Research has proposed different models of how contact situations should be structured to maximize contact effects, focusing in particular on the role of categorization during contact. We conducted two experimental field interventions (Ns = 247 and 247) to test models that integrate different levels of categorization. Each of the tested models was contrasted against a no-intervention control condition. In both studies, we assessed effects shortly after the intervention (1 week later; i.e., posttest) and then after approximately 6 months (i.e., follow-up). In the first study, results generally supported the model where categorization precedes decategorization, showing effects on major dependent measures highlighted in research on intergroup contact: quantity and quality of contact, cross-group friendships, intergroup anxiety (marginal effect at follow-up), outgroup attitudes (only at follow-up). Evidence for follow-up effects for this model was, however, weaker in Study 2, where the delayed effects of the intervention emerged only indirectly, via changes in contact quality, outgroup attitudes, and approach behavioral intentions at posttest. Comparisons of the other two models (decategorization then categorization; and simultaneous categorization and decategorization) with the control condition (only in Study 1) provided weaker and inconsistent results.

研究提出了如何构建接触情境以最大化接触效果的不同模型，特别关注分类在接触过程中的作用。我们进行了两次实验现场干预（Ns = 247 和 247）来测试集成不同级别分类的模型。每个测试模型都与无干预控制条件进行了对比。在这两项研究中，我们在干预后不久（1 周后；即后测）和大约 6 个月后（即随访）评估了效果。在第一项研究中，结果普遍支持分类先于去分类的模型，显示了对群体间接触研究中强调的主要依赖测量的影响：接触的数量和质量、跨群体友谊、群体间焦虑（后续的边际效应），外群体态度（仅在后续行动中）。然而，该模型的后续效应的证据在研究 2 中较弱，其中干预的延迟效应仅通过接触质量的变化间接出现，外群体态度，并在后测中接近行为意图。其他两个模型（先分类然后分类；同时分类和分类）与控制条件（仅在研究 1 中）的比较提供了较弱和不一致的结果。