社会阶层的分析.博士学位论文,2010,华东师范大学.
[8]侯杰泰,温忠麟,成子娟.结构方程模型及其应用.教育科学出版社.2004.
[9]侯娟,邹泓,李晓巍.(2009).流动儿童家庭环境的特点及其对生活满意度的影响.心理发展与教育,(2),78-85.
[10]胡宁,方晓义,蔺秀云,刘杨.(2009).北京流动儿童的流动性、社交焦虑及对孤独感的影响.应用心理学,15(2),166-176.
[11]胡书芝,吴新慧,李洪君.(2009).社会结构异质性与流动儿童社会网络的建构——以同伴关系为核心.青年研究,3,27-35.
[12]姜宇.(2008).流动儿童教育与心理发展研究述评.河北学刊,28(5),250-253.
[13]焦璨,吴利,张敏强.(2010)Bootstrap探索性因素分析方法及其应用.心理学探新,30(3),84-90.
[14]李丹,陈峰,陈欣银,陈斌斌.(2011).文化背景与社会行为和适应：城市、农村和流动三类儿童的比较研究.心理科学,34(1),93-101.
[15]李森森,龙长权,陈庆飞,李红.(2010).群际接触理论——一种改善群际关系的理论.心理科学进展,18(5),831-839.
[16]李小青,邹泓,王瑞敏,窦东徽.(2008).北京市流动儿童自尊的发展特点及其与学业行为、师生关系的相关研究.心理科学,31(4),909-913.
[17]李晓巍,邹泓,张俊,杨颖.(2008).流动儿童歧视知觉产生机制的质性研究：社会比较的视角.心理研究,1(2),66-70.
[18]李运庆.(2006).区隔与认同：农民工子弟的人际交往现状研究——以南京市 所民工子弟学校为例.青年研究,5,20-27.
[19]蔺秀云,方晓义,刘杨,兰菁.(2009).流动儿童歧视知觉与心理健康水平的关系及其心理机制.心理学报,41(10),967-979.
[20]刘霞,申继亮.(2010).环境因素对流动儿童歧视知觉的影响及群体态度的调节作用.心理发展与教育,(4),395-401.
[21]刘霞,申继亮.(2010).流动儿童的歧视知觉及与自尊的关系.心理科学,33(3),695-697.
[22]刘杨,方晓义,张耀方,蔡蓉,吴杨.(2008).流动儿童城市适应标准的研究.应用心理学,14(1),77-83.
[23]邱皓政.量化研究与统计分析——SPSS中文视窗版数据分析范例解析.重庆大学出版社.2009.
[24]师保国,徐玲,许晶晶.(2009).流动儿童幸福感、安全感及其与社会排斥的关系.心理科学,32(6),1452-1454.
[25]舒华.心理与教育研究中的多因素实验设计.北京师范大学出版社.1994.
[26]申继亮,王兴华.(2007).流动对儿童意味着什么——对一项心理学研究的再思考.中国妇运,(6),27-29.
[27]王瑞敏,邹泓.(2008).流动儿童的人格特点对主观幸福感的影响.心理学探析,28(3),82-87.
[28]王毅杰,史秋霞.(2010).流动儿童社会认同的策略性选择.社会科学研究,(1),90-96.
[29]温忠麟,侯杰泰,张雷.(2005).调节效应与中介效应的比较和应用.心理学报,37(2),268-274
[30]温忠麟,张雷,侯杰泰.(2006).有中介的调节变量和有调节的中介变量.心理学报,38(3),448-452.
[31]吴明隆.结构方程模型——AMOS的操作与应用(第2版).重庆大学出版社.2009.
[32]徐夫真,张文新,张玲玲.(2009).家庭功能对青少年疏离感的影响：有调节的中介效应.心理学报,41(12),1165-1174.
[33]许靖.偏见心理学.北京理工大学出版社,2010.
[34]张厚粲,徐建平.现代心理与教育统计学.北京师范大学出版社.2004.
[35]郑友富,俞国良.(2009).流动儿童身份认同与人格特征研究.教育研究,(5),99-102.
[36]钟涨宝,陶琴外来务工人员子女和本地学生的社会距离研究——基于双向度社会距离测量.南京社会科学,8,76-84.
