Emerging Trends in The Social and Behavioral Sciences

The Good, the Bad, and the Long‐Term Implications of Social Diversity

Media

Part of The Good, the Bad, and the Long‐Term Implications of Social Diversity

Title

The Good, the Bad, and the Long‐Term Implications of Social Diversity

extracted text

k
PSYHB etrds0465.tex

V2 - 10/22/2018

6:17 P.M.

Page 1

The Good, the Bad, and the
Long-Term Implications of Social
Diversity
MIGUEL R. RAMOS and MILES HEWSTONE

Abstract

k

Demographic trends reveal that modern societies have become more heterogeneous
in terms of their ethnic composition. Concerns about social diversity and its implications have received critical scholarly attention, and it has become a prominent topic
in several social sciences. The recent but already impressive amount of published
research has examined the impact of social diversity (e.g., ethnic, religious diversity)
on societal variables such as economic performance and neighborhood trust. However, results from this body of work have been contradictory and a lack of consensus
in diversity research has undermined the impact of science on policy. To address this
concern, we propose a time-focused perspective in which seemingly contradictory
theoretical perspectives can be integrated to provide a coherent account as to why
social diversity can potentially yield both negative and positive outcomes. This perspective is discussed in light of its implications for diversity politics. A successful
management and planning of these unprecedented demographic changes will dictate the quality of people’s lives.

k

There is a long history of migration around the world, but with changes in
the global economy and increased availability of communication and transportation networks, the number of migrants has dramatically increased over
the last decades. Modern societies are now in constant flux and have become
more diverse than ever before. In 2000, the United Nations estimated that a
total of almost 173 million people were living outside their country of birth,
whilst in 2017 this figure increased by 67% reaching a total of 258 million
individuals (United Nations, 2017). Europe hosted the largest share of these
immigrants (a total of 78 million), a figure that accounted for 30% of the
world’s immigrants in 2017. Outside of Europe, the United States and Canada
hosted 50 M and 8 M immigrants, respectively, with foreign-born residents
being vital for these societies as they compose 15% of the total population
Emerging Trends in the Social and Behavioral Sciences.
Robert A. Scott and Marlis Buchmann (General Editors) with Stephen Kosslyn (Consulting Editor).
© 2018 John Wiley & Sons, Inc. ISBN 978-1-118-90077-2.

1

k

k
PSYHB etrds0465.tex

2

k

V2 - 10/22/2018

6:17 P.M.

Page 2

EMERGING TRENDS IN THE SOCIAL AND BEHAVIORAL SCIENCES

in the United States and 22% in Canada (United Nations, 2017). Moreover,
the United States Census Bureau anticipates that in the next 40 years, the
size of the White population will increase by only 7.4%, whilst the Black
population will grow 70%, and that of Asians and Hispanics by more than
250%—so-called (ethnic) “minorities” will become “the majority.” It is undeniable that our societies are changing—these demographic shifts are having
a major impact across all spheres of life, including the workplace, neighborhood environments, schools, and nations.
Not surprisingly, multiple social sciences have been concerned about the
impact of diversity on societies, the consequences of multiculturalism, and
the adaptation of immigrant populations. And indeed, it is critical to use the
knowledge generated by the social sciences to develop analyses that will be of
practical benefit to leaders and policy makers responsible for managing both
the opportunities and the challenges of diversity. However, the transfer of scientific knowledge into society has faced its own winding path. Despite the
increasing effort of social scientists to contribute to issues of public policy, the
lack of consensus in diversity research has undermined the impact of science
on policy (Eagly, 2016). To address this issue, we propose a novel perspective
in which seemingly contradictory theoretical perspectives can be integrated
to provide a coherent account as to why social diversity provides a context
promoting, potentially, both negative and positive outcomes. We will do so
by presenting a time-focused perspective, where fragmented (and often contradictory) pieces of extant scholarship are not theorized as opposing ideas,
but instead, as different time points of an evolving temporal continuum of
intergroup relations. In the following sections we consider, first, the negative, and then the positive reactions to social diversity. We then outline a
time-focused perspective on the effects of social diversity and, finally, consider the implications of our approach for diversity politics.
THE NEGATIVE REACTIONS TO SOCIAL DIVERSITY
Scholars across the social sciences have highlighted the fact that changes in
social diversity are not always well received by societies and individuals.
Some argue that diversity is likely to result in ethnic competition (Scheepers,
Gijsberts, & Coenders, 2002) and perceived threat (Stephan & Stephan, 2000).
These negative outcomes are thought to emerge because societies are seen
as having limited resources. Thus, increasing heterogeneity (e.g., through
ethnic or religious diversity) should lead to group competition over power,
housing, and jobs, which, in turn, worsens overall intergroup relations.
Other researchers contend that diversity leads to fragmented social norms,
which generate communication difficulties, often resulting in exclusion and
anomie (Seeman, 1959), or, even without animosity, people simply display

k

k

k
PSYHB etrds0465.tex

V2 - 10/22/2018

The Good, the Bad, and the Long-Term Implications of Social Diversity

k

Page 3

3

homophily, preferring those who are similar to themselves (McPherson,
Smith-Lovin, & Cook, 2001).
These factors can perhaps explain why some research has found that
social capital (i.e., aspects of social networks such as social norms, trust,
and collaboration) is lower in communities with high ethnic diversity
(Putnam, 2007). This could also be the reason why ethnic diversity has been
associated with intergroup conflict (Esteban, Mayoral, & Ray, 2012) and
with lower economic performance (Alesina & La Ferrara, 2005), social trust,
civic engagement, and political participation (Kesler & Bloemraad, 2010).
However, a careful meta-analysis of relevant research has shown that the
putative effect whereby diversity drives down trust is much more limited
than Putnam argued, being more typical of the United States than of Europe,
and more likely to be found on measures of trust in neighbours than other
measures of trust (ingroup members, outgroup members, or trust in general;
see van der Meer & Tolsma, 2014).
At the individual level, these negative findings have been substantiated
by empirical work studying interactions in the lab between people of different racial or ethnic backgrounds. Results from this research have shown that
intergroup (compared with within-group) interactions can lead to a threatened social identity (Shelton, Richeson, & Vorauer, 2006) and heightened anxiety (Stephan & Stephan, 1989). Just anticipating such interactions can induce
concerns about being negatively viewed by an interaction partner (Vorauer,
Hunter, Main, & Roy, 2000). During intergroup interactions, individuals have
reported wishing to avoid those who are different, which is detrimental for
them and society at large (Plant & Devine, 2003). There is now a compelling
body of work demonstrating that, at least initially (we return to this point,
below), intergroup interactions can exacerbate intergroup bias, producing
heightened stress and anxiety, less positive emotions, and outgroup avoidance (for a meta-analysis, see Toosi, Babbitt, Ambady, & Sommers, 2012).
These effects have been demonstrated with behavioral, self-report, and physiological measures (Blascovich, Mendes, Hunter, Lickel, & Kowai-Bell, 2001;
Richeson & Shelton, 2003).
THE POSITIVE CONSEQUENCES OF SOCIAL DIVERSITY
Socially diverse contexts offer opportunities that have been associated with
positive intergroup relations. One of these is the greater opportunity for
intergroup contact, which has long been argued to improve intergroup attitudes (Allport, 1954). Work over more than 60 years has demonstrated that
positive intergroup contact reliably reduces prejudice (Brown & Hewstone,
2005; Hewstone & Swart, 2011), intergroup anxiety, and perceived threat
(Islam & Hewstone, 1993; Paolini, Hewstone, Cairns, & Voci, 2004; Savelkoul,

k

6:17 P.M.

k

k
PSYHB etrds0465.tex

4

k

V2 - 10/22/2018

6:17 P.M.

Page 4

EMERGING TRENDS IN THE SOCIAL AND BEHAVIORAL SCIENCES

Gesthuizen, & Scheepers, 2011; Voci & Hewstone, 2003). These findings
have been validated by multiple studies and meta-analyses (Lemmer &
Wagner, 2015; Pettigrew & Tropp, 2006, 2008) and together constitute one of
social psychology’s most important and well-established contributions to
improving intergroup relations. Intergroup contact is effective in improving
intergroup attitudes because it equips people with the social skills and
resources to appraise interactions as non-stressful (Mendes, Blascovich,
Hunter, Lickel, & Jost, 2007), and reduces anxiety while increasing perspective taking, trust, and empathy with outgroup members (Pettigrew &
Tropp, 2008). Another beneficial effect derives from the fact that positive
experiences of intergroup contact promote, in turn, more intergroup contact
contributing to more positive intergroup relations (Trawalter, Richeson, &
Shelton, 2009).
Research conducted at the Oxford Centre for the Study of Intergroup
Conflict has been exploring the role of intergroup contact as a function of
variation in ethnic diversity. Part of this work has examined intergroup contact and social integration in state schools in Oldham, Greater Manchester
(UK). Using longitudinal surveys, social network analysis, and observational
methods, relations between 11–18-year-old White-British and Asian-British
(primarily Muslim) students in mixed, segregated, and recently merged
schools were studied. Results from this fieldwork demonstrated that intergroup contact in school reliably improved intergroup attitudes by boosting
trust, enhancing positive behavior toward outgroups, and reducing prejudice (Hewstone et al., 2018; Schmid, Hewstone, & Al Ramiah, 2014). In
parallel ongoing work, members of our lab have examined the effects of
ethnic diversity on intergroup contact, perceived threat, and trust using
large-scale national surveys in England and Germany, sampling respondents
from neighborhoods of varying degrees of diversity. Findings revealed that
ethnic diversity promotes intergroup contact, which in turn promotes trust
in both ethnic out-group members and neighbors by lowering perceptions
of threat (Schmid, Ramiah, & Hewstone, 2014). These findings suggest that
any perceptions of threat that might have emerged with increased ethnic
diversity were offset by positive intergroup contact, and negative effects
were suppressed by more positive ones. This is consistent with a recent
perspective contending that anxiety, stress, and other negative outcomes of
intergroup relations may be dissipated with time (MacInnis & Page-Gould,
2015).
The positive effects of contact, moreover, are not restricted to the effects
of direct face-to-face intergroup contact. We now know that there are
reliable effects of extended contact—that is, there is a prejudice-reducing
effect if one’s in-group friends have out-groups friends (Vezzali, Hewstone,
Capozza, Giovannini, & Wölfer, 2014; Wright, Aron, McLaughlin-Volpe,

