Contact theory is a well-established paradigm for improving intergroup relations—positive contact between groups promotes social harmony by increasing intergroup warmth. A longstanding critique of this paradigm is that contact does not necessarily promote social equality. Recent research has blunted this critique by showing that contact correlates positively with political solidarity expressed by dominant groups toward subordinate groups, thus furthering the goal of equality. However, this research precludes causal inferences because it conflates within-person change (people with higher contact subsequently expressing higher solidarity) and between-person stability (people with chronically high contact simultaneously expressing chronically high solidarity, and vice versa). We addressed this problem in a highly powered, seven-wave study using two different measures of contact and three different measures of political solidarity (N = 22,646). Results showed no within-person change over a 1-year period (inconsistent with a causal effect), but significant between-person stability (consistent with third-variable explanations). This reinforces doubts about contact as a strategy for promoting equality.

How does identity influence economic behavior in the labor market? I investigate this question in rural India, focusing on the effect of caste identity on job-specific labor supply. In a field experiment, laborers choose whether to take up various job offers, which differ in associations with specific castes. Workers are less willing to accept offers that are linked to castes other than their own, especially when those castes rank lower in the social hierarchy. Workers forgo large payments to avoid job offers that conflict with their caste identity, even when these decisions are made in private.