[37]曾守锤.(2009).流动儿童的自尊及其稳定性和保护作用的研究.华东师范大学学报(教育科学版),27(2),64-69.
[38]邹泓.青少年的同伴关系发展特点、功能及其影响因素.北京师范大学出版社.2003.
[39]周利国.高中生依恋类型与社会能力、孤独抑郁关系——基于结构方程模型的实证研究.硕士学位论文,2010,华东师范大学.
[40]Bastian B., Lusher D.,& Ata A. (2011). Contact, evaluation and social distance: Differentiating majority and minority effects. International Journal of Intercultural Relations, doi:10.1016/j.ijintrel.2011.02.005.
[41]Binder J., Zagefka H., Brown R., Funke F., Kessler T., Mummendey A., Maquil A., Demoulin S.,& Leyens J.P. (2009). Does contact reduce prejudice or does prejudice reduce contact? A longitudinal test of the contact hypothesis among majority and minority groups in three European countries. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology,96(4),843-856.
[42]Butz D.A., Plant E.A. (2006). Perceiving outgroup members as unresponsive: Implications for approach-related emotions, intentions, and behavior. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology,91(6),1066-1079.
[43]Chu T.,& Kwan V.S.Y. (2007). Effect of collectivistic cultural imperatives on Asian American meta-stereotypes. Asian Journal of Social Psychology,10,270-276.
[44]Dovidio J.F., Esses V.M., Beach K.R.,& Gaertner S.L. (in press). The role of affect in determining intergroup behavior:The case of willingness to engage in intergroup contact. To appear in D.M. Mackie & E.R. Smith (Eds.), From prejudice to intergroup emotions:Differentiated reactions to social groups. Philadelphia: Psychology Press.
[45]Dovidio J.F., Gaertner S.L., & Kawakami K. (2003). Intergroup Contact:The Past, Present, and the Future. Group Processes & Intergroup Relations,6(1),5-21.
[46]Dovidio J.F., Gaertner S.L., KAWAKAMI K.,& Hodson G. (2002). Why can't we just get along? Interpersonal biases and interracial distrust. Cultural Diversity and Ethnic Minority Psychology,8(2),88-102.
[47]Esses V.M., Dovidio J.F. (2002). The Role of Emotions in Determining Willingness to Engage in Intergroup Contact. Personality and Social Psychology Bulletin,28(9), 1202-1214.
[48]Finchilescu G. (2005). Meta-stereotypes may hinder inter-racial contact. South African Journal of Psychology,35(3),460-472.
[49]Finchilescu G. (2010). Intergroup Anxiety in Interracial Interaction:The Role of Prejudice and Metastereo types. Journal of Social Issues,66(2),334-351.
[50]Finchilescu G, Tredoux C., Mynhardt J., Pillay J.,& Muianga L. (2007). Accounting for lack of interracial mixing amongst South African university students. South African Journal of Psychology,37(4),720-737.
[51]Gomez A. (1998). Factores facilitadores de los efectos positivos del contacto intergrupal. Unpublished Doctoral dissertation. UNED, Madrid.
[52]G6mez A. (2002). If my group stereotypes others, others stereotype my group... and we know. Concept, research lines and future perspectives of meta-stereotypes. Revista de Psicologia Social,17(3),253-282.
[53]Hyers L.L., Swim J.K. (1998). A comparison of experiences of dominant and minority group members during an intergroup encounter. Group Processes & Intergroup Relations,1(2),143-163.
[54]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.
[55]Judd C.M., Park B., Yzerbyt V., Gordijn E.H.,& Muller D. (2005). Attributions of intergroup bias and outgroup homogeneity to ingroup and outgroup others. European Journal of Social Psychology,35,677-704.
[56]Kamans E., Gordijn E.H., Oldenhuis H.,& Otten S. (2009). What I think you see is what you get:Influence of prejudice on assimilation to negative meta-stereotypes among Dutch Moroccan teenagers. European Journal of Social Psychology,39, 842-851.
[57]KIM J.,& OE T. (2009). Meta-stereotype as an indicator of intergroup attitude: How Japanese perceive they are viewed by Koreans. Japanese Psychological Research,51(4),279-285.