k

k

k
PSYHB etrds0465.tex

V2 - 10/22/2018

The Good, the Bad, and the Long-Term Implications of Social Diversity

6:17 P.M.

Page 5

5

& Ropp, 1997; for a recent meta-analysis, see Zhou, Page-Gould, Aron,
Moyer, & Hewstone, 2018), and extended contact earlier in time promotes
more direct contact later (Wölfer et al., in press). Even more broadly, the
aggregate level of contact in the neighborhood where one lives has a
prejudice-reducing effect over and above the effect of one’s individual level
of contact (Christ et al., 2014).
In sum, the potential negative and positive consequences of diversity are
evident in the very nature of intergroup contact, which can, of course, be
either positive (the focus of research for 60 years) or negative (a more recent
focus). It is, moreover, logical that diverse contexts offer greater opportunities
for not only positive but also negative contact, and that while positive contact
improves, negative contact worsens intergroup relations (Barlow et al., 2012;
Graf, Paolini, & Rubin, 2014). Yet, research also shows that positive contact
is much more frequent than negative contact, so we may expect a net benefit
of contact in diverse settings. A focus of current work is to simultaneously
explore the additive and interactive effects of both positive and negative contact over time.

k

A TIME-FOCUSED PERSPECTIVE ON THE EFFECTS OF SOCIAL
DIVERSITY
It is clear that, under some circumstances, social diversity can have negative implications, but it is also apparent that intergroup contact can mitigate negative effects of diversity. In the social diversity literature, diversity
is typically approached as a construct having a linear direction toward outcomes. Here, we would like to depart from this reasoning and propose that
the effects of social diversity are dynamic. They should be dynamic because
threat and anxiety are likely to be triggered only by recent and rapid increases
rather than stable levels of diversity. Moreover, the beneficial effects of intergroup contact should only be apparent in the long run, after short-term, periodic increases and decreases have been considered (a point acknowledged
by Putnam, 2007, although the focus of his article remained on the negative
sequelae of diversity). For these reasons, it is critical to have a time-focused
perspective to understand reactions to social diversity and its consequences.
To account for this dynamic perspective of diversity, longitudinal studies are
required and, so far, empirical work in this field has predominantly been
cross-sectional. Another limitation of previous work emerges from the fact
that little empirical effort has been made to explain the mechanisms underpinning such effects, making it impossible to evaluate how negative and positive effects may push or pull in either direction (Ramos, Hewstone, Barreto,
& Branscombe, 2016).

k

k

k
PSYHB etrds0465.tex

6

V2 - 10/22/2018

6:17 P.M.

Page 6

EMERGING TRENDS IN THE SOCIAL AND BEHAVIORAL SCIENCES

WHY SHOULD INITIAL REACTIONS TO SOCIAL DIVERSITY BE NEGATIVE AND NOT POSITIVE?

k

Human nature may dictate negative reactions to changes in social diversity,
especially if they occur abruptly or at a fast pace. We are thought to have
evolved with a preference for homogeneity and stability (Caporael, 1997)
and a tendency to approach outgroups with a certain degree of uncertainty
(Stephan & Stephan, 2000). Relatedly, as noted earlier, it has been argued that
humans follow the principle of homophily (McPherson et al., 2001). These
tendencies could perhaps have evolved from a survival instinct given that
unknown others could be friend or foe, prey or predator, and caution in new
encounters could dictate one’s survival.
History from the nineteenth and twentieth centuries is consonant with
these ideas. It shows that rapid ethnic change is often associated with calls
for immigration restriction and support for ethnic nationalism (Kaufmann,
2017) and, in fact, recent political events in the Western world demonstrate
a similar path (e.g., rapid changes in migration in specific locales have been
associated with support for Brexit in the U.K.; Economist, 2016). In line
with this perspective, one of our recent studies analyzing data from more
than 100 countries and 20 years of data shows that an increase in religious
diversity is associated with lower reported quality of life all around the
world. This effect occurs irrespective of political and cultural ideology and is
spread across different continents, suggesting that it may be a typical human
reaction to these demographic changes. However, our results showed no
negative long-term implications of religious diversity for people’s quality
of life. Taken together, these results indicate that despite initial negative
reactions to increasing religious diversity, these tend to dissipate with time.
WHY SHOULD INITIAL REACTIONS TO SOCIAL DIVERSITY DISSIPATE WITH TIME?
As much as we are ready to react with initial negativity to social diversity, we are also equipped with the potential to benefit from intergroup
experiences. Biology and cultural anthropology argue that human beings
evolved and fared better than other species because of this ability. It is
argued that intergroup contact brings a variety of benefits that cannot be
attained by intragroup interactions. First, there is biological advantage in
gaining genetic variability through new mating opportunities (Glémin,
Ronfort, & Bataillon, 2003; Moore & Ali, 1984). Second, intergroup contact
allows individuals to acquire more diverse resources and knowledge
(Bar-Yosef, 2002; Stringer, 2001). A notable example is evidence of tool use
in paleoarcheology. Whilst Homo sapiens used sophisticated tools made from
materials extracted from distant regions, Neanderthal sites from the same
era revealed more rudimentary tools with materials from local areas, along
with evidence of cannibalism and violence (Ambrose, 2010). Homo sapiens

k

k

k
PSYHB etrds0465.tex

V2 - 10/22/2018

The Good, the Bad, and the Long-Term Implications of Social Diversity

k

Page 7

7

obtained materials by contact and trading with foreign populations and, for
this reason, was more adapted and gained reproductive success over the
Neanderthal who fought outgroups. The ability to benefit from intergroup
experiences has been maintained, in present times, and similar phenomena
occur in organizational settings. Research has shown that, for example,
diverse compared to homogenous teams tend to achieve better and more
creative solutions (van Knippenberg, De Dreu, & Homan, 2004).
Our argument is that, in contexts of increasing diversity, benefiting from
these experiences is, however, contingent upon overcoming an initial phase
of negative reactions (e.g., perceived threat, heightened intergroup anxiety).
Thus, in society at large, in neighborhoods, communities, schools, and
even workgroups, changes in social diversity can, initially, be perceived
as threatening and this can be a natural response of human beings who
evolved from environments thousands of years ago where survival was
paramount. And, of course, some time is needed to overcome this initial
resistance and start paving the way for more positive outcomes. Research
we are now conducting using European Social Survey data, including a total
of twenty European countries, provides some evidence of the timeframe of
these processes (Ramos, Bennett, Massey, & Hewstone, 2018). Our findings
suggest that increasing social diversity is associated with negative outgroup
attitudes, but also with greater intergroup contact that emerges as a function
of these demographic changes. However, from the moment that diversity
increases, it takes at least 8 years before intergroup contact reaches a quantity
and quality sufficient to neutralize initial negative effects associated with
these demographic changes. This 8-year timeframe is, of course, just a
reference from European data and may be different in other world regions.
Nonetheless, the relevant messages from this finding are that we may not
reap the benefits of diversity immediately, and that understanding this
timeframe is critical for the appropriate public policy response to address
diversity issues.
IMPLICATIONS FOR DIVERSITY POLITICS
One interesting aspect concerning these processes is that political leaders
have long realized that individuals feel threatened by changes in the demographics of their societies and some use this to gain political support. In this
context, threat is typically triggered by a few steps. One initial step is to
follow a narrative that defines specific group boundaries, with the goal of
shifting, for example, political discussion about immigration into an intergroup discussion (e.g., nationals of a country are portrayed as “us” versus
the immigrants who are portrayed as “them”). After this intergroup context has been made salient, overemphasizing demographic changes (e.g., in

k

6:17 P.M.

k

k
PSYHB etrds0465.tex

8

k

V2 - 10/22/2018

6:17 P.M.

