Page 185 - Ana Kozina and Nora Wiium, eds. ▪︎ Positive Youth Development in Contexts. Ljubljana: Educational Research Institute, 2021. Digital Library, Dissertationes (Scientific Monographs), 42.
P. 185
contact-based interventions to reduce ethnic prejudice ...
“extended contact”) and were implemented in the school context (school,
pupils, students, teenagers, adolescent*, child*, “primary education”, “sec-
ondary education”, “high school”). We used Boolean operators to combine
and limit our search.
Searches were conducted based on title words, keywords and the ab-
stract. The flow diagram below shows the literature search process (Fig. 1).
First, we entered our search terms and limited our search by adjusting pa-
rameters to only include empirical studies written in the English language.
We then merged the three databases and excluded duplicates. Article eligi-
bility was assessed by the researcher, first based on the title, then on the ab-
stract, according to the inclusion criteria. The collecting and reporting of
results was done according to the PRISMA guidelines (Moher et al., 2009).
Inclusion criteria
Interventions had to meet the following criteria to be included in the study:
1. The research was written in English.
2. Sufficient data were provided to enable effect-size calculations.
The PICOS inclusion criteria:
3. Population: The target group was young people attending prima-
ry and secondary school, aged between 6–18 years.
4. Intervention: The study included a standardised contact-based
intervention (i.e. direct, extended, vicarious, imagined) aimed at
lowering ethnic prejudice against refugees and individuals with a
migratory background, implemented in the school context.
5. Comparison: The intervention involved a comparison of a control
and an experimental group.
6. Outcome: Cognitive, affective and behavioural aspects of ethnic
prejudice were measured.
7. Study: The research had an experimental design.
Coding procedure
Suitable articles were subjected to a recording procedure. Relevant infor-
mation about each intervention was recorded: the country of implemen-
tation, type of intervention, ethnic status of the target group, age of par-
ticipants, administrator of the intervention, number of sessions, duration
185
“extended contact”) and were implemented in the school context (school,
pupils, students, teenagers, adolescent*, child*, “primary education”, “sec-
ondary education”, “high school”). We used Boolean operators to combine
and limit our search.
Searches were conducted based on title words, keywords and the ab-
stract. The flow diagram below shows the literature search process (Fig. 1).
First, we entered our search terms and limited our search by adjusting pa-
rameters to only include empirical studies written in the English language.
We then merged the three databases and excluded duplicates. Article eligi-
bility was assessed by the researcher, first based on the title, then on the ab-
stract, according to the inclusion criteria. The collecting and reporting of
results was done according to the PRISMA guidelines (Moher et al., 2009).
Inclusion criteria
Interventions had to meet the following criteria to be included in the study:
1. The research was written in English.
2. Sufficient data were provided to enable effect-size calculations.
The PICOS inclusion criteria:
3. Population: The target group was young people attending prima-
ry and secondary school, aged between 6–18 years.
4. Intervention: The study included a standardised contact-based
intervention (i.e. direct, extended, vicarious, imagined) aimed at
lowering ethnic prejudice against refugees and individuals with a
migratory background, implemented in the school context.
5. Comparison: The intervention involved a comparison of a control
and an experimental group.
6. Outcome: Cognitive, affective and behavioural aspects of ethnic
prejudice were measured.
7. Study: The research had an experimental design.
Coding procedure
Suitable articles were subjected to a recording procedure. Relevant infor-
mation about each intervention was recorded: the country of implemen-
tation, type of intervention, ethnic status of the target group, age of par-
ticipants, administrator of the intervention, number of sessions, duration
185