[58]Klein B.,& Azzi A.E. (2001). The strategic confirmation of meta-stereotypes:How group members attempt to tailor an out-group's representation of themselves. British Journal of Social Psychology,40,279-293.
[59]Koudenburg N.,& Gordijn E.H. (2011). "My Date Can Call Me Sweet, but My Colleague Can't" Meta-Stereotypic Behavioral Intentions as a Function of Context and Liking of the Outgroup. Social Cognition,29(2),221-230.
[60]Krueger J. (1996). Personal Beliefs and Cultural Stereotypes About Racial Characteristics. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology,71(3),536-548.
[61]Kunda Z., Sinclair L. (1999). Motivated reasoning with stereotypes:Activation, application, and inhibition. Psychological Inquiry,10(1),12-22.
[62]Levin S., Van Laar C., & Sidanius J. (2003). The effects of ingroup and outgroup friendships on ethnic attitudes in college:A longitudinal study. Group Processes & Intergroup Relations, 6(1),76-92.
[63]Lichtenberger E.J. (2004). The Accuracy of Meta-Stereotypes Applied to Career and Technical Education. Unpublished doctoral dissertation, Virginia Tech, Blacksburg.
[64]MacInnis C.C. (2009). Perceptions of intergroup bias:The roles of social projection and meta-stereotypes. Unpublished Master dissertation. BROCK UNIVERSITY, St. Catharines, Ontario.
[65]MacInnis C.C., Hodson G, (2011).'Where the rubber hits the road'en route to inter-group harmony:Examining contact intentions and contact behaviour under meta-stereotype threat. British Journal of Social Psychology, doi:10.1111/j. 2044-8309.2010.02014.X.
[66]Mendez E., Gomez A., & Tropp L.R. (2007). When Metaperceptions are Affected by Intergroup Processes. International journal of psychology and psychological therapy,7(2),237-250.
[67]Miller N. (2002). Personalization and the promise of Contact Theory. Journal of Social Issues,58(2),387-410.
[68]Moholola F.M. (2007). Intergroup attitudes of black learners attending a multiracial school and black learners attending a single race school. Unpublished Master dissertation. University of Witwatersrand, Johannesburg.
[69]Murray S.L., Holmes J.G., Griffin D.W., Bellavia G., & Rose P. (2001). The mismeasure of love:How self-doubt contaminates relationship beliefs. Personality and Social Psychology Bulletin,27(4),423-436.
[70]Oldenhuis H. (2007). I know what they think about us:Metaperceptions and intergroup relations. Unpublished doctorial dissertation. University of Groningen, Groningen, Netherlands.
[71]Oldenhuis H., Gordijn E.H.,& Otten S. (2008). If you don't like us,we won't be likeable.The influence of meta-stereotype activation on behavior and attitudes. Submitted for publication.
[72]Pettigrew T.F. (1998). Intergroup contact theory. Annual Review of Psychology,49, 65-85.
[73]Pettigrew T.F. (2008). Future directions for intergroup contact theory and research. International Journal of Intercultural Relations,32,187-199.
[74]Pettigrew T.F., Tropp L.R. (2006). A Meta-Analytic Test of Intergroup Contact Theory. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology,90(5),751-783.
[75]Pettigrew T.F., Tropp L.R. (2008). How does intergroup contact reduce prejudice? Meta-analytic tests of three mediators. European Journal of Social Psychology,38, 922-934.
[76]Plant E.A., Butz D.A. (2006). The causes and consequences of an avoidance-focus for interracial interactions. Personality and Social Psychology Bulletin,32(6), 833-846.
[77]Plant E.A., Butz D.A.,& Tartakovsky M. (2008). Interethnic Interactions: Expectancies, Emotions, and Behavioral Intentions. Group Processes & Intergroup Relations,11(4),555-574.
[78]Plant E.A., Devine P.G. (2003). The antecedents and implications of interracial anxiety. Personality and Social Psychology Bulletin,29(6),790-801.
[79]Saroglou V., Yzerbyt V.,& Kaschten C. (2011). Meta-stereotypes of Groups with Opposite Religious Views:Believers and Non-Believers. Journal of Community & Applied Social Psychology,21(6),484-498.