Page 8

EMERGING TRENDS IN THE SOCIAL AND BEHAVIORAL SCIENCES

terms of ethnic, racial, or religious diversity) should trigger perceptions of
identity and cultural threat, consonant with the initial processes described in
our time-focused perspective. Semyonov, Raijman, Tov, and Schmidt (2004)
showed that only the perceived, but not the actual size of the outgroup population was associated with greater perceived threat and exclusionary outgroup
attitudes. To capitalize on this strategy, the solution of closing the borders
(to curb immigration flow) is introduced and rapidly gathers support from
those who were threatened by demographic changes. Interestingly, this is a
remarkably powerful narrative that proved to be successful in recent political
decisions such as the British referendum and the 2017 presidential election in
the United States. Perhaps the reason why these narratives are so powerful is
that they trigger our most primary survival instincts along the lines we discussed above. In agreement with our reasoning, areas that are already diverse
with stable levels of diversity are less susceptible to the apparent allure of
these narratives. This is, for example, the case for London, one of the areas in
the UK less supportive of Brexit (Economist, 2016). Other forms of political
influence whereby this threat response can be triggered include the mainstream media. This was, for example, witnessed when the so-called refugee
crisis hit European countries. The extensive media coverage of this topic led
to great public awareness and heated discussions in the news, social media,
and political debate.
Another reason why such narratives are so powerful relates to the fact that
for the layperson (and for social scientists) it is easier to establish causality
when consequences occur right after a given event and, for this reason, the
notion that social diversity can, in the long run, result in positive outcomes is
more difficult to grasp. In this respect, we believe that education should play
a major role. This is particularly important (but not exclusively, the same is
true for Japan) for most European societies, which are relatively homogenous, are declining in population, and with the present birth rates will have
to receive greater flows of immigration to maintain their workforce. In line
with our reasoning, steep increases in immigration rates will trigger negative
reactions to social diversity. It is therefore extremely important to plan ahead.
The successful planning of this issue is very likely to dictate the quality of
people’s lives in the near future.
A FINAL NOTE
Our perspective on diversity can also be used to understand inconsistencies
in the field. Extant work has been limited to cross-sectional studies and, thus,
depending on which snapshot of the intergroup relations time continuum a
particular study investigates, it may reveal opposing effects of diversity. For
example, after a rapid increase of ethnic diversity, we should be more likely to

k

k

k
PSYHB etrds0465.tex

V2 - 10/22/2018

The Good, the Bad, and the Long-Term Implications of Social Diversity

k

Page 9

9

observe negative effects on intergroup variables such as a lack of trust in outgroups and support for policies restricting immigration. In contrast, a study
conducted in a period of stability should reveal lesser or no effects of ethnic diversity on most intergroup variables. This is perhaps one of the reasons
why there has been a great lack of consensus in work investigating the effects
of ethnic diversity on trust (for a review of these inconsistencies, see van der
Meer & Tolsma, 2014). Understanding how these processes unfold has critical
implications for social policy, as it would allow the promotion of factors that
harness the protective aspects while targeting the pernicious aspects, helping
to turn diversity into a valuable asset in a globalizing world.
We argue that negative reactions to diversity should attenuate with time.
However, it would be a mistake to assume that nothing should be done to
improve the integration of immigrants or the conditions of ethnic, racial, and
religious groups living as minority groups around the world. These groups
typically face social barriers, prejudice, and discrimination, which together
have deleterious consequences for their health (for a review, see Pascoe &
Smart Richman, 2009), which has personal as well as economic costs. And
of course, when political leaders intervene in these processes, they have the
power to escalate initial negative reactions to the level of intergroup conflict
(e.g., as an extreme example, this is what happened under the Nazi regime
with its portrayal of the “Jewish threat”). Our reasoning also points to the
significance of appropriate integration measures. Societies or communities
promoting high levels of segregation of minority groups are more likely to
escalate negative reactions to diversity, given that they are slowing down the
mechanism (i.e., intergroup contact) that mitigates these negative reactions.
Our message is one of cautious, research-based optimism; understanding
that human beings have the ability to benefit from diversity can contribute
to better planning and help societies to capitalize on these inevitable demographic changes associated with globalization and global inequality.
ACKNOWLEDGMENT
This research was supported by a Marie Curie Intra-European Fellowship
(627982) awarded to the first author and a Nuffield Foundation grant
(WEL/43108) awarded to both authors.

REFERENCES
Alesina, A., & La Ferrara, E. (2005). Preferences for redistribution in the land of
opportunities. Journal of Public Economics, 89, 897–931.
Allport, G. W. (1954). The nature of prejudice. Cambridge, MA: Addison-Wesley.

k

6:17 P.M.

k

k
PSYHB etrds0465.tex

10

k

V2 - 10/22/2018

6:17 P.M. Page 10

EMERGING TRENDS IN THE SOCIAL AND BEHAVIORAL SCIENCES

Ambrose, S. H. (2010). Coevolution of composite-tool technology, constructive memory, and language: Implications for the evolution of modern human behavior.
Current Anthropology, 51, 135–147.
Barlow, F. K., Paolini, S., Pedersen, A., Hornsey, M. J., Radke, H. R. M., Harwood, J.
and Sibley, C. G. (2012). The contact caveat: Negative contact predicts increased
prejudice more than positive contact predicts reduced prejudice. Personality and
Social Psychology Bulletin, 38, 1629-1643.
Bar-Yosef, O. (2002). The upper paleolithic revolution. Annual Review of Anthropology,
31, 363–393.
Blascovich, J., Mendes, W. B., Hunter, S. B., Lickel, B., & Kowai-Bell, N. (2001). Perceiver threat in social interactions with stigmatized others. Journal of Personality
and Social Psychology, 80, 253–267.
Brown, R., & Hewstone, M. (2005). An integrative theory of intergroup contact.
Advances in Experimental Social Psychology, 37, 255–343.
Caporael, L. R. (1997). The evolution of truly social cognition: The core configurations
model. Personality and Social Psychology Review, 1, 276–298.
Christ, O., Schmid, K., Lolliot, S., Swart, H., Stolle, D., Tausch, N., & Hewstone, M.
(2014). Contextual effect of positive intergroup contact on outgroup prejudice. Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences, 111, 3996–4000.
Eagly, A. (2016). When passionate advocates meet research on diversity, does the
honest broker stand a chance? Journal of Social Issues, 72, 199–222.
Economist. (2016). The immigration paradox. The Economist, July 16th, 48.
Esteban, J., Mayoral, L., & Ray, D. (2012). Ethnicity and conflict: Theory and facts.
Science, 336, 858–865.
Glémin, S., Ronfort, J., & Bataillon, T. (2003). Patterns of inbreeding depression and
architecture of the load in subdivided populations. Genetics, 165, 2193–2212.
Graf, S., Paolini, S., & Rubin, M. (2014). Negative intergroup contact is more influential, but positive intergroup contact is more common: Assessing contact prominence and contact prevalence in five Central European countries. European Journal
of Social Psychology, 44, 536–547.
Hewstone, M., Ramiah, A. A., Schmid, K., Floe, C., Zalk, M. V., Wölfer, R., & New, R.
(2018). Influence of segregation versus mixing: Intergroup contact and attitudes
among White-British and Asian-British students in high schools in Oldham, England. Theory and Research in Education, 16, 179–203.
Hewstone, M., & Swart, H. (2011). Fifty-odd years of inter-group contact: From
hypothesis to integrated theory. British Journal of Social Psychology, 50, 374–386.
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, 700–710.
Kaufmann, E. (2017). Levels or changes? Ethnic context, immigration and the UK
Independence Party vote. Electoral Studies, 48, 57–69.
Kesler, C., & Bloemraad, I. (2010). Does immigration erode social capital? The conditional effects of immigration-generated diversity on trust, membership, and
participation across 19 countries, 1981-2000. Canadian Journal of Political Science,
43, 319–347.

