Dehumanization of Socioeconomically Disadvantaged Groups Decreases Support for Welfare Policies via Perceived Wastefulness

Dehumanization and Minimization of Informal Caregivers Suffering: The Legitimizing Role of Justice Perceptions

Informal caregivers, who provide unpaid care work to individuals with disabilities, are devalued despite their important contributions to society. Identifying the factors contributing to their devaluation is crucial for recognizing and valuing their work. In two experimental studies, we examined (a) whether informal caregivers are dehumanized; (b) the moderating impact of belief in a just world (BJW) on this process; and (c) the predictive impact of BJW and the dehumanization of informal caregivers on the perception of informal caregivers' suffering. In Study 1 (N = 180), a 2 (informal caregiver vs. non-caregiver) X 2 (female vs. male) between-participants design was used; in Study 2 (N = 205), there were two experimental conditions: female informal caregiver vs. male informal caregiver. Participants were randomly assigned to one description of a target and were asked to complete measures assessing the dehumanization of the target (Studies 1 and 2), the perception of the suffering of the target (Study 2), and a measure of BJW referring to themselves (Study 2). Results showed the expected dehumanization effect, such that participants attributed fewer uniquely human emotions to informal caregivers compared to non-caregivers, regardless of their gender (Studies 1 and 2). However, this effect was observed only among participants with higher BJW (Study 2). Furthermore, BJW and the dehumanization of informal caregivers predicted the minimization of the perception of informal caregivers' suffering (Study 2). These results establish a theoretical relationship between these research areas and offer insights for practical implications and future research.

Unequal by malice, protesters by outrage: Agent perceptions drive moralization of, and collective action against, inequality

Economic inequality does not encounter strong protests even though individuals are generally against it. One potential explanation of this paradox is that individuals do not perceive inequality as caused by intentional agents, which, in line with the Theory of Dyadic Morality (Schein & Gray, 2018), should prevent its assessment as immoral and consequently dampen moral outrage and collective action. Across three studies, we test and confirm this hypothesis. In Studies 1 (N = 395) and 2 (N = 337), the more participants believed that inequality is human driven and caused by intentional agents, the more they moralized inequality, felt outraged and wanted to engage in collective action. This was confirmed in Study 3 (N = 243) through an experimental design. Thus, our research shows that agent perception is crucial in the moralization of economic inequality and, more broadly, that morality can be a powerful motivator and effectively mobilize people to action.

Not all ballots should be considered equal: How education-based dehumanization undermines the democratic social contract

Less educated people are viewed negatively and their opinions are belittled in our society. Besides, along with other groups, they are underrepresented in the political arena which questions the legitimacy of democratic systems. Despite the existence of education-based devaluation, research on how people dehumanize individuals and groups with lesser education and minimize their democratic rights is scarce. In this project, we provide correlational evidence that less (vs. highly) educated individuals and groups are dehumanized (Study 1a, N = 304) and their democratic rights (voting, running for office) are questioned (Study 1b, N = 504). Furthermore, we identified that dehumanization tendencies of the less (vs. highly) educated targets predict support for denying them voting rights or the capability to run for public candidacies (Study 2, N = 447). Finally, an experimental study confirmed that the target's educational background influences attributions of humanity, which in turn seem to affect the denial of democratic rights to the target (Study 3, N = 470). These findings suggest that education-based dehumanization might undermine the inalienable democratic rights of lesser educated individuals and groups thus endangering the foundations of democratic systems.

Identifying hostile versus paternalistic classism profiles: a person-based approach to the study of ambivalent classism

Research on ambivalent classism suggests that individuals can manifest classism not only in a hostile and explicit manner but also in a condescending and paternalistic form. However, researchers have not determined the existence of individual profiles or population subgroups that show this ambivalence pattern. Therefore, to assess the existence of different profiles based on their manifestation of ambivalent classism, we carry out a latent profile analysis with a national representative sample (N = 1536). We identify different classist profiles among the population, including a minority of individuals who score low on both dimensions of classism (low generalized classists, 8.65%) and another minority who score high on both hostile and paternalism classism (high generalized classists, 8.13%). Further, we discovered that most of the population adhered to a moderated classism profile, endorsing both dimensions of classism (moderately generalized classist, 40.95%) or to an ambivalent profile, scoring low in hostile classism and high in paternalistic attitudes (paternalistic classists, 42.25%). The likelihood of adhering to the different profiles seems to be related to the individual’s level of education and system justification beliefs. Those individuals who score higher on system justification and with lower educational attainment are more willing to be highly generalized classists rather than be part of other profiles. Profiles also differ to an extent regarding concerns about economic inequality and social attitudes, with moderate and highly generalized classists being less concerned about economic inequality and less willing to support poor groups. We discuss the implications for developing targeted interventions aimed to confront classism patterns for each profile.

Gendered Social Perceptions of "The Poor": Differences in Individualistic Attributions, Stereotypes, and Attitudes Toward Social Protection Policies

Poverty is a phenomenon that affects men and women differently. In the current research, we examined social perceptions of poor men and women across three experiments focusing on attributions for poverty, classist attitudes, and stereotypes about poor people. In Study 1, participants from the general population (N = 484) made more individualistic (dispositional) attributions for men's poverty compared to women's poverty, blaming men more for their poverty. Participants also believed that men would manage the assistance they received from the state more poorly than women. These patterns were observed across all three studies. In Study 2 (N = 256), we also found that more individualistic attributions for why men were in poverty predicted more negative attitudes toward social protection policies concerning men. In Study 3 (N = 358), we replicated the results observed in Study 2, and found that women in poverty were described as mor communal and competent than men in poverty. We interpret these results considering the operation of traditional gender roles as well as the parallelism between stereotypes of women and poor people. Our results are relevant to the framing of the proposals by social organizations, political parties, and emancipation movements that advocate for policies and programs to address poverty.

