Intergroup Contact and Outgroup Humanization: Is the Causal Relationship Uni- or Bidirectional?

The Italian Validation of the Healthcare Professional Humanization Scale for Nursing

Purpose: The Healthcare Professional Humanization Scale (HUMAS) is a measure of the evaluation of the humanization of care in nursing professions. Despite being validated for the Spanish language, there still needed validation in Italian, which seems essential considering the cultural differences. Aim: We aimed to test the validity and reliability of the HUMAS with an Italian sample of registered nurses. Methods: The present study used cross-sectional data from 300 nurses that completed the survey. The study's main phases were (a) construction of the Italian version; (b) testing and analyzing the psychometric properties of the scale. The exploratory factor analysis and the Content Validity Index (CVI) were performed. Cronbach's alpha and test-retest were used to determine the reliability. Findings: The final Italian version of HUMAS (HUMAS-I) comprised 19 items grouped into five correlated latent factors, accounting for 68.4% of the variance. Additionally, it exhibited a satisfactory Cronbach's alpha for each latent component and an average CVI for the entire scale of 0.68. Conclusions: The HUMAS-I shows acceptable psychometric proprieties as the original Spanish version. Therefore, it could be an advantageous instrument for use in nursing practice and research.

Reducing Explicit Blatant Dehumanization by Correcting Exaggerated Meta-Perceptions

If explicitly, blatantly dehumanizing a group of people—overtly characterizing them as less than human—facilitates harming them, then reversing this process is paramount. Addressing dehumanization among American political partisans appears especially crucial, given that it has been linked to their anti-democratic hostility. Perhaps because of its overt nature, partisans recognize—and greatly exaggerate—the extent to which out-partisans explicitly, blatantly dehumanize them. Past research has found that when people perceive they are dehumanized by an outgroup (i.e., meta-dehumanization), they respond with reciprocal dehumanization. Therefore, we reasoned that partisans’ dehumanization could be reduced by correcting their exaggerated meta-dehumanization. Indeed, across three preregistered studies ( N = 4,154), an intervention correcting American partisans’ exaggerated meta-dehumanization reduced their own dehumanization of out-partisans. This decreased dehumanization persisted at a 1-week follow-up and predicted downstream reductions in partisans’ anti-democratic hostility, suggesting that correcting exaggerated meta-dehumanization can durably mitigate the dark specter of dehumanization.

Priming attachment security and outgroup humanization: The mediation role of intergroup emotions

Individuals tend to dehumanize the outgroup. In this paper, we explore whether the activation of attachment security can attenuate dehumanization. Two studies were performed. In Study 1, attachment security was primed by showing pictures that depicted relationships with attachment figures; the outgroup was the homeless and humanization was measured considering the attribution of uniquely human and non-uniquely human emotions to this group. In Study 2, the sense of interpersonal security was activated by inviting participants to relive a recent interaction that left them with a feeling of safety and warmth. Outgroup members were the Roma, and humanization was measured considering the attribution of uniquely human and human nature traits to them. In Study 2, the mediation effect of intergroup emotions was investigated. In both studies, outgroup humanization effects were highlighted. In Study 2, these effects were mediated by increased empathy toward the outgroup. Interestingly, the positive impact of security activation was not moderated by chronic attachment orientations. Findings suggest strategies that can be used to improve intergroup relations in specific contexts and in society at large.

Dehumanization: trends, insights, and challenges

Despite our many differences, one superordinate category we all belong to is 'humans'. To strip away or overlook others' humanity, then, is to mark them as 'other' and, typically, 'less than'. We review growing evidence revealing how and why we subtly disregard the humanity of those around us. We then highlight new research suggesting that we continue to blatantly dehumanize certain groups, overtly likening them to animals, with important implications for intergroup hostility. We discuss advances in understanding the experience of being dehumanized and novel interventions to mitigate dehumanization, address the conceptual boundaries of dehumanization, and consider recent accounts challenging the importance of dehumanization and its role in intergroup violence. Finally, we present an agenda of outstanding questions to propel dehumanization research forward.

Seeking and avoiding contact with Muslims at a Hijab Stall: Evidence for multilayer, multi-determined solidarity, courage, apathy, and moral outrage

Intergroup contact is key to social cohesion, yet psychological barriers block engagement with diversity even when contact opportunities are abundant. We lack an advanced understanding of contact seeking because intergroup contact is often an independent variable in research, and studies on contact seeking have favoured experimental probing of selected factors or measured only broad behavioural intentions. This research carried out the first ecological tests of a novel multilayer-multivariate framework to contact seeking/avoiding. These tests were centred on a Muslim-led community contact-based initiative with visible support from local authorities following a terrorist attack. Non-Muslim Australian women (N = 1,347) contributed field data on their situated contact motivations, choices, and attendance at an intercultural educational stall; many (N = 559) completed a profiling test battery. Among those who responded to the initiative invite, the rate of taking up the high-salience contact opportunity in this heated setting was high and reflected multiple approach/avoidance motivations. Contact seeking/avoiding was not just allophilia/prejudice; it presented as new typologies of politicized solidarity, courage, apathy, and moral outrage. While intergroup predictors were significant across all profiling analyses, intrapersonal and interpersonal predictors also regularly contributed to explain variance in non-Muslims' contact motivations and choices, confirming their multilayer-multivariate nature.

Stigmatization and dehumanization perceptions towards psychiatric patients among nurses: A path-analysis approach

BACKGROUND

People with mental illness are stigmatized and dehumanized, which contributes to disorders' maintenance. Dehumanization is associated with abuse/neglect and should thus be evaluated among healthcare workers. We compared nurses' stigmatizing/dehumanizing perceptions of people with psychiatric versus non-psychiatric disorders. We also investigated the impact of social contact's quality/frequency and identified the determinants of dehumanization.

METHODS

French-speaking hospitals and nurses' associations were contacted to disseminate the survey among their employees or members. Three hundred thirty-six nurses reported their perceptions of one among three clinical populations (people with severe alcohol use disorder, schizophrenia, or cardiovascular disease). Nurses' perception of patients was evaluated through stigmatization, dehumanization, quality of contacts, structural discrimination, and evaluation of patients' life, pain, consent, and diagnostic overshadowing. Nurses' well-being was evaluated through their own perception of being dehumanized by superiors and their burnout, depression, anxiety, and stress levels.

RESULTS

Nurses stigmatized and dehumanized people with a psychiatric disorder more than people without a psychiatric disorder. Nurses dehumanized patients more if they felt dehumanized by their hierarchical superiors and less if they had qualitative contacts with patients.

CONCLUSIONS

Stigmatization and dehumanization are widespread among nurses in psychiatry, which advocates for less stigmatizing practices in healthcare settings. We propose concrete perspectives to reduce stigma/dehumanization among nurses.

Dehumanization During the COVID-19 Pandemic

Communities often unite during a crisis, though some cope by ascribing blame or stigmas to those who might be linked to distressing life events. In a preregistered two-wave survey, we evaluated the dehumanization of Asians and Asian Americans during the COVID-19 pandemic. Our first wave (March 26–April 2, 2020; N = 917) revealed dehumanization was prevalent, between 6.1% and 39% of our sample depending on measurement. Compared to non-dehumanizers, people who dehumanized also perceived the virus as less risky to human health and caused less severe consequences for infected people. They were more likely to be ideologically Conservative and believe in conspiracy theories about the virus. We largely replicated the results 1 month later in our second wave (May 6–May 13, 2020; N = 723). Together, many Americans dehumanize Asians and Asian Americans during the COVID-19 pandemic with related perceptions that the virus is less problematic. Implications and applications for dehumanization theory are discussed.