k

k

k
PSYHB etrds0465.tex

V2 - 10/22/2018

The Good, the Bad, and the Long-Term Implications of Social Diversity

k

6:17 P.M. Page 11

11

Lemmer, G., & Wagner, U. (2015). Can we really reduce ethnic prejudice outside the
lab? A meta-analysis of direct and indirect contact interventions. European Journal
of Social Psychology, 45, 152–168.
MacInnis, C. C., & Page-Gould, E. (2015). How can intergroup interaction be bad if
intergroup contact is good? Exploring and reconciling an apparent paradox in the
science of intergroup relations. Perspectives on Psychological Science, 10, 307–327.
McPherson, M., Smith-Lovin, L., & Cook, J. M. (2001). Birds of a feather: Homophily
in social networks. Annual Review of Sociology, 27, 415–444.
Mendes, W. B., Blascovich, J., Hunter, S., Lickel, B., & Jost, J. (2007). Threatened by the unexpected: Physiological responses during social interactions with
expectancy-violating partners. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 92,
698–716.
Moore, J., & Ali, R. (1984). Are dispersal and inbreeding avoidance related? Animal
Behaviour, 32, 94–112.
Paolini, S., Hewstone, M., Cairns, E., & Voci, A. (2004). Effects of direct and indirect
cross-group friendships on judgments of Catholics and Protestants in Northern
Ireland: The mediating role of an anxiety-reduction mechanism. Personality and
Social Psychology Bulletin, 30, 770–786.
Pascoe, E. A., & Smart Richman, L. (2009). Perceived discrimination and health:
A meta-analytic review. Psychological Bulletin, 135, 531–554.
Pettigrew, T. F., & Tropp, L. R. (2006). A meta-analytic test of intergroup contact theory. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 90, 751–783.
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.
Plant, E. A., & Devine, P. G. (2003). The antecedents and implications of interracial
anxiety. Personality and Social Psychology Bulletin, 29, 790–801.
Putnam, R. D. (2007). E Pluribus Unum: Diversity and community in the twenty-first
century: The 2006 Johan Skytte Prize lecture. Scandinavian Political Studies, 30,
137–174.
Ramos, M. R., Bennett, M., Massey, D., & Hewstone, M., (2018). Are we able to
adapt to increasing societal diversity? Unpublished manuscript: University of Oxford,
Oxford, UK.
Ramos, M. R., Hewstone, M., Barreto, M., & Branscombe, N. R. (2016). The opportunities and challenges of diversity: Explaining its impact on individuals and groups.
European Journal of Social Psychology, 46, 793–806.
Richeson, J. A., & Shelton, J. N. (2003). When prejudice does not pay: Effects of interracial contact on executive function. Psychological Science, 14, 287–290.
Savelkoul, M., Gesthuizen, M., & Scheepers, P. (2011). Explaining relationships
between ethnic diversity and informal social capital across European countries
and regions: Tests of constrict, conflict and contact theory. Social Science Research,
40, 1091–1107.
Scheepers, P., Gijsberts, M., & Coenders, M. (2002). Ethnic exclusionism in European
countries: public opposition to civil rights for legal migrants as a response to perceived ethnic threat. European Sociological Review, 18, 17–34.

k

k

k
PSYHB etrds0465.tex

12

k

V2 - 10/22/2018

6:17 P.M. Page 12

EMERGING TRENDS IN THE SOCIAL AND BEHAVIORAL SCIENCES

Schmid, K., Hewstone, M., & Al Ramiah, A. (2014). Diversity, trust, and intergroup
attitudes: Underlying processes and mechanisms. In Social cohesion and immigration
in Europe and North America (pp. 163–184). London, UK: Routledge.
Schmid, K., Ramiah, A., & Hewstone, M. (2014). Neighborhood ethnic diversity and
trust: The role of intergroup contact and perceived threat. Psychological Science, 25,
665–674.
Seeman, M. (1959). On the meaning of alienation. American Sociological Review,
783–791.
Semyonov, M., Raijman, R., Tov, A. Y., & Schmidt, P. (2004). Population size, perceived threat and exclusion: A multiple-indicators analysis of attitudes toward
foreigners in Germany. Social Science Research, 33, 681–701.
Shelton, J. N., Richeson, J. A., & Vorauer, J. D. (2006). Threatened identities and
interethnic interactions. European Review of Social Psychology, 17, 321–358.
Stephan, W. G., & Stephan, C. W. (1989). Antecedents of intergroup anxiety in
Asian-Americans and Hispanic-Americans. International Journal of Intercultural
Relations, 13, 203–219.
Stephan, W. G., & Stephan, C. W. (2000). An integrated threat theory of prejudice.
In S. Oskamp (Ed.), Reducing prejudice and discrimination (pp. 23–45). Mahwah, NJ:
Erlbaum.
Stringer, C. (2001). The evolution of modern humans: Where are we now. General
Anthropology, 7, 1–5.
Toosi, N. R., Babbitt, L. G., Ambady, N., & Sommers, S. R. (2012). Dyadic interracial
interactions: A meta-analysis. Psychological Bulletin, 138, 1–27.
Trawalter, S., Richeson, J. A., & Shelton, J. N. (2009). Predicting behavior during interracial interactions: A stress and coping approach. Personality and Social Psychology
Review, 13, 243–268.
United Nations (2017). International Migration 2017. Retrieved 29 March, 2018, from
http://www.un.org/en/development/desa/population/migration/publica
tions/wallchart/docs/MigrationWallChart2017.pdf
van der Meer, T., & Tolsma, J. (2014). Ethnic diversity and its effects on social cohesion. Annual Review of Sociology, 40, 459–478.
van Knippenberg, D., De Dreu, C. K., & Homan, A. C. (2004). Work group diversity and group performance: An integrative model and research agenda. Journal of
Applied Psychology, 89, 1008–1022.
Vezzali, L., Hewstone, M., Capozza, D., Giovannini, D., & Wölfer, R. (2014). Improving intergroup relations with extended and vicarious forms of indirect contact.
European Review of Social Psychology, 25, 314–389.
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, 37–54.
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, 690–707.

k

k

k
PSYHB etrds0465.tex

V2 - 10/22/2018

The Good, the Bad, and the Long-Term Implications of Social Diversity

6:17 P.M. Page 13

13

Wölfer, R., Christ, O., Schmid, K., Tausch, N., Buchallik, F. M., Vertovec, S., Hewstone,
M. (in press). Indirect contact predicts direct contact: longitudinal evidence and
the mediating role of intergroup anxiety.
Wright, S. C., Aron, A., McLaughlin-Volpe, T., & Ropp, S. A. (1997). The extended
contact effect: Knowledge of cross-group friendships and prejudice. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 73, 73–90.
Zhou, S., Page-Gould, E., Aron, A., Moyer, A., & Hewstone, M. (2018). The
extended contact hypothesis: A meta-analysis on 20 years of research.
Personality and Social Psychology Review. Advance online publication.
https://doi.org/10.1177/1088868318762647.

Miguel R. Ramos is a postdoctoral research associate at the Department of
Experimental Psychology, University of Oxford, UK. He received his PhD
from the University of St. Andrews, UK. His research investigates the impact
of stereotyping and discrimination on disadvantaged groups.
Miles Hewstone is professor of Social Psychology and Public Policy, and fellow of New College, University of Oxford, UK. He has published extensively
on a wide range of topics in social psychology, focusing recently on prejudice and stereotyping, intergroup contact, and the reduction of intergroup
conflict. He is a fellow of the British Academy.
k

RELATED ESSAYS
Reconciliation and Peace-Making: Insights from Studies on Nonhuman
Animals (Anthropology), Sonja E. Koski
Exploring Opportunities in Cultural Diversity (Political Science), David D.
Laitin and Sangick Jeon
Politics of Immigration Policy (Political Science), Jeannette Money
Attitude: Construction versus Disposition (Psychology), Charles G. Lord
Cognitive Processes Involved in Stereotyping (Psychology), Susan T. Fiske
and Cydney H. Dupree
Emotion and Intergroup Relations (Psychology), Diane M. Mackie et al.
Empathy Gaps between Helpers and Help-Seekers: Implications for Cooperation (Psychology), Vanessa K. Bohns and Francis J. Flynn
Longitudinal Data Analysis (Methods), Todd D. Little et al.
Misinformation and How to Correct It (Psychology), John Cook et al.
Stereotype Threat (Psychology), Toni Schmader and William M. Hall
The Development of Social Trust (Psychology), Vikram K. Jaswal and Marissa
B. Drell
Assimilation and Its Discontents (Sociology), Min Zhou
Class, Cognition, and Face-to-Face Interaction (Sociology), Lauren A. Rivera
Cultural Conflict (Sociology), Ian Mullins
Globalization Backlash (Economics), Mabel Berezin

k

k

k
PSYHB etrds0465.tex

14

k

V2 - 10/22/2018

6:17 P.M. Page 14

EMERGING TRENDS IN THE SOCIAL AND BEHAVIORAL SCIENCES

Ethnic Enclaves (Sociology), Steven J. Gold
Immigration and the Changing Status of Asian Americans (Sociology),
Jennifer Lee
Migrant Networks (Sociology), Filiz Garip and Asad L. Asad
Stereotype Content (Sociology), Beatrice H. Capestany and Lasana T. Harris
Immigrant Sociocultural Adaptation, Identification, and Belonging
(Sociology), Sarah J. Mahler
Social Network Analysis in the Study of Ethnic Inequalities (Psychology),
Frank Kalter
The Role of Social Mechanisms in the Formation of Social Inequalities
(Sociology),Martin Diewald
Social Inequality across the Life Course: Societal Unfolding and Individual
Agency (Psychology), Jutta Heckhausen
Language Proficiency and the Integration of Immigrant Students in the
Education System (Education), Petra Stanat and Aileen Edele
Diversity in Groups (Sociology), Catarina R. Fernandes and Jeffrey T. Polzer
Exploring Opportunities in Cultural Diversity (Political Science), David D.
Laitin and Sangick Jeon
Skill Production Regimes and Immigrant Labor Market Integration (Sociology), Irena Kogan
Immigrant Adolescents: Opportunities and Challenges (Psychology), Peter F.
Titzmann and Linda Juang
The Transnationalized Social Question: Migration and Social Inequalities
(Sociology), Thomas Faist
Demography and Social Inequality (Sociology), Anette Fasang
Between the Devil and the Deep Blue Sea: Refugee Youth in Resettlement
(Clinical psychology), Maryam Kia-Keating et al.
The Process of Racial Re-Segregation in Housing and Schools: The Sociology
of Reputation (Sociology/Education), Amy Wells

k

k



k
PSYHB etrds0465.tex

V2 - 10/22/2018

6:17 P.M.

