In explaining or reducing prejudice, the literature so far has largely focused on either individual differences (such as social-ideological beliefs) or contextual factors (such as the amount of diversity in one’s environment or norms predominantly endorsed by one’s ingroup). With three different projects, we aimed to bridge these two explanations by adopting a person-within-context perspective and to see how dispositional and contextual forces interact to predict attitudes toward outgroups. First, we analyzed data from the 50 largest Dutch municipalities with different immigrant concentrations and showed that polarization in attitudes was higher in municipalities that were highly diverse. Next, we analyzed data from 18 countries and showed that country-level diversity did not increase prejudice, rather, individual-level ideologies interacted with diversity to predict prejudice. Diversity was linked with prejudice only for those who were highly authoritarian and non-egalitarian. With the final project, we tackled perceived ideologies in one’s environment and showed that perceived Right-Wing Authoritarianism in close groups helped to shape one’s own ideology and that in turn predicted prejudice toward ethnic outgroups. Importantly, this effect was moderated by the desire for norm enactment. The more people strived to enact the norms of their close groups, the bigger the effect of close group ideology was on one’s own. In sum, I will share our findings from different projects on how contextual and individual-level variables interact to predict intergroup attitudes.