[80]Shelton J.N, (2003). Interpersonal concerns in social encounters between majority and minority group members. Group Processes & Intergroup Relations,6(2), 171-185.
[81]Shelton J.N., Richeson J.A. (2005). Intergroup Contact and Pluralistic Ignorance. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology,88(1),91-107.
[82]Shelton J.N., Richeson J.A.,& Salvatore J. (2005). Expecting To Be the Target of Prejudice:Implications for Interethnic Interactions. Personality and Social Psychology Bulletin,31(9),1189-1202.
[83]Sidanius J., Van Laar C, Levin S.,& Sinclair S. (2004). Ethnic enclaves and the dynamics of social identity on the college campus:The good,the bad,and the ugly. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology,87(1),96-110.
[84]Stephan W.G.,& Stephan C.W. (1985). Intergroup Anxiety. Journal of Social Issues,41(3),157-175.
[85]Torres K.C.,& Charles C.Z. (2004). Metastereotypes and the Black-White Divide: A Qualitative View of Race on an Elite College Campus. The DuBois Review: Social Science Research on Race,1,115-149.
[86]Tropp L.R. (2003). The Psychological Impact of Prejudice:Implications for Intergroup Contact. Group Processes & Inter group Relations,6(2),131-149.
[87]Tropp L.R.,& Pettigrew T.F. (2005). Differential Relationships Between Intergroup Contact and Affective and Cognitive Dimensions of Prejudice. Personality and Social Psychology Bulletin,31(8),1145-1158.
[88]Tropp L.R., Bianchi R.A. (2006). Valuing Diversity and Interest in Intergroup Contact. Journal of Social Issues,62(3),533-551.
[89]Tropp L.R., Pettigrew T.F. (2005). Relationships Between Intergroup Contact and Prejudice Among Minority and Majority Status Groups. Psychological Science, 16(12),951-957.
[90]Turner R.N., Hewstone M.,& Voci A.(2007). Reducing explicit and implicit outgroup prejudice via direct and extended contact:The mediating role of self-disclosure and intergroup anxiety. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology,93(3),369-388.
[91]Turner R.N., Hewstone M., Voci A.,& Vonofakou C. (2008). A test of the extended intergroup contact hypothesis:the mediating role of intergroup anxiety, perceived ingroup and outgroup norms, and inclusion of the outgroup in the self. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology,95(4),843-860.
[92]Voci A., Hewstone M. (2003). Intergroup Contact and Prejudice Toward Immigrants in Italy:The Mediational Role of Anxiety and the Moderational Role of Group Salience. Group Processes& Intergroup Relations, 6(1),37-54.
[93]Vorauer J.D. (2003). Dominant group members in cross-group interaction:Safety or vulnerability in numbers?. Personality and Social Psychology Bulletin,29(4), 498-511.
[94]Vorauer J.D.,& Kumhyr S.M. (2001). Is this about You or Me? Self-Versus Other-Directed Judgments and Feelings in Response to Intergroup Interaction. Personality and Social Psychology Bulletin,27(6),706-719.
[95]Vorauer J.D., Hunter A.J., Main K.J.,& Roy S.A. (2000). Meta-Stereotype Activation:Evidence From Indirect Measures for Specific Evaluative Concerns Experienced by Members of Dominant Groups in Intergroup Interaction. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology,78(4),690-707.
[96]Vorauer J.D., Main K.J.,& O'Connell G.B. (1998). How Do Individuals Expect to Be Viewed by Members of Lower Status Groups? Content and Implications of Meta-Stereotypes. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology,75(4),911-931.
[97]Wilder D.A. (1993b). Freezing intergroup evaluations:Anxiety fosters resistance to counterstereotypic information. In Group Motivation:Social Psychological Perspectives, ed. M.A. Hogg, D. Abrams, pp.68-86. London:Harvester Wheatsheaf.240 pp.
[2]陈晶,佐斌.(2004).群际接触理论介评.心理学探新,24(1),74-77.
[3]陈美芬.(2005).外来务工人员子女人格特征的研究.心理科学,28(6),178-180.
[4]程黎,高文斌,欧云,刘正奎,王文忠.(2007).流动儿童校园人际关系及相关因素的研究.中国临床心理学杂志,15(4),389-394.