Page 1

The Good, the Bad, and the
Long-Term Implications of Social
Diversity
MIGUEL R. RAMOS and MILES HEWSTONE

Abstract

k

Demographic trends reveal that modern societies have become more heterogeneous
in terms of their ethnic composition. Concerns about social diversity and its implications have received critical scholarly attention, and it has become a prominent topic
in several social sciences. The recent but already impressive amount of published
research has examined the impact of social diversity (e.g., ethnic, religious diversity)
on societal variables such as economic performance and neighborhood trust. However, results from this body of work have been contradictory and a lack of consensus
in diversity research has undermined the impact of science on policy. To address this
concern, we propose a time-focused perspective in which seemingly contradictory
theoretical perspectives can be integrated to provide a coherent account as to why
social diversity can potentially yield both negative and positive outcomes. This perspective is discussed in light of its implications for diversity politics. A successful
management and planning of these unprecedented demographic changes will dictate the quality of people’s lives.

k

There is a long history of migration around the world, but with changes in
the global economy and increased availability of communication and transportation networks, the number of migrants has dramatically increased over
the last decades. Modern societies are now in constant flux and have become
more diverse than ever before. In 2000, the United Nations estimated that a
total of almost 173 million people were living outside their country of birth,
whilst in 2017 this figure increased by 67% reaching a total of 258 million
individuals (United Nations, 2017). Europe hosted the largest share of these
immigrants (a total of 78 million), a figure that accounted for 30% of the
world’s immigrants in 2017. Outside of Europe, the United States and Canada
hosted 50 M and 8 M immigrants, respectively, with foreign-born residents
being vital for these societies as they compose 15% of the total population
Emerging Trends in the Social and Behavioral Sciences.
Robert A. Scott and Marlis Buchmann (General Editors) with Stephen Kosslyn (Consulting Editor).
© 2018 John Wiley & Sons, Inc. ISBN 978-1-118-90077-2.

1

k

k
PSYHB etrds0465.tex

2

k

V2 - 10/22/2018

6:17 P.M.

Page 2

EMERGING TRENDS IN THE SOCIAL AND BEHAVIORAL SCIENCES

in the United States and 22% in Canada (United Nations, 2017). Moreover,
the United States Census Bureau anticipates that in the next 40 years, the
size of the White population will increase by only 7.4%, whilst the Black
population will grow 70%, and that of Asians and Hispanics by more than
250%—so-called (ethnic) “minorities” will become “the majority.” It is undeniable that our societies are changing—these demographic shifts are having
a major impact across all spheres of life, including the workplace, neighborhood environments, schools, and nations.
Not surprisingly, multiple social sciences have been concerned about the
impact of diversity on societies, the consequences of multiculturalism, and
the adaptation of immigrant populations. And indeed, it is critical to use the
knowledge generated by the social sciences to develop analyses that will be of
practical benefit to leaders and policy makers responsible for managing both
the opportunities and the challenges of diversity. However, the transfer of scientific knowledge into society has faced its own winding path. Despite the
increasing effort of social scientists to contribute to issues of public policy, the
lack of consensus in diversity research has undermined the impact of science
on policy (Eagly, 2016). To address this issue, we propose a novel perspective
in which seemingly contradictory theoretical perspectives can be integrated
to provide a coherent account as to why social diversity provides a context
promoting, potentially, both negative and positive outcomes. We will do so
by presenting a time-focused perspective, where fragmented (and often contradictory) pieces of extant scholarship are not theorized as opposing ideas,
but instead, as different time points of an evolving temporal continuum of
intergroup relations. In the following sections we consider, first, the negative, and then the positive reactions to social diversity. We then outline a
time-focused perspective on the effects of social diversity and, finally, consider the implications of our approach for diversity politics.
THE NEGATIVE REACTIONS TO SOCIAL DIVERSITY
Scholars across the social sciences have highlighted the fact that changes in
social diversity are not always well received by societies and individuals.
Some argue that diversity is likely to result in ethnic competition (Scheepers,
Gijsberts, & Coenders, 2002) and perceived threat (Stephan & Stephan, 2000).
These negative outcomes are thought to emerge because societies are seen
as having limited resources. Thus, increasing heterogeneity (e.g., through
ethnic or religious diversity) should lead to group competition over power,
housing, and jobs, which, in turn, worsens overall intergroup relations.
Other researchers contend that diversity leads to fragmented social norms,
which generate communication difficulties, often resulting in exclusion and
anomie (Seeman, 1959), or, even without animosity, people simply display

k

k

k
PSYHB etrds0465.tex

V2 - 10/22/2018

The Good, the Bad, and the Long-Term Implications of Social Diversity

k

Page 3

3

homophily, preferring those who are similar to themselves (McPherson,
Smith-Lovin, & Cook, 2001).
These factors can perhaps explain why some research has found that
social capital (i.e., aspects of social networks such as social norms, trust,
and collaboration) is lower in communities with high ethnic diversity
(Putnam, 2007). This could also be the reason why ethnic diversity has been
associated with intergroup conflict (Esteban, Mayoral, & Ray, 2012) and
with lower economic performance (Alesina & La Ferrara, 2005), social trust,
civic engagement, and political participation (Kesler & Bloemraad, 2010).
However, a careful meta-analysis of relevant research has shown that the
putative effect whereby diversity drives down trust is much more limited
than Putnam argued, being more typical of the United States than of Europe,
and more likely to be found on measures of trust in neighbours than other
measures of trust (ingroup members, outgroup members, or trust in general;
see van der Meer & Tolsma, 2014).
At the individual level, these negative findings have been substantiated
by empirical work studying interactions in the lab between people of different racial or ethnic backgrounds. Results from this research have shown that
intergroup (compared with within-group) interactions can lead to a threatened social identity (Shelton, Richeson, & Vorauer, 2006) and heightened anxiety (Stephan & Stephan, 1989). Just anticipating such interactions can induce
concerns about being negatively viewed by an interaction partner (Vorauer,
Hunter, Main, & Roy, 2000). During intergroup interactions, individuals have
reported wishing to avoid those who are different, which is detrimental for
them and society at large (Plant & Devine, 2003). There is now a compelling
body of work demonstrating that, at least initially (we return to this point,
below), intergroup interactions can exacerbate intergroup bias, producing
heightened stress and anxiety, less positive emotions, and outgroup avoidance (for a meta-analysis, see Toosi, Babbitt, Ambady, & Sommers, 2012).
These effects have been demonstrated with behavioral, self-report, and physiological measures (Blascovich, Mendes, Hunter, Lickel, & Kowai-Bell, 2001;
Richeson & Shelton, 2003).
THE POSITIVE CONSEQUENCES OF SOCIAL DIVERSITY
Socially diverse contexts offer opportunities that have been associated with
positive intergroup relations. One of these is the greater opportunity for
intergroup contact, which has long been argued to improve intergroup attitudes (Allport, 1954). Work over more than 60 years has demonstrated that
positive intergroup contact reliably reduces prejudice (Brown & Hewstone,
2005; Hewstone & Swart, 2011), intergroup anxiety, and perceived threat
(Islam & Hewstone, 1993; Paolini, Hewstone, Cairns, & Voci, 2004; Savelkoul,

k

6:17 P.M.

k

k
PSYHB etrds0465.tex

4

k

V2 - 10/22/2018

6:17 P.M.

Page 4

EMERGING TRENDS IN THE SOCIAL AND BEHAVIORAL SCIENCES

Gesthuizen, & Scheepers, 2011; Voci & Hewstone, 2003). These findings
have been validated by multiple studies and meta-analyses (Lemmer &
Wagner, 2015; Pettigrew & Tropp, 2006, 2008) and together constitute one of
social psychology’s most important and well-established contributions to
improving intergroup relations. Intergroup contact is effective in improving
intergroup attitudes because it equips people with the social skills and
resources to appraise interactions as non-stressful (Mendes, Blascovich,
Hunter, Lickel, & Jost, 2007), and reduces anxiety while increasing perspective taking, trust, and empathy with outgroup members (Pettigrew &
Tropp, 2008). Another beneficial effect derives from the fact that positive
experiences of intergroup contact promote, in turn, more intergroup contact
contributing to more positive intergroup relations (Trawalter, Richeson, &
Shelton, 2009).
Research conducted at the Oxford Centre for the Study of Intergroup
Conflict has been exploring the role of intergroup contact as a function of
variation in ethnic diversity. Part of this work has examined intergroup contact and social integration in state schools in Oldham, Greater Manchester
(UK). Using longitudinal surveys, social network analysis, and observational
methods, relations between 11–18-year-old White-British and Asian-British
(primarily Muslim) students in mixed, segregated, and recently merged
schools were studied. Results from this fieldwork demonstrated that intergroup contact in school reliably improved intergroup attitudes by boosting
trust, enhancing positive behavior toward outgroups, and reducing prejudice (Hewstone et al., 2018; Schmid, Hewstone, & Al Ramiah, 2014). In
parallel ongoing work, members of our lab have examined the effects of
ethnic diversity on intergroup contact, perceived threat, and trust using
large-scale national surveys in England and Germany, sampling respondents
from neighborhoods of varying degrees of diversity. Findings revealed that
ethnic diversity promotes intergroup contact, which in turn promotes trust
in both ethnic out-group members and neighbors by lowering perceptions
of threat (Schmid, Ramiah, & Hewstone, 2014). These findings suggest that
any perceptions of threat that might have emerged with increased ethnic
diversity were offset by positive intergroup contact, and negative effects
were suppressed by more positive ones. This is consistent with a recent
perspective contending that anxiety, stress, and other negative outcomes of
intergroup relations may be dissipated with time (MacInnis & Page-Gould,
2015).
The positive effects of contact, moreover, are not restricted to the effects
of direct face-to-face intergroup contact. We now know that there are
reliable effects of extended contact—that is, there is a prejudice-reducing
effect if one’s in-group friends have out-groups friends (Vezzali, Hewstone,
Capozza, Giovannini, & Wölfer, 2014; Wright, Aron, McLaughlin-Volpe,

k

k

k
PSYHB etrds0465.tex

V2 - 10/22/2018

The Good, the Bad, and the Long-Term Implications of Social Diversity

6:17 P.M.

