The following is an excerpt of the intervention methodology. For more information, please see the full text of the article on the publisher's website or through your institution's library.

Study 1

Participants A random class consisting of 68 (34 Han, 34 Uygur) high school students, of which 39 were female and 29 were male, aged 16 to 19 years (16.76 ± 0.79), [...]

Procedure Study 1 used the intergroup Attributional Tendency Questionnaire [...] The questionnaire consists of the following 12 different con‐ texts: 3 settings (in a bus station vs. on a bus vs. on a bicycle) × 2 ethnic identities of the story protagonist (Han vs. Uygur) × 2 types of behaviors (desirable vs. undesirable). [...] Participants answered two questions after reading each context. The first was an open‐ended question about the cause of the story protagonist's behavior. [...] The second was a forced‐choice question, requiring participants to choose from an internal [...] or an external [...] reason to explain the story protagonist's behavior. [...]

Experimental design The study was a four‐factor mixed design：2 ethnic identities of the participants (Han vs. Uygur) × 2 ethnic identities of the story protagonists (Han vs. Uygur) × 3 settings (in a bus station vs. on a bus vs. on a bicycle) × 2 types of behaviors (desirable vs. undesirable), with the participants’ ethnic identity as the between‐subject variable, and with the story protagonist's ethnic identity, setting, and behavior type as within‐subject variables.

Study 2

Participants In total, 140 participants (70 Hans and 70 Uygurs), of which 77 were female and 63 were male, aged 15 to 19 years (16.64 ± 0.77) [...]

Procedure [...] Both Han and Uygur participants were told that they were completing a test of imagination ability before they were instructed to imagine a positive intergroup contact with a stranger belonging to the other ethnic group (the experimental group), or to simply imagine an outdoor scene (the control group). [...] Participants in the experimental group were asked to describe the process of their imagined contact in detail to ensure that they had completed the imagination task then. All participants were then required to complete the same questionnaire as in Study 1. [...]

Experimental design This study had a four‐factor mixed design: 2 participants (with vs. without positive imagined intergroup contact) × 2 ethnic identities of the participants (Han vs. Uygur) × 2 ethnic identities of the story protagonists (Han vs. Uygur) × 2 types of behaviors (desirable vs. undesirable). [...]

Study 3

Participants Forty‐two Han participants, 22 of which were female and 20 of which were male, aged 16 to 20 years (17.57 ± 1.174) [...] randomly allocated to the experimental group or the control group. [...]

Procedure [...] First, they were to imagine interacting with a stranger, and then they were to have a discussion with a Uygur participant. [...] Once the first task was finished, believing that they would be having a discussion with a Uygur, participants were taken to another room with a stack of chairs in the corner. They were asked to set out two chairs for the upcoming discussion while the experimenter ostensibly left to get the Uygur participant. Each participant also completed a brief questionnaire about their demographic information and a feeling thermometer measure [...] After each participant left, the distance between the two chairs was measured as a behavioral indication of their implicit intergroup attitude. [...]

Experimental design This study was a one‐factor between‐subject design, with two mental imagery situations (meeting a Uygur stranger vs. meeting a stran‐ ger with no specific features) as the only independent variable, and the distance between the two chairs and the score of the feeling thermometer measure, as dependent variables.