[5]冯帮.(2007).流动儿童教育公平问题：基于社会排斥的分析视角.教育学术月刊,(9),97-100.
[6]方晓义,范兴华,刘杨.(2008).应对方式在流动儿童歧视知觉与孤独情绪关系上的调节作用
[7]贺雯.元刻板印象及其作用：基于不同社会阶层的分析.博士学位论文,2010,华东师范大学.
[8]侯杰泰,温忠麟,成子娟.结构方程模型及其应用.教育科学出版社.2004.
[9]侯娟,邹泓,李晓巍.(2009).流动儿童家庭环境的特点及其对生活满意度的影响.心理发展与教育,(2),78-85.
[10]胡宁,方晓义,蔺秀云,刘杨.(2009).北京流动儿童的流动性、社交焦虑及对孤独感的影响.应用心理学,15(2),166-176.
[11]胡书芝,吴新慧,李洪君.(2009).社会结构异质性与流动儿童社会网络的建构——以同伴关系为核心.青年研究,3,27-35.
[12]姜宇.(2008).流动儿童教育与心理发展研究述评.河北学刊,28(5),250-253.
[13]焦璨,吴利,张敏强.(2010)Bootstrap探索性因素分析方法及其应用.心理学探新,30(3),84-90.
[14]李丹,陈峰,陈欣银,陈斌斌.(2011).文化背景与社会行为和适应：城市、农村和流动三类儿童的比较研究.心理科学,34(1),93-101.
[15]李森森,龙长权,陈庆飞,李红.(2010).群际接触理论——一种改善群际关系的理论.心理科学进展,18(5),831-839.
[16]李小青,邹泓,王瑞敏,窦东徽.(2008).北京市流动儿童自尊的发展特点及其与学业行为、师生关系的相关研究.心理科学,31(4),909-913.
[17]李晓巍,邹泓,张俊,杨颖.(2008).流动儿童歧视知觉产生机制的质性研究：社会比较的视角.心理研究,1(2),66-70.
[18]李运庆.(2006).区隔与认同：农民工子弟的人际交往现状研究——以南京市 所民工子弟学校为例.青年研究,5,20-27.
[19]蔺秀云,方晓义,刘杨,兰菁.(2009).流动儿童歧视知觉与心理健康水平的关系及其心理机制.心理学报,41(10),967-979.
[20]刘霞,申继亮.(2010).环境因素对流动儿童歧视知觉的影响及群体态度的调节作用.心理发展与教育,(4),395-401.
[21]刘霞,申继亮.(2010).流动儿童的歧视知觉及与自尊的关系.心理科学,33(3),695-697.
[22]刘杨,方晓义,张耀方,蔡蓉,吴杨.(2008).流动儿童城市适应标准的研究.应用心理学,14(1),77-83.
[23]邱皓政.量化研究与统计分析——SPSS中文视窗版数据分析范例解析.重庆大学出版社.2009.
[24]师保国,徐玲,许晶晶.(2009).流动儿童幸福感、安全感及其与社会排斥的关系.心理科学,32(6),1452-1454.
[25]舒华.心理与教育研究中的多因素实验设计.北京师范大学出版社.1994.
[26]申继亮,王兴华.(2007).流动对儿童意味着什么——对一项心理学研究的再思考.中国妇运,(6),27-29.
[27]王瑞敏,邹泓.(2008).流动儿童的人格特点对主观幸福感的影响.心理学探析,28(3),82-87.
[28]王毅杰,史秋霞.(2010).流动儿童社会认同的策略性选择.社会科学研究,(1),90-96.
[29]温忠麟,侯杰泰,张雷.(2005).调节效应与中介效应的比较和应用.心理学报,37(2),268-274
[30]温忠麟,张雷,侯杰泰.(2006).有中介的调节变量和有调节的中介变量.心理学报,38(3),448-452.
[31]吴明隆.结构方程模型——AMOS的操作与应用(第2版).重庆大学出版社.2009.
[32]徐夫真,张文新,张玲玲.(2009).家庭功能对青少年疏离感的影响：有调节的中介效应.心理学报,41(12),1165-1174.
[33]许靖.偏见心理学.北京理工大学出版社,2010.