Page 5

5

& Ropp, 1997; for a recent meta-analysis, see Zhou, Page-Gould, Aron,
Moyer, & Hewstone, 2018), and extended contact earlier in time promotes
more direct contact later (Wölfer et al., in press). Even more broadly, the
aggregate level of contact in the neighborhood where one lives has a
prejudice-reducing effect over and above the effect of one’s individual level
of contact (Christ et al., 2014).
In sum, the potential negative and positive consequences of diversity are
evident in the very nature of intergroup contact, which can, of course, be
either positive (the focus of research for 60 years) or negative (a more recent
focus). It is, moreover, logical that diverse contexts offer greater opportunities
for not only positive but also negative contact, and that while positive contact
improves, negative contact worsens intergroup relations (Barlow et al., 2012;
Graf, Paolini, & Rubin, 2014). Yet, research also shows that positive contact
is much more frequent than negative contact, so we may expect a net benefit
of contact in diverse settings. A focus of current work is to simultaneously
explore the additive and interactive effects of both positive and negative contact over time.

k

A TIME-FOCUSED PERSPECTIVE ON THE EFFECTS OF SOCIAL
DIVERSITY
It is clear that, under some circumstances, social diversity can have negative implications, but it is also apparent that intergroup contact can mitigate negative effects of diversity. In the social diversity literature, diversity
is typically approached as a construct having a linear direction toward outcomes. Here, we would like to depart from this reasoning and propose that
the effects of social diversity are dynamic. They should be dynamic because
threat and anxiety are likely to be triggered only by recent and rapid increases
rather than stable levels of diversity. Moreover, the beneficial effects of intergroup contact should only be apparent in the long run, after short-term, periodic increases and decreases have been considered (a point acknowledged
by Putnam, 2007, although the focus of his article remained on the negative
sequelae of diversity). For these reasons, it is critical to have a time-focused
perspective to understand reactions to social diversity and its consequences.
To account for this dynamic perspective of diversity, longitudinal studies are
required and, so far, empirical work in this field has predominantly been
cross-sectional. Another limitation of previous work emerges from the fact
that little empirical effort has been made to explain the mechanisms underpinning such effects, making it impossible to evaluate how negative and positive effects may push or pull in either direction (Ramos, Hewstone, Barreto,
& Branscombe, 2016).

k

k

k
PSYHB etrds0465.tex

6

V2 - 10/22/2018

6:17 P.M.

Page 6

EMERGING TRENDS IN THE SOCIAL AND BEHAVIORAL SCIENCES

WHY SHOULD INITIAL REACTIONS TO SOCIAL DIVERSITY BE NEGATIVE AND NOT POSITIVE?

k

Human nature may dictate negative reactions to changes in social diversity,
especially if they occur abruptly or at a fast pace. We are thought to have
evolved with a preference for homogeneity and stability (Caporael, 1997)
and a tendency to approach outgroups with a certain degree of uncertainty
(Stephan & Stephan, 2000). Relatedly, as noted earlier, it has been argued that
humans follow the principle of homophily (McPherson et al., 2001). These
tendencies could perhaps have evolved from a survival instinct given that
unknown others could be friend or foe, prey or predator, and caution in new
encounters could dictate one’s survival.
History from the nineteenth and twentieth centuries is consonant with
these ideas. It shows that rapid ethnic change is often associated with calls
for immigration restriction and support for ethnic nationalism (Kaufmann,
2017) and, in fact, recent political events in the Western world demonstrate
a similar path (e.g., rapid changes in migration in specific locales have been
associated with support for Brexit in the U.K.; Economist, 2016). In line
with this perspective, one of our recent studies analyzing data from more
than 100 countries and 20 years of data shows that an increase in religious
diversity is associated with lower reported quality of life all around the
world. This effect occurs irrespective of political and cultural ideology and is
spread across different continents, suggesting that it may be a typical human
reaction to these demographic changes. However, our results showed no
negative long-term implications of religious diversity for people’s quality
of life. Taken together, these results indicate that despite initial negative
reactions to increasing religious diversity, these tend to dissipate with time.
WHY SHOULD INITIAL REACTIONS TO SOCIAL DIVERSITY DISSIPATE WITH TIME?
As much as we are ready to react with initial negativity to social diversity, we are also equipped with the potential to benefit from intergroup
experiences. Biology and cultural anthropology argue that human beings
evolved and fared better than other species because of this ability. It is
argued that intergroup contact brings a variety of benefits that cannot be
attained by intragroup interactions. First, there is biological advantage in
gaining genetic variability through new mating opportunities (Glémin,
Ronfort, & Bataillon, 2003; Moore & Ali, 1984). Second, intergroup contact
allows individuals to acquire more diverse resources and knowledge
(Bar-Yosef, 2002; Stringer, 2001). A notable example is evidence of tool use
in paleoarcheology. Whilst Homo sapiens used sophisticated tools made from
materials extracted from distant regions, Neanderthal sites from the same
era revealed more rudimentary tools with materials from local areas, along
with evidence of cannibalism and violence (Ambrose, 2010). Homo sapiens

k

k

k
PSYHB etrds0465.tex

V2 - 10/22/2018

The Good, the Bad, and the Long-Term Implications of Social Diversity

k

Page 7

7

obtained materials by contact and trading with foreign populations and, for
this reason, was more adapted and gained reproductive success over the
Neanderthal who fought outgroups. The ability to benefit from intergroup
experiences has been maintained, in present times, and similar phenomena
occur in organizational settings. Research has shown that, for example,
diverse compared to homogenous teams tend to achieve better and more
creative solutions (van Knippenberg, De Dreu, & Homan, 2004).
Our argument is that, in contexts of increasing diversity, benefiting from
these experiences is, however, contingent upon overcoming an initial phase
of negative reactions (e.g., perceived threat, heightened intergroup anxiety).
Thus, in society at large, in neighborhoods, communities, schools, and
even workgroups, changes in social diversity can, initially, be perceived
as threatening and this can be a natural response of human beings who
evolved from environments thousands of years ago where survival was
paramount. And, of course, some time is needed to overcome this initial
resistance and start paving the way for more positive outcomes. Research
we are now conducting using European Social Survey data, including a total
of twenty European countries, provides some evidence of the timeframe of
these processes (Ramos, Bennett, Massey, & Hewstone, 2018). Our findings
suggest that increasing social diversity is associated with negative outgroup
attitudes, but also with greater intergroup contact that emerges as a function
of these demographic changes. However, from the moment that diversity
increases, it takes at least 8 years before intergroup contact reaches a quantity
and quality sufficient to neutralize initial negative effects associated with
these demographic changes. This 8-year timeframe is, of course, just a
reference from European data and may be different in other world regions.
Nonetheless, the relevant messages from this finding are that we may not
reap the benefits of diversity immediately, and that understanding this
timeframe is critical for the appropriate public policy response to address
diversity issues.
IMPLICATIONS FOR DIVERSITY POLITICS
One interesting aspect concerning these processes is that political leaders
have long realized that individuals feel threatened by changes in the demographics of their societies and some use this to gain political support. In this
context, threat is typically triggered by a few steps. One initial step is to
follow a narrative that defines specific group boundaries, with the goal of
shifting, for example, political discussion about immigration into an intergroup discussion (e.g., nationals of a country are portrayed as “us” versus
the immigrants who are portrayed as “them”). After this intergroup context has been made salient, overemphasizing demographic changes (e.g., in

k

6:17 P.M.

k

k
PSYHB etrds0465.tex

8

k

V2 - 10/22/2018

6:17 P.M.

