Quote:
Originally Posted by feniin
[You must be logged in to view images. Log in or Register.]
No need to imagine anything. I don't have hate in my heart, especially for some poor bigot on the other end of the comment chain.
|
How do you reconcile this with calling me a hookworm infested red cap? That's pretty clearly a hateful statement.
Quote:
|
Originally Posted by feniin
I wish you all the best and hope that some day you'll leave your small town and meet some people who don't look and think exactly like yourself.
|
The contact hypothesis is probably the result of the bias of sociologists. When
Paluck et Al revisited the topic they had to throw out 99% of the studies used Pettigrew & Troop:
Quote:
|
Originally Posted by Paluck
When searching for policy-relevant findings among the hundreds of studies that comprise the contact literature to date, we used the following two critiques of the literature as criteria for determining whether a research study was capable of generating actionable research findings: first, did the study assign a contact intervention randomly, allowing for unbiased causal inference about the effects of intergroup contact? Second, were outcomes measured at least one day after the contact intervention began? Testing whether intervention effects endure beyond the first day of engagement is a minimum policy standard of efficacy. This requirement also reflects the greater stock we put in studies that separate the experimental intervention process from the measurement process. Of the hundreds of studies we reviewed, only 27 experiments track post-intervention outcomes for at least one day. Notably, just 11 of these studies focus on contact across racial or ethnic lines, which has been a concern of courts and policy-makers from the start of intergroup contact research.
|
Their conclusion was that the contact hypothesis only holds for the disabled.