[34]张厚粲,徐建平.现代心理与教育统计学.北京师范大学出版社.2004.
[35]郑友富,俞国良.(2009).流动儿童身份认同与人格特征研究.教育研究,(5),99-102.
[36]钟涨宝,陶琴外来务工人员子女和本地学生的社会距离研究——基于双向度社会距离测量.南京社会科学,8,76-84.
[37]曾守锤.(2009).流动儿童的自尊及其稳定性和保护作用的研究.华东师范大学学报(教育科学版),27(2),64-69.
[38]邹泓.青少年的同伴关系发展特点、功能及其影响因素.北京师范大学出版社.2003.
[39]周利国.高中生依恋类型与社会能力、孤独抑郁关系——基于结构方程模型的实证研究.硕士学位论文,2010,华东师范大学.
[40]Bastian B., Lusher D.,& Ata A. (2011). Contact, evaluation and social distance: Differentiating majority and minority effects. International Journal of Intercultural Relations, doi:10.1016/j.ijintrel.2011.02.005.
[41]Binder J., Zagefka H., Brown R., Funke F., Kessler T., Mummendey A., Maquil A., Demoulin S.,& Leyens J.P. (2009). Does contact reduce prejudice or does prejudice reduce contact? A longitudinal test of the contact hypothesis among majority and minority groups in three European countries. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology,96(4),843-856.
[42]Butz D.A., Plant E.A. (2006). Perceiving outgroup members as unresponsive: Implications for approach-related emotions, intentions, and behavior. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology,91(6),1066-1079.
[43]Chu T.,& Kwan V.S.Y. (2007). Effect of collectivistic cultural imperatives on Asian American meta-stereotypes. Asian Journal of Social Psychology,10,270-276.
[44]Dovidio J.F., Esses V.M., Beach K.R.,& Gaertner S.L. (in press). The role of affect in determining intergroup behavior:The case of willingness to engage in intergroup contact. To appear in D.M. Mackie & E.R. Smith (Eds.), From prejudice to intergroup emotions:Differentiated reactions to social groups. Philadelphia: Psychology Press.
[45]Dovidio J.F., Gaertner S.L., & Kawakami K. (2003). Intergroup Contact:The Past, Present, and the Future. Group Processes & Intergroup Relations,6(1),5-21.
[46]Dovidio J.F., Gaertner S.L., KAWAKAMI K.,& Hodson G. (2002). Why can't we just get along? Interpersonal biases and interracial distrust. Cultural Diversity and Ethnic Minority Psychology,8(2),88-102.
[47]Esses V.M., Dovidio J.F. (2002). The Role of Emotions in Determining Willingness to Engage in Intergroup Contact. Personality and Social Psychology Bulletin,28(9), 1202-1214.
[48]Finchilescu G. (2005). Meta-stereotypes may hinder inter-racial contact. South African Journal of Psychology,35(3),460-472.
[49]Finchilescu G. (2010). Intergroup Anxiety in Interracial Interaction:The Role of Prejudice and Metastereo types. Journal of Social Issues,66(2),334-351.
[50]Finchilescu G, Tredoux C., Mynhardt J., Pillay J.,& Muianga L. (2007). Accounting for lack of interracial mixing amongst South African university students. South African Journal of Psychology,37(4),720-737.
[51]Gomez A. (1998). Factores facilitadores de los efectos positivos del contacto intergrupal. Unpublished Doctoral dissertation. UNED, Madrid.
[52]G6mez A. (2002). If my group stereotypes others, others stereotype my group... and we know. Concept, research lines and future perspectives of meta-stereotypes. Revista de Psicologia Social,17(3),253-282.
[53]Hyers L.L., Swim J.K. (1998). A comparison of experiences of dominant and minority group members during an intergroup encounter. Group Processes & Intergroup Relations,1(2),143-163.
[54]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.
[55]Judd C.M., Park B., Yzerbyt V., Gordijn E.H.,& Muller D. (2005). Attributions of intergroup bias and outgroup homogeneity to ingroup and outgroup others. European Journal of Social Psychology,35,677-704.