Page 8

EMERGING TRENDS IN THE SOCIAL AND BEHAVIORAL SCIENCES

terms of ethnic, racial, or religious diversity) should trigger perceptions of
identity and cultural threat, consonant with the initial processes described in
our time-focused perspective. Semyonov, Raijman, Tov, and Schmidt (2004)
showed that only the perceived, but not the actual size of the outgroup population was associated with greater perceived threat and exclusionary outgroup
attitudes. To capitalize on this strategy, the solution of closing the borders
(to curb immigration flow) is introduced and rapidly gathers support from
those who were threatened by demographic changes. Interestingly, this is a
remarkably powerful narrative that proved to be successful in recent political
decisions such as the British referendum and the 2017 presidential election in
the United States. Perhaps the reason why these narratives are so powerful is
that they trigger our most primary survival instincts along the lines we discussed above. In agreement with our reasoning, areas that are already diverse
with stable levels of diversity are less susceptible to the apparent allure of
these narratives. This is, for example, the case for London, one of the areas in
the UK less supportive of Brexit (Economist, 2016). Other forms of political
influence whereby this threat response can be triggered include the mainstream media. This was, for example, witnessed when the so-called refugee
crisis hit European countries. The extensive media coverage of this topic led
to great public awareness and heated discussions in the news, social media,
and political debate.
Another reason why such narratives are so powerful relates to the fact that
for the layperson (and for social scientists) it is easier to establish causality
when consequences occur right after a given event and, for this reason, the
notion that social diversity can, in the long run, result in positive outcomes is
more difficult to grasp. In this respect, we believe that education should play
a major role. This is particularly important (but not exclusively, the same is
true for Japan) for most European societies, which are relatively homogenous, are declining in population, and with the present birth rates will have
to receive greater flows of immigration to maintain their workforce. In line
with our reasoning, steep increases in immigration rates will trigger negative
reactions to social diversity. It is therefore extremely important to plan ahead.
The successful planning of this issue is very likely to dictate the quality of
people’s lives in the near future.
A FINAL NOTE
Our perspective on diversity can also be used to understand inconsistencies
in the field. Extant work has been limited to cross-sectional studies and, thus,
depending on which snapshot of the intergroup relations time continuum a
particular study investigates, it may reveal opposing effects of diversity. For
example, after a rapid increase of ethnic diversity, we should be more likely to

k

k

k
PSYHB etrds0465.tex

V2 - 10/22/2018

The Good, the Bad, and the Long-Term Implications of Social Diversity

k

Page 9

9

observe negative effects on intergroup variables such as a lack of trust in outgroups and support for policies restricting immigration. In contrast, a study
conducted in a period of stability should reveal lesser or no effects of ethnic diversity on most intergroup variables. This is perhaps one of the reasons
why there has been a great lack of consensus in work investigating the effects
of ethnic diversity on trust (for a review of these inconsistencies, see van der
Meer & Tolsma, 2014). Understanding how these processes unfold has critical
implications for social policy, as it would allow the promotion of factors that
harness the protective aspects while targeting the pernicious aspects, helping
to turn diversity into a valuable asset in a globalizing world.
We argue that negative reactions to diversity should attenuate with time.
However, it would be a mistake to assume that nothing should be done to
improve the integration of immigrants or the conditions of ethnic, racial, and
religious groups living as minority groups around the world. These groups
typically face social barriers, prejudice, and discrimination, which together
have deleterious consequences for their health (for a review, see Pascoe &
Smart Richman, 2009), which has personal as well as economic costs. And
of course, when political leaders intervene in these processes, they have the
power to escalate initial negative reactions to the level of intergroup conflict
(e.g., as an extreme example, this is what happened under the Nazi regime
with its portrayal of the “Jewish threat”). Our reasoning also points to the
significance of appropriate integration measures. Societies or communities
promoting high levels of segregation of minority groups are more likely to
escalate negative reactions to diversity, given that they are slowing down the
mechanism (i.e., intergroup contact) that mitigates these negative reactions.
Our message is one of cautious, research-based optimism; understanding
that human beings have the ability to benefit from diversity can contribute
to better planning and help societies to capitalize on these inevitable demographic changes associated with globalization and global inequality.
ACKNOWLEDGMENT
This research was supported by a Marie Curie Intra-European Fellowship
(627982) awarded to the first author and a Nuffield Foundation grant
(WEL/43108) awarded to both authors.

REFERENCES
Alesina, A., & La Ferrara, E. (2005). Preferences for redistribution in the land of
opportunities. Journal of Public Economics, 89, 897–931.
Allport, G. W. (1954). The nature of prejudice. Cambridge, MA: Addison-Wesley.

k

6:17 P.M.

k

k
PSYHB etrds0465.tex

10

k

V2 - 10/22/2018

6:17 P.M. Page 10

EMERGING TRENDS IN THE SOCIAL AND BEHAVIORAL SCIENCES

Ambrose, S. H. (2010). Coevolution of composite-tool technology, constructive memory, and language: Implications for the evolution of modern human behavior.
Current Anthropology, 51, 135–147.
Barlow, F. K., Paolini, S., Pedersen, A., Hornsey, M. J., Radke, H. R. M., Harwood, J.
and Sibley, C. G. (2012). The contact caveat: Negative contact predicts increased
prejudice more than positive contact predicts reduced prejudice. Personality and
Social Psychology Bulletin, 38, 1629-1643.
Bar-Yosef, O. (2002). The upper paleolithic revolution. Annual Review of Anthropology,
31, 363–393.
Blascovich, J., Mendes, W. B., Hunter, S. B., Lickel, B., & Kowai-Bell, N. (2001). Perceiver threat in social interactions with stigmatized others. Journal of Personality
and Social Psychology, 80, 253–267.
Brown, R., & Hewstone, M. (2005). An integrative theory of intergroup contact.
Advances in Experimental Social Psychology, 37, 255–343.
Caporael, L. R. (1997). The evolution of truly social cognition: The core configurations
model. Personality and Social Psychology Review, 1, 276–298.
Christ, O., Schmid, K., Lolliot, S., Swart, H., Stolle, D., Tausch, N., & Hewstone, M.
(2014). Contextual effect of positive intergroup contact on outgroup prejudice. Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences, 111, 3996–4000.
Eagly, A. (2016). When passionate advocates meet research on diversity, does the
honest broker stand a chance? Journal of Social Issues, 72, 199–222.
Economist. (2016). The immigration paradox. The Economist, July 16th, 48.
Esteban, J., Mayoral, L., & Ray, D. (2012). Ethnicity and conflict: Theory and facts.
Science, 336, 858–865.
Glémin, S., Ronfort, J., & Bataillon, T. (2003). Patterns of inbreeding depression and
architecture of the load in subdivided populations. Genetics, 165, 2193–2212.
Graf, S., Paolini, S., & Rubin, M. (2014). Negative intergroup contact is more influential, but positive intergroup contact is more common: Assessing contact prominence and contact prevalence in five Central European countries. European Journal
of Social Psychology, 44, 536–547.
Hewstone, M., Ramiah, A. A., Schmid, K., Floe, C., Zalk, M. V., Wölfer, R., & New, R.
(2018). Influence of segregation versus mixing: Intergroup contact and attitudes
among White-British and Asian-British students in high schools in Oldham, England. Theory and Research in Education, 16, 179–203.
Hewstone, M., & Swart, H. (2011). Fifty-odd years of inter-group contact: From
hypothesis to integrated theory. British Journal of Social Psychology, 50, 374–386.
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, 700–710.
Kaufmann, E. (2017). Levels or changes? Ethnic context, immigration and the UK
Independence Party vote. Electoral Studies, 48, 57–69.
Kesler, C., & Bloemraad, I. (2010). Does immigration erode social capital? The conditional effects of immigration-generated diversity on trust, membership, and
participation across 19 countries, 1981-2000. Canadian Journal of Political Science,
43, 319–347.

k

k

k
PSYHB etrds0465.tex

V2 - 10/22/2018

The Good, the Bad, and the Long-Term Implications of Social Diversity

k

6:17 P.M. Page 11

11

Lemmer, G., & Wagner, U. (2015). Can we really reduce ethnic prejudice outside the
lab? A meta-analysis of direct and indirect contact interventions. European Journal
of Social Psychology, 45, 152–168.
MacInnis, C. C., & Page-Gould, E. (2015). How can intergroup interaction be bad if
intergroup contact is good? Exploring and reconciling an apparent paradox in the
science of intergroup relations. Perspectives on Psychological Science, 10, 307–327.
McPherson, M., Smith-Lovin, L., & Cook, J. M. (2001). Birds of a feather: Homophily
in social networks. Annual Review of Sociology, 27, 415–444.
Mendes, W. B., Blascovich, J., Hunter, S., Lickel, B., & Jost, J. (2007). Threatened by the unexpected: Physiological responses during social interactions with
expectancy-violating partners. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 92,
698–716.
Moore, J., & Ali, R. (1984). Are dispersal and inbreeding avoidance related? Animal
Behaviour, 32, 94–112.
Paolini, S., Hewstone, M., Cairns, E., & Voci, A. (2004). Effects of direct and indirect
cross-group friendships on judgments of Catholics and Protestants in Northern
Ireland: The mediating role of an anxiety-reduction mechanism. Personality and
Social Psychology Bulletin, 30, 770–786.
Pascoe, E. A., & Smart Richman, L. (2009). Perceived discrimination and health:
A meta-analytic review. Psychological Bulletin, 135, 531–554.
Pettigrew, T. F., & Tropp, L. R. (2006). A meta-analytic test of intergroup contact theory. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 90, 751–783.
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.
Plant, E. A., & Devine, P. G. (2003). The antecedents and implications of interracial
anxiety. Personality and Social Psychology Bulletin, 29, 790–801.
Putnam, R. D. (2007). E Pluribus Unum: Diversity and community in the twenty-first
century: The 2006 Johan Skytte Prize lecture. Scandinavian Political Studies, 30,
137–174.
Ramos, M. R., Bennett, M., Massey, D., & Hewstone, M., (2018). Are we able to
adapt to increasing societal diversity? Unpublished manuscript: University of Oxford,
Oxford, UK.
Ramos, M. R., Hewstone, M., Barreto, M., & Branscombe, N. R. (2016). The opportunities and challenges of diversity: Explaining its impact on individuals and groups.
European Journal of Social Psychology, 46, 793–806.
Richeson, J. A., & Shelton, J. N. (2003). When prejudice does not pay: Effects of interracial contact on executive function. Psychological Science, 14, 287–290.
Savelkoul, M., Gesthuizen, M., & Scheepers, P. (2011). Explaining relationships
between ethnic diversity and informal social capital across European countries
and regions: Tests of constrict, conflict and contact theory. Social Science Research,
40, 1091–1107.
Scheepers, P., Gijsberts, M., & Coenders, M. (2002). Ethnic exclusionism in European
countries: public opposition to civil rights for legal migrants as a response to perceived ethnic threat. European Sociological Review, 18, 17–34.

k

k

k
PSYHB etrds0465.tex

12

k

V2 - 10/22/2018

6:17 P.M. Page 12

EMERGING TRENDS IN THE SOCIAL AND BEHAVIORAL SCIENCES

Schmid, K., Hewstone, M., & Al Ramiah, A. (2014). Diversity, trust, and intergroup
attitudes: Underlying processes and mechanisms. In Social cohesion and immigration
in Europe and North America (pp. 163–184). London, UK: Routledge.
Schmid, K., Ramiah, A., & Hewstone, M. (2014). Neighborhood ethnic diversity and
trust: The role of intergroup contact and perceived threat. Psychological Science, 25,
665–674.
Seeman, M. (1959). On the meaning of alienation. American Sociological Review,
783–791.
Semyonov, M., Raijman, R., Tov, A. Y., & Schmidt, P. (2004). Population size, perceived threat and exclusion: A multiple-indicators analysis of attitudes toward
foreigners in Germany. Social Science Research, 33, 681–701.
Shelton, J. N., Richeson, J. A., & Vorauer, J. D. (2006). Threatened identities and
interethnic interactions. European Review of Social Psychology, 17, 321–358.
Stephan, W. G., & Stephan, C. W. (1989). Antecedents of intergroup anxiety in
Asian-Americans and Hispanic-Americans. International Journal of Intercultural
Relations, 13, 203–219.
Stephan, W. G., & Stephan, C. W. (2000). An integrated threat theory of prejudice.
In S. Oskamp (Ed.), Reducing prejudice and discrimination (pp. 23–45). Mahwah, NJ:
Erlbaum.
Stringer, C. (2001). The evolution of modern humans: Where are we now. General
Anthropology, 7, 1–5.
Toosi, N. R., Babbitt, L. G., Ambady, N., & Sommers, S. R. (2012). Dyadic interracial
interactions: A meta-analysis. Psychological Bulletin, 138, 1–27.
Trawalter, S., Richeson, J. A., & Shelton, J. N. (2009). Predicting behavior during interracial interactions: A stress and coping approach. Personality and Social Psychology
Review, 13, 243–268.
United Nations (2017). International Migration 2017. Retrieved 29 March, 2018, from
http://www.un.org/en/development/desa/population/migration/publica
tions/wallchart/docs/MigrationWallChart2017.pdf
van der Meer, T., & Tolsma, J. (2014). Ethnic diversity and its effects on social cohesion. Annual Review of Sociology, 40, 459–478.
van Knippenberg, D., De Dreu, C. K., & Homan, A. C. (2004). Work group diversity and group performance: An integrative model and research agenda. Journal of
Applied Psychology, 89, 1008–1022.
Vezzali, L., Hewstone, M., Capozza, D., Giovannini, D., & Wölfer, R. (2014). Improving intergroup relations with extended and vicarious forms of indirect contact.
European Review of Social Psychology, 25, 314–389.
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, 37–54.
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, 690–707.

k

k

k
PSYHB etrds0465.tex

V2 - 10/22/2018

The Good, the Bad, and the Long-Term Implications of Social Diversity

6:17 P.M. Page 13

13

Wölfer, R., Christ, O., Schmid, K., Tausch, N., Buchallik, F. M., Vertovec, S., Hewstone,
M. (in press). Indirect contact predicts direct contact: longitudinal evidence and
the mediating role of intergroup anxiety.
Wright, S. C., Aron, A., McLaughlin-Volpe, T., & Ropp, S. A. (1997). The extended
contact effect: Knowledge of cross-group friendships and prejudice. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 73, 73–90.
Zhou, S., Page-Gould, E., Aron, A., Moyer, A., & Hewstone, M. (2018). The
extended contact hypothesis: A meta-analysis on 20 years of research.
Personality and Social Psychology Review. Advance online publication.
https://doi.org/10.1177/1088868318762647.

Miguel R. Ramos is a postdoctoral research associate at the Department of
Experimental Psychology, University of Oxford, UK. He received his PhD
from the University of St. Andrews, UK. His research investigates the impact
of stereotyping and discrimination on disadvantaged groups.
Miles Hewstone is professor of Social Psychology and Public Policy, and fellow of New College, University of Oxford, UK. He has published extensively
on a wide range of topics in social psychology, focusing recently on prejudice and stereotyping, intergroup contact, and the reduction of intergroup
conflict. He is a fellow of the British Academy.
k

RELATED ESSAYS
Reconciliation and Peace-Making: Insights from Studies on Nonhuman
Animals (Anthropology), Sonja E. Koski
Exploring Opportunities in Cultural Diversity (Political Science), David D.
Laitin and Sangick Jeon
Politics of Immigration Policy (Political Science), Jeannette Money
Attitude: Construction versus Disposition (Psychology), Charles G. Lord
Cognitive Processes Involved in Stereotyping (Psychology), Susan T. Fiske
and Cydney H. Dupree
Emotion and Intergroup Relations (Psychology), Diane M. Mackie et al.
Empathy Gaps between Helpers and Help-Seekers: Implications for Cooperation (Psychology), Vanessa K. Bohns and Francis J. Flynn
Longitudinal Data Analysis (Methods), Todd D. Little et al.
Misinformation and How to Correct It (Psychology), John Cook et al.
Stereotype Threat (Psychology), Toni Schmader and William M. Hall
The Development of Social Trust (Psychology), Vikram K. Jaswal and Marissa
B. Drell
Assimilation and Its Discontents (Sociology), Min Zhou
Class, Cognition, and Face-to-Face Interaction (Sociology), Lauren A. Rivera
Cultural Conflict (Sociology), Ian Mullins
Globalization Backlash (Economics), Mabel Berezin

k

k

k
PSYHB etrds0465.tex

14

k

V2 - 10/22/2018

6:17 P.M. Page 14

EMERGING TRENDS IN THE SOCIAL AND BEHAVIORAL SCIENCES

Ethnic Enclaves (Sociology), Steven J. Gold
Immigration and the Changing Status of Asian Americans (Sociology),
Jennifer Lee
Migrant Networks (Sociology), Filiz Garip and Asad L. Asad
Stereotype Content (Sociology), Beatrice H. Capestany and Lasana T. Harris
Immigrant Sociocultural Adaptation, Identification, and Belonging
(Sociology), Sarah J. Mahler
Social Network Analysis in the Study of Ethnic Inequalities (Psychology),
Frank Kalter
The Role of Social Mechanisms in the Formation of Social Inequalities
(Sociology),Martin Diewald
Social Inequality across the Life Course: Societal Unfolding and Individual
Agency (Psychology), Jutta Heckhausen
Language Proficiency and the Integration of Immigrant Students in the
Education System (Education), Petra Stanat and Aileen Edele
Diversity in Groups (Sociology), Catarina R. Fernandes and Jeffrey T. Polzer
Exploring Opportunities in Cultural Diversity (Political Science), David D.
Laitin and Sangick Jeon
Skill Production Regimes and Immigrant Labor Market Integration (Sociology), Irena Kogan
Immigrant Adolescents: Opportunities and Challenges (Psychology), Peter F.
Titzmann and Linda Juang
The Transnationalized Social Question: Migration and Social Inequalities
(Sociology), Thomas Faist
Demography and Social Inequality (Sociology), Anette Fasang
Between the Devil and the Deep Blue Sea: Refugee Youth in Resettlement
(Clinical psychology), Maryam Kia-Keating et al.
The Process of Racial Re-Segregation in Housing and Schools: The Sociology
of Reputation (Sociology/Education), Amy Wells

k

k