In a world increasingly shaped by globalization, understanding and fostering good cross-group relations became crucial to mitigating intergroup differences and potential conflicts. Drawing on...Show moreIn a world increasingly shaped by globalization, understanding and fostering good cross-group relations became crucial to mitigating intergroup differences and potential conflicts. Drawing on intergroup contact theory, the goal of this paper is to investigate whether the well-established effects of intergroup contact on prejudice reduction hold true in non-Western countries as it does in a Western context. The paper further criticises prior literature on its lack of generalizability beyond Western perspectives, and argues that cultural specificities and diversity of human behaviour globally should be considered when examining the dynamics of prejudice. The central hypothesis posits that intergroup contact with outgroup members generally leads to lower prejudice levels among the dominant group. This is further operationalized by using interfaith meeting attendance among Muslims as an indicator of intergroup contact with Christians, as well as using social distancing levels as indicators of prejudice. Final results indicate a significant negative relationship between intergroup contact and prejudice levels, supporting the central hypothesis. In return, this contributes to a broader understanding of prejudice dynamics and the effectiveness of intergroup contact as a tool for prejudice reduction in non-Western contexts. By focusing on Muslim-Christian interactions in the "Global East," the research sheds light on the nuances of cross-group relations in diverse cultural settings, emphasizing the need for a more inclusive approach in intergroup contact research.Show less
Very recently, it was revealed that Dutch citizens are now generally supportive of nuclear energy: the supporters outnumber the opponents (Centraal Bureau voor de Statistiek [CBS], 2023)....Show moreVery recently, it was revealed that Dutch citizens are now generally supportive of nuclear energy: the supporters outnumber the opponents (Centraal Bureau voor de Statistiek [CBS], 2023). Supporters cite the fact that no carbon dioxide is emitted during generation and the need to guarantee a sufficient energy supply as reasons for their support of nuclear energy (Van Engeland & Van der Schelde, 2021). Nuclear energy has not always had high favourability ratings (e.g. Pampel, 2011). One of the reasons for this low support is that nuclear energy has not only been associated with benefits, but also with substantial risks, such as the risk of meltdown and the risks related to nuclear waste (Stoutenborough et al., 2013). The fact that support for nuclear energy apparently fluctuates with time suggests that actors (e.g. the media, politicians) may be able to influence support for the technology by framing it in a certain way. Indeed, nuclear energy has been framed in various ways in Dutch media (Vossen, 2020). Existing research has found that framing can alter attitudes toward nuclear energy (Bickerstaff et al., 2008; Bird et al., 2014; Feldman & Hart, 2018; Pidgeon et al., 2008). However, research on the effect of positive framing (i.e framing designed to increase support) and negative framing (i.e. framing designed to decrease support) on attitudes toward nuclear energy has not yet been conducted in the Netherlands. Additionally, there is reason to believe that the size of the effect of positive and negative frames on support for nuclear energy depends on the values one endorses (De Groot et al., 2013; Entman, 1993; Perlaviciute & Steg, 2015). Existing research has not looked into this hypothesis. Thus, the present study addresses two research questions. Firstly, to what extent does framing affect support for nuclear energy? Secondly, to what extent does the size of the framing effect depend on the values one endorses?Show less
