{'fraction_non_alphanumeric': 0.01846381093057607, 'fraction_numerical': 0.0, 'mean_word_length': 5.878172588832487, 'pattern_counts': {'":': 0, '<': 0, '<?xml version=': 0, '>': 0, 'https://': 0, 'lorem ipsum': 0, 'www.': 0, 'xml': 0}, 'pii_count': 0, 'substrings_counts': 0, 'word_list_counts': {'cursed_substrings.json': 0, 'profanity_word_list.json': 0, 'sexual_word_list.json': 0, 'zh_pornsignals.json': 0}}
Improving intergroup relations with extended and vicarious forms of indirect contact

Research in social psychology has provided impressive evidence that intergroup contact reduces prejudice. However, to the extent that strategies based on direct contact are sometimes difficult to implement, scholars have more recently focused on indirect contact. An effective form of indirect contact is extended contact. According to the extended contact hypothesis, simply knowing that ingroup members have outgroup friends (extended contact), or observing these friendships vicariously (vicarious contact), can improve intergroup relations. Since its initial formulation a large body of studies has supported the validity of the extended contact hypothesis. In reviewing the available literature on two forms of indirect contact (extended and vicarious), we outline a model that identifies their antecedents and consequences, spanning from cognitive to affective to behavioural outcomes. In addition to identifying the main moderators of indirect contact, we also distinguish two different routes, one cognitive and one affective, that underlie what processes mediate their effects. Finally, we indicate some possible avenues for future research and we consider how direct and indirect contact strategies can be used in combination to improve intergroup relations.