[56]Kamans E., Gordijn E.H., Oldenhuis H.,& Otten S. (2009). What I think you see is what you get:Influence of prejudice on assimilation to negative meta-stereotypes among Dutch Moroccan teenagers. European Journal of Social Psychology,39, 842-851.
[57]KIM J.,& OE T. (2009). Meta-stereotype as an indicator of intergroup attitude: How Japanese perceive they are viewed by Koreans. Japanese Psychological Research,51(4),279-285.
[58]Klein B.,& Azzi A.E. (2001). The strategic confirmation of meta-stereotypes:How group members attempt to tailor an out-group's representation of themselves. British Journal of Social Psychology,40,279-293.
[59]Koudenburg N.,& Gordijn E.H. (2011). "My Date Can Call Me Sweet, but My Colleague Can't" Meta-Stereotypic Behavioral Intentions as a Function of Context and Liking of the Outgroup. Social Cognition,29(2),221-230.
[60]Krueger J. (1996). Personal Beliefs and Cultural Stereotypes About Racial Characteristics. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology,71(3),536-548.
[61]Kunda Z., Sinclair L. (1999). Motivated reasoning with stereotypes:Activation, application, and inhibition. Psychological Inquiry,10(1),12-22.
[62]Levin S., Van Laar C., & Sidanius J. (2003). The effects of ingroup and outgroup friendships on ethnic attitudes in college:A longitudinal study. Group Processes & Intergroup Relations, 6(1),76-92.
[63]Lichtenberger E.J. (2004). The Accuracy of Meta-Stereotypes Applied to Career and Technical Education. Unpublished doctoral dissertation, Virginia Tech, Blacksburg.
[64]MacInnis C.C. (2009). Perceptions of intergroup bias:The roles of social projection and meta-stereotypes. Unpublished Master dissertation. BROCK UNIVERSITY, St. Catharines, Ontario.
[65]MacInnis C.C., Hodson G, (2011).'Where the rubber hits the road'en route to inter-group harmony:Examining contact intentions and contact behaviour under meta-stereotype threat. British Journal of Social Psychology, doi:10.1111/j. 2044-8309.2010.02014.X.
[66]Mendez E., Gomez A., & Tropp L.R. (2007). When Metaperceptions are Affected by Intergroup Processes. International journal of psychology and psychological therapy,7(2),237-250.
[67]Miller N. (2002). Personalization and the promise of Contact Theory. Journal of Social Issues,58(2),387-410.
[68]Moholola F.M. (2007). Intergroup attitudes of black learners attending a multiracial school and black learners attending a single race school. Unpublished Master dissertation. University of Witwatersrand, Johannesburg.
[69]Murray S.L., Holmes J.G., Griffin D.W., Bellavia G., & Rose P. (2001). The mismeasure of love:How self-doubt contaminates relationship beliefs. Personality and Social Psychology Bulletin,27(4),423-436.
[70]Oldenhuis H. (2007). I know what they think about us:Metaperceptions and intergroup relations. Unpublished doctorial dissertation. University of Groningen, Groningen, Netherlands.
[71]Oldenhuis H., Gordijn E.H.,& Otten S. (2008). If you don't like us,we won't be likeable.The influence of meta-stereotype activation on behavior and attitudes. Submitted for publication.
[72]Pettigrew T.F. (1998). Intergroup contact theory. Annual Review of Psychology,49, 65-85.
[73]Pettigrew T.F. (2008). Future directions for intergroup contact theory and research. International Journal of Intercultural Relations,32,187-199.
[74]Pettigrew T.F., Tropp L.R. (2006). A Meta-Analytic Test of Intergroup Contact Theory. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology,90(5),751-783.
[75]Pettigrew T.F., Tropp L.R. (2008). How does intergroup contact reduce prejudice? Meta-analytic tests of three mediators. European Journal of Social Psychology,38, 922-934.
[76]Plant E.A., Butz D.A. (2006). The causes and consequences of an avoidance-focus for interracial interactions. Personality and Social Psychology Bulletin,32(6), 833-846.
[77]Plant E.A., Butz D.A.,& Tartakovsky M. (2008). Interethnic Interactions: Expectancies, Emotions, and Behavioral Intentions. Group Processes & Intergroup Relations,11(4),555-574.
