About

Angelika Love

I am a social integration and diversity researcher and consultant. Whether in academia, through collaborations with NGOs, local government, the Armed Forces, or as a volunteer: I am passionate about bringing together people who want to learn from one another, are ready to grapple with diversity, and believe that a team can be greater than the sum of its parts.

In 2020, I completed my doctorate in social psychology at the University of Oxford. In my research, I use large data sets to try to understand friendships across group divides, and combine survey and social network analysis to study both individuals and their social environments.

Data matters. However, I believe that the personal stories of people standing at the fault lines dividing our societies and building bridges across those divides, can add tremendous depth to our data-driven understanding of the social world.

That’s why I not only publish in academic journals and speak at research conferences, but also record a podcast featuring one-on-one conversations with social integration practitioners.

I champion the marriage of Data and Doing. Because integration is a behaviour, not simply a thought.

 

Podcast

Angelika Love’s Conversations is a podcast featuring conversations between Angelika Love, social psychologist and social integration researcher, and integration practitioners: entrepreneurs, activists, and academics who, in their unique ways, are building bridges across rifts in society.

On this page, you can find out more about each guest featured on the podcast. To listen to all episodes and to find out when the next season launches, please subscribe!

“In-depth conversations with Angelika are not only effortless, but I also find them personally enriching and truly worthwhile. Angelika listens with compassion and great care for detail and, by asking well-placed and insightful questions, is able to turn unstructured thoughts into stories worth telling.”

Helen Willis (Season One)

Bonus Episodes (November 2020)

General Sir Peter Wall on Leadership

Season Two (November 2020)

Season One (May 2020)

Robi Gorna on a Campaigner’s Career


Would you like to suggest a conversation partner for the podcast?

Writing

Never Waste a Crisis (Part 2): Impactful Decision-Making

Boards are tasked with providing strategic oversight. But the Covid-19 pandemic has prompted some charity boards to become more heavily involved with day-to-day operational activities. Shifting the focus from the here-and-now to more medium- to long-term strategic issues will be essential if boards are to keep their organisations on track. What can boards do to ensure that their decisions lead to effective governance and oversight during a period of remote work, distraction and volatility?

Never Waste a Crisis (Part 1): Holding Effective Meetings

Boards in the charity sector are operating in a challenging environment. Covid-19 has created huge need for charitable services, while constraining sources of funding and volunteering support. Governance effectiveness is under scrutiny while many charities are also finding themselves at the brink of viability and are facing truly existential decisions.

This autumn, whilst I was working for the decision-science consultancy Leapwise, we partnered with New Philanthropy Capital on a pro bono project to support the sector. We interviewed CEOs and Chairs of UK charities as well as board advisory experts, collected new data from trustees, and integrated their best-practice insights with our knowledge on decision-science.

The result is a a report on how boards can equip themselves for a challenging period of decision-making. Staying true to the saying “Never waste a crisis!”, we believe that the disruption caused by the Covid-19 pandemic is presenting boards with an opportunity to assess the effectiveness of their meetings and to revisit their decision-making processes.

Why Diversity Improves Decision-Making

What is it about diversity that improves decision-making and performance, and how can leaders harness diversity in their organisations? That is the question Tom Gash, CEO of the decision-making consultancy Leapwise, and I recently grappled with in a blog that was published in Public Finance, the magazine of the Chartered Institute of Public Finance & Accountancy. This is an extract; you can read the whole piece on the Public Finance website and find all the associated academic references on the Leapwise website.

Research

Bridging group divides: A theoretical overview of the “what” and “how” of Gateway Groups

Love, A. & Levy, A. (2019)

Journal of Social Issues, 2, 414-435, DOI: 10.1111/josi.12327

One of the most recent developments in the realm of intergroup relations is that of the gateway group notion. This conceptual framework addresses the potential of groups with multiple social backgrounds to play a role in the facilitation of positive intergroup relations between their distinct social counterparts (e.g., immigrants as a gateway between home and host countries). Given their shared identity with different social groups, people with multiple identities can potentially bridge the cleft between the two otherwise separate groups with which they are affiliated. In this article, we first provide a theoretical introduction to the gateway group notion and review preliminary experimental and social network‐based research on gateway groups’ potential to improve intergroup relations. We then integrate this novel concept with the existing literature on intergroup contact and social categorization and discuss the potential social implications of gateway groups.

 

Reducing intergroup bias through intergroup contact: Twenty years of progress and future directions

Dovidio JF., Love A., Schellhaas FMH., Hewstone M. (2017)

Group Processes and Intergroup Relations, 20, 606-620. DOI: 10.1177/1368430217712052

Classic research on the contact hypothesis focused on the direct relationship between the antecedents (conditions under which contact occurs) and the outcomes (primarily, the reduction of prejudice) of intergroup contact. Recent work has taken a broader view of contact processes and effects. We review key developments over the past 20 years, identifying different forms of contact, factors that mediate and moderate the effects of contact, and both the nature and temporal stage and the varied outcomes of contact. We then identify several research directions to address pressing theoretical and practical issues. These issues concern (a) group processes and intergroup relations, (b) intergroup contact in the context of multiple categorization, (c) structural- and individual-level processes, (d) a broader range of individual-level outcomes (e.g., health), and (e) impact on social change. Contact theory and research provides a comprehensive conceptual foundation, allied to a range of powerful empirical techniques, for important new advances and practical applications for improving intergroup relations and producing more equitable outcomes across groups.

 

Intergroup contact and social change: Implications of negative and positive contact for collective action in advantaged and disadvantaged groups

Reimer NK., Becker JC., Benz A., Christ O., Dhont K., Klocke U., Neji S., Rychlowska M., Schmid K., Hewstone M. (2017)

Personality and Social Psychology Bulletin, 43, 121 – 136, DOI: 10.1177/0146167216676478

Previous research has shown that (a) positive intergroup contact with an advantaged group can discourage collective action among disadvantaged-group members and (b) positive intergroup contact can encourage advantaged-group members to take action on behalf of disadvantaged outgroups. Two studies investigated the effects of negative as well as positive intergroup contact. Study 1 ( n = 482) found that negative but not positive contact with heterosexual people was associated with sexual-minority students’ engagement in collective action (via group identification and perceived discrimination). Among heterosexual students, positive and negative contacts were associated with, respectively, more and less LGB (lesbian, gay, bisexual) activism. Study 2 ( N = 1,469) found that only negative contact (via perceived discrimination) predicted LGBT (lesbian, gay, bisexual, and transgender) students’ collective action intentions longitudinally while only positive contact predicted heterosexual/cisgender students’ LGBT activism. Implications for the relationship between intergroup contact, collective action, and social change are discussed.

 

 

 

 

Collaboration

I am available for freelance consulting roles, select speaking engagements, interviews, and article commissions. Please note that I am based in Germany and able to work with you both in English and in German. Upon request, I am happy to provide you with a detailed CV and references.

I would also be delighted to hear from you if you would like to discuss your work on social integration and the possibility of appearing on the Angelika Love’s Conversations podcast.

Please use the contact form to get in touch!


“Angelika has a bright mind, with a huge capacity for deep and engaging conversations with high powered stakeholders from diverse backgrounds. Her empathy and carefully honed communications skills make her an impressive member of any team.”

Robin Gorna

“The design of survey tools and analyses conducted by Angelika Love and her colleagues formed the backbone to our impact report and were extremely impressive and insightful.”

Antony Hawkins

“At St John’s College Oxford, Angelika has been able to create a supportive space for aspiring leaders to network while exploring, sharing and practicing new skills. She approaches any role with an open mind and willingness to listen, reflect and learn.”

Alice Purkiss