Dialogue Across Difference: Practice, Theory, and Research on Intergroup Dialogue

Notes

NOTES chAPTER 1 1. Brown v. Board of Education, 347 US 483 (1954). 2. Grutter v. Bollinger, 539 US 306 (2003). 3. Ibid, 3–4. 4. Actual practices and experiences with diversity—not merely attending a diverse campus—were held to be the way in which diversity produces educational impact in amicus briefs submitted by the American Psychological Association and the American Educational Research Association (citing Chang 1999; Hurtado 2001; Gurin et al. 2002; Orfield and Kurlaender 2001). 5. Scott Page, private communication. chAPTER 2 1. A curriculum design team developed a standard curriculum that was implemented at the nine collaborating institutions (Multi-University Intergroup Dialogue Research Project 2005). The team members included Craig Alimo, Gary Anderson, Margarita M. Arellano, Gloria J. Bouis, Teresa Brett, Dominic Cobb, Eva Fatigoni, Patricia Gurin, Joycelyn Landrum-Brown, Gretchen Lopez, Kelly Maxwell, Biren (Ratnesh) Nagda, Jaclyn Rodriguez, Thomas Walker, Kathleen Wong (Lau), Anna Yeakley, and Ximena Zúñiga. The team drew heavily from intergroup dialogue curricula developed at Arizona State University (Treviño and Maxwell 1999), University of Massachusetts (Zúñiga and Cytron-Walker 2003), University of Michigan (Program on Intergroup Relations 2003) and University of Washington (Nagda 2001). For a more detailed description of se- 418 NOTES lect activities, see the ASHE Higher Education Report by Ximena Zúñiga and her colleagues (2007). chAPTER 3 1. This work shows that the same affective brain circuits are activated both when people feel their own pain and the pain or distress of others. In one of the first studies, Vittorio Gallese and his colleagues (1996) demonstrated through singlecell recordings in macaque monkeys that brain cells, called mirror neurons, located in area F5 of the premotor cortex fired not only when a monkey acted but also when the monkey observed another one making the same action. “Later on, by mapping regions of the human brain using Functional Magnetic Resonance Imaging (fMRI), it was discovered that human areas that presumably had mirror neurons also communicated with the brain’s emotional or limbic system, facilitating connection with another’s feelings, probably by mirroring those feelings. This neural circuitry is presumed to be the basis of empathic behavior, in which actions in response to the distress of others are virtually instantaneous” (Olson 2008, 2). A related area of research has investigated the network of brain regions thought to support mental inference and the processes by which we understand stories (Mar 2011). Raymond Mar concludes that although a quantitative metaanalysis reveals an overlap in the brain regions associated with mental inference and story comprehension, the exact relationship between these two processes is not yet clear. Both of these processes are involved in empathy. 2. Wil Haygood, “One Family’s Plunge from the Middle Class into Poverty,” Washington Post, November 19, 2010. Available at: http://www.washingtonpost.com/ wp-dyn/content/story/2010/11/19/ST2010111900317.html (accessed January 23, 2013). chAPTER 4 1. Detailed presentation of all these methods and consent forms is available in a project guidebook on the Russell Sage Foundation website. 2. In this study, the units of data at each level are not statistically independent of one another and ignoring this interdependency yields misleadingly small standard errors when estimating the effect of intergroup dialogue on the outcomes of interest. MLM properly estimates the effect of IGD by accounting for the nesting of multiple time points of data within each student and the multiple students within each dialogue, control, or social science comparison groups. 3. Although our structural equation model (SEM) does not account for the hierar- NOTES 419 chical structure of the data for this study, we conducted sensitivity analyses that partial out students’ dialogue group means from their individual scores to bolster confidence in the estimation of the reported pathways to the outcomes of intergroup dialogue. 4. Multiple imputations were done with ten datasets, which reduces the potential bias introduced when estimating the effect of intergroup dialogue using only observed data. Analyses of missing data patterns suggest that a number of measured variables were associated with missingness in a predictable pattern. Thus, we assume that the data were missing at random (MAR) such that missing data depend on observed data but not on unobserved data. Multiple imputation corrects for this kind of bias using the available observed data to predict and impute missing values. After these relationships are accounted for, MAR assumes that the patterns of missingness are completely random. In contrast, including...