[78]Plant E.A., Devine P.G. (2003). The antecedents and implications of interracial anxiety. Personality and Social Psychology Bulletin,29(6),790-801.
[79]Saroglou V., Yzerbyt V.,& Kaschten C. (2011). Meta-stereotypes of Groups with Opposite Religious Views:Believers and Non-Believers. Journal of Community & Applied Social Psychology,21(6),484-498.
[80]Shelton J.N, (2003). Interpersonal concerns in social encounters between majority and minority group members. Group Processes & Intergroup Relations,6(2), 171-185.
[81]Shelton J.N., Richeson J.A. (2005). Intergroup Contact and Pluralistic Ignorance. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology,88(1),91-107.
[82]Shelton J.N., Richeson J.A.,& Salvatore J. (2005). Expecting To Be the Target of Prejudice:Implications for Interethnic Interactions. Personality and Social Psychology Bulletin,31(9),1189-1202.
[83]Sidanius J., Van Laar C, Levin S.,& Sinclair S. (2004). Ethnic enclaves and the dynamics of social identity on the college campus:The good,the bad,and the ugly. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology,87(1),96-110.
[84]Stephan W.G.,& Stephan C.W. (1985). Intergroup Anxiety. Journal of Social Issues,41(3),157-175.
[85]Torres K.C.,& Charles C.Z. (2004). Metastereotypes and the Black-White Divide: A Qualitative View of Race on an Elite College Campus. The DuBois Review: Social Science Research on Race,1,115-149.
[86]Tropp L.R. (2003). The Psychological Impact of Prejudice:Implications for Intergroup Contact. Group Processes & Inter group Relations,6(2),131-149.
[87]Tropp L.R.,& Pettigrew T.F. (2005). Differential Relationships Between Intergroup Contact and Affective and Cognitive Dimensions of Prejudice. Personality and Social Psychology Bulletin,31(8),1145-1158.
[88]Tropp L.R., Bianchi R.A. (2006). Valuing Diversity and Interest in Intergroup Contact. Journal of Social Issues,62(3),533-551.
[89]Tropp L.R., Pettigrew T.F. (2005). Relationships Between Intergroup Contact and Prejudice Among Minority and Majority Status Groups. Psychological Science, 16(12),951-957.
[90]Turner R.N., Hewstone M.,& Voci A.(2007). Reducing explicit and implicit outgroup prejudice via direct and extended contact:The mediating role of self-disclosure and intergroup anxiety. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology,93(3),369-388.
[91]Turner R.N., Hewstone M., Voci A.,& Vonofakou C. (2008). A test of the extended intergroup contact hypothesis:the mediating role of intergroup anxiety, perceived ingroup and outgroup norms, and inclusion of the outgroup in the self. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology,95(4),843-860.
[92]Voci A., Hewstone M. (2003). Intergroup Contact and Prejudice Toward Immigrants in Italy:The Mediational Role of Anxiety and the Moderational Role of Group Salience. Group Processes& Intergroup Relations, 6(1),37-54.
[93]Vorauer J.D. (2003). Dominant group members in cross-group interaction:Safety or vulnerability in numbers?. Personality and Social Psychology Bulletin,29(4), 498-511.
[94]Vorauer J.D.,& Kumhyr S.M. (2001). Is this about You or Me? Self-Versus Other-Directed Judgments and Feelings in Response to Intergroup Interaction. Personality and Social Psychology Bulletin,27(6),706-719.
[95]Vorauer J.D., Hunter A.J., Main K.J.,& Roy S.A. (2000). Meta-Stereotype Activation:Evidence From Indirect Measures for Specific Evaluative Concerns Experienced by Members of Dominant Groups in Intergroup Interaction. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology,78(4),690-707.
[96]Vorauer J.D., Main K.J.,& O'Connell G.B. (1998). How Do Individuals Expect to Be Viewed by Members of Lower Status Groups? Content and Implications of Meta-Stereotypes. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology,75(4),911-931.
[97]Wilder D.A. (1993b). Freezing intergroup evaluations:Anxiety fosters resistance to counterstereotypic information. In Group Motivation:Social Psychological Perspectives, ed. M.A. Hogg, D. Abrams, pp.68-86. London:Harvester Wheatsheaf.240 pp.