Supplementary Information

The online version contains supplementary material available at 10.1007/s11199-023-01375-9.

Self-dehumanization and other-dehumanization toward students with special educational needs: examining their prevalence, consequences and identifying solutions-a study protocol

BACKGROUND

Students with special educational needs (SEN) often face dehumanization, which negatively impacts their mental health, daily functioning, and educational outcomes. This study seeks to address the research gap in dehumanization literature by examining the prevalence, dynamics, and consequences of self-dehumanization and other-dehumanization among SEN students. Moreover, by utilizing psychological experiments, the study aims to identify potential intervention strategies and make recommendations to minimize the negative psychological consequences derived from the dual model of dehumanization.

METHODS

This two-phase, mixed-methods study incorporates cross-sectional surveys and quasi-experimental designs. Phase 1 investigates the self-dehumanization of SEN students and other-dehumanization from non-SEN peers, teachers, parents, and the public. Phase 2 involves four experimental studies to evaluate the effectiveness of interventions emphasizing human nature and uniqueness in reducing self-dehumanization and other-dehumanization of SEN students, as well as their associated negative consequences.

DISCUSSION

The study fills a research gap by examining dehumanization in SEN students, applying dyadic modeling, and identifying potential solutions to ameliorate dehumanization and its negative consequences. The findings will contribute to the advancement of the dual model of dehumanization, increase public awareness and support for SEN students in inclusive education, and promote changes in school practice and family support. The 24-month study in Hong Kong schools is expected to provide significant insights into inclusive education in school and community settings.

Perceived economic inequality enlarges the perceived humanity gap between low- and high-socioeconomic status groups

In this paper, we analyze the influence of the perceived level of economic inequality in daily life on people's recognition of the perceived humanity gap between low- and high-socioeconomic groups within society. To achieve this purpose, in Studies 1A-B, we analyzed the relationship between economic inequality and the humanity gap. In Studies 2A-B, we manipulated the level of inequality (low vs. high) to identify differences in the humanity gap. Results indicated that higher perceptions of economic inequality lead individuals to recognize a wider humanity gap between low- and high-socioeconomic groups in society. Implications are discussed.

Not all poor are equal: the perpetuation of poverty through blaming those who have been poor all their lives

The economic crisis of 2008 severely affected the welfare states. As the economic situation of a country worsens, the resources that the public administration can devote to improve the situation of the people also decrease, endangering the advancement of those in a disadvantaged situation. People who have always lived in poverty, besides having their opportunities reduced, also face negative public views that affect the perceived legitimacy of such public aid, which can in turn be a mechanism for perpetuating their situation. Two studies (N = 252 and N = 266) analyse how a person in persistent poverty is perceived compared to a person in poverty due to the crisis-a circumstantial poverty. We also study some feasible mechanisms underlying this different perception, as well as their effects on attitudes toward social protection policies. In Study 1, results indicated that people showed more favourable attitudes toward social protection policies when they perceived someone in poverty due to the crisis, compared to the target who had been in poverty all his/her life. Individualistic attributions for poverty mediated this effect: when people think of someone in persistent poverty, they make more individualistic attributions concerning their situation, which leads to worse attitudes toward social protection policies. Identification with the group moderates this relation. Furthermore, Study 2 showed that participants perceive people who are in poverty because of economic crisis as more deserving of help than people who have always been poor. Some theoretical and practical implications for intergroup relations and public policy are discussed.

Supplementary Information

The online version contains supplementary material available at 10.1007/s12144-022-03804-6.

Animalistic dehumanisation as a social influence strategy

The phenomenon of animalistic dehumanisation has been extensively studied in social psychology, but mostly as an intergroup relations tool used to justify the mistreatment of an outgroup. Surprisingly, however, dehumanisation has not been approached as an influence strategy to convince the ingroup to mistreat an outgroup. In the present article, we investigate these possible influence effects. We propose that a message depicting an outgroup in negative animalised terms would lead to lasting unfavourable outgroup attitudes because the animal essence conveyed through the message would immunise ingroup members against subsequent counterinfluence attempts. In one experimental study we compared the effect of three influence messages depicting a despised outgroup (Roma beggars) in negative animalised vs. negative humanised vs. positive humanised terms, followed by a counterpropaganda message advocating for Roma beggars' rights. Results show that the animalisation message leads to a lasting animalised perception of the outgroup (eliciting disgust and repugnancy) that resists exposure to the counterpropaganda positive message. In contrast, the negative humanisation message provokes a brief negative perception of the group (pre-counterpropaganda) that disappears after exposure to the counterpropaganda. The animalisation message also leads to more negative attitudes and discriminatory behavioural intentions towards Roma beggars expressed after the counterpropaganda message (i.e., discrimination in the workplace, hiring intentions, and social proximity), whilst the negative humanisation message does not, showing no difference with the positive humanisation message. These results suggest that animalistic dehumanisation indeed acts as an influence strategy, immunising targets against subsequent counterpropaganda attempts. We discuss implications in the light of essentialisation, forms of dehumanisation and group status, and current non-discriminatory norms.