Dehumanization and infrahumanization

We review early and recent psychological theories of dehumanization and survey the burgeoning empirical literature, focusing on six fundamental questions. First, we examine how people are dehumanized, exploring the range of ways in which perceptions of lesser humanness have been conceptualized and demonstrated. Second, we review who is dehumanized, examining the social targets that have been shown to be denied humanness and commonalities among them. Third, we investigate who dehumanizes, notably the personality, ideological, and other individual differences that increase the propensity to see others as less than human. Fourth, we explore when people dehumanize, focusing on transient situational and motivational factors that promote dehumanizing perceptions. Fifth, we examine the consequences of dehumanization, emphasizing its implications for prosocial and antisocial behavior and for moral judgment. Finally, we ask what can be done to reduce dehumanization. We conclude with a discussion of limitations of current scholarship and directions for future research.

Don’t Mind Meat? The Denial of Mind to Animals Used for Human Consumption

Many people like eating meat, but most are reluctant to harm things that have minds. The current three studies show that this dissonance motivates people to deny minds to animals. Study 1 demonstrates that animals considered appropriate for human consumption are ascribed diminished mental capacities. Study 2 shows that meat eaters are motivated to deny minds to food animals when they are reminded of the link between meat and animal suffering. Finally, Study 3 provides direct support for our dissonance hypothesis, showing that expectations regarding the immediate consumption of meat increase mind denial. Moreover, this mind denial in turn reduces negative affect associated with dissonance. The findings highlight the role of dissonance reduction in facilitating the practice of meat eating and protecting cultural commitments.

Resolving the Meat-Paradox: A Motivational Account of Morally Troublesome Behavior and Its Maintenance

A majority of people the world over eat meat, yet many of these same people experience discomfort when the meat on their plate is linked to the death of animals. We draw on this common form of moral conflict—the meat-paradox—to develop insights into the ways in which morally troublesome behaviors vanish into the commonplace and every day. Drawing on a motivational analysis, we show how societies may be shaped by attempts to resolve dissonance, in turn protecting their citizens from discomfort associated with their own moral conflicts. To achieve this, we build links between dissonance reduction, habit formation, social influence, and the emergence of social norms and detail how our analysis has implications for understanding immoral behavior and motivations underpinning dehumanization and objectification. Finally, we draw from our motivational analysis to advance new insights into the origins of prejudice and pathways through which prejudice can be maintained and resolved.

The Psychology of Eating Animals

Most people both eat animals and care about animals. Research has begun to examine the psychological processes that allow people to negotiate this “meat paradox.” To understand the psychology of eating animals, we examine characteristics of the eaters (people), the eaten (animals), and the eating (the behavior). People who value masculinity, enjoy meat and do not see it as a moral issue, and find dominance and inequality acceptable are most likely to consume animals. Perceiving animals as highly dissimilar to humans and as lacking mental attributes, such as the capacity for pain, also supports meat-eating. In addition to these beliefs, values, and perceptions, the act of eating meat triggers psychological processes that regulate negative emotions associated with eating animals. We conclude by discussing the implications of this research for understanding the psychology of morality.

Sexual Objectification Increases Rape Victim Blame and Decreases Perceived Suffering

Sexual objectification changes the way people view women by reducing them to sexual objects—denied humanity and an internal mental life, as well as deemed unworthy of moral concern. However, the subsequent consequences of sexually objectifying others remain underresearched. In the current study, we examined the impact of objectification in the domain of sexual assault. Sixty British undergraduate students were recruited to complete an impression formation task. We manipulated objectification by presenting participants with either a sexualized or nonsexualized woman. Participants rated the woman’s mind and the extent to which they felt moral concern for her. They then learned that she was the victim of an acquaintance rape and reported victim blame and both blatant and subtle perceptions of her suffering. Consistent with prior research, sexualized women were objectified through a denial of mental states and moral concern. Further, compared with nonobjectified women, the objectified were perceived to be more responsible for being raped. Interestingly, although no difference emerged for blatant measures of suffering, participants tacitly denied the victims’ suffering by exhibiting changes in moral concern for the victim. We conclude that objectification has important consequences for how people view victims of sexual assault. Our findings reveal that sexual objectification can have serious consequences and we discuss how these might influence how victims cope and recover from sexual assault.

Economic Inequality Is Linked to Biased Self-Perception

People’s self-perception biases often lead them to see themselves as better than the average person (a phenomenon known as self-enhancement). This bias varies across cultures, and variations are typically explained using cultural variables, such as individualism versus collectivism. We propose that socioeconomic differences among societies—specifically, relative levels of economic inequality—play an important but unrecognized role in how people evaluate themselves. Evidence for self-enhancement was found in 15 diverse nations, but the magnitude of the bias varied. Greater self-enhancement was found in societies with more income inequality, and income inequality predicted cross-cultural differences in self-enhancement better than did individualism/collectivism. These results indicate that macrosocial differences in the distribution of economic goods are linked to microsocial processes of perceiving the self.

When Closing the Human–Animal Divide Expands Moral Concern

Humans and animals share many similarities. Across three studies, the authors demonstrate that the framing of these similarities has significant consequences for people’s moral concern for others. Comparing animals to humans expands moral concern and reduces speciesism; however, comparing humans to animals does not appear to produce these same effects. The authors find these differences when focusing on natural tendencies to frame human–animal similarities (Study 1) and following experimental induction of framings (Studies 2 and 3). In Study 3, the authors extend their focus from other animals to marginalized human outgroups, demonstrating that human–animal similarity framing also has consequences for the extension of moral concern to other humans. The authors explain these findings by reference to previous work examining the effects of framing on judgments of similarity and self-other comparisons and discuss them in relation to the promotion of animal welfare and the expansion of moral concern.

Poverty, inequality, and increased consumption of high calorie food: Experimental evidence for a causal link

Rising obesity represents a serious, global problem. It is now well established that obesity is associated with poverty and wealth inequality, suggesting that these factors may promote caloric intake. Whereas previous work has examined these links from an epidemiological perspective, the current paper examined them experimentally. In Study 1 we found that people experimentally induced to view themselves as poor (v. wealthy) exhibited increased calorie intake. In Study 2, participants who believed that they were poorer or wealthier than their interaction partners exhibited higher levels of anxiety compared to those in an equal partners condition; this anxiety in turn led to increased calorie consumption for people who had a strong need to belong. The findings provide causal evidence for the poverty-intake and inequality-intake links. Further, we identify social anxiety and a strong need to belong as important social psychological factors linking inequality to increased calorie intake.

Understanding the Relationship between Attribute-Based and Metaphor-Based Dehumanization

Previous research has adopted two distinct approaches to the study of dehumanization. One has focused on the denial of human attributes to groups (attribute-based dehumanization) and the other on the likening of group members to nonhumans (metaphor-based dehumanization). The relationship between these two approaches has yet to be examined. The current studies seek to clarify this relationship by integrating the two approaches. Using Haslam and colleagues’ (Haslam, 2006; Haslam, Loughnan, Kashima & Bain, 2008) model of dehumanization, we examined whether attribute-based dehumanization leads to metaphor-based dehumanization, and vice versa. In Study 1 participants read about a novel group that was described either as lacking one type of humanness or as being like a nonhuman. In Study 2 a concrete learning task taught participants that a novel group lacked a specific type of humanness. In both studies, participants explicitly learned to dehumanize the group and inferred the corresponding type of attribute- or metaphor-based perception (e.g. perceived a group as animal-like after learning that it lacked uniquely human attributes, and vice versa). Implicitly, however