Does confronting prejudice reduce intergroup bias? A meta-analytic review

Confronting prejudice is a promising strategy for reducing intergroup bias. The current meta-analysis estimated the effects of confronting prejudice on intergroup bias in the confronted person and examined the impact of potential moderators. Eligible studies measured intergroup bias in participants confronted vs. not confronted for intergroup bias. A three-level mixed-effects analysis on 91 effect sizes found a significant, medium-sized effect of confronting prejudice on reducing intergroup bias (g+ = 0.54). There was only limited evidence of publication bias. Confrontation was differentially effective at reducing different types of intergroup bias with a medium-to-large effect on using or endorsing stereotypes, small-to-medium effects on behavior and behavioral intentions, and no significant effects on cognitive prejudice. Effects were otherwise largely robust to differences in confrontation, sample, and study design characteristics. Yet, studies predominantly focused on whether confronting the use of stereotypes reduced subsequent use of stereotypes in artificial settings, and primarily sampled US-based, young, White adults, making it difficult to generalize effects to other forms of intergroup bias and populations, particularly in real-world settings. Studies also tended to measure intergroup bias immediately after confrontation, so the duration of effects over longer periods is less clear. To better evaluate the potential of confrontation as a prejudice reduction technique, future research should examine whether confronting prejudice reduces different forms of intergroup bias in more diverse participant samples and settings, over longer periods, and further test theoretical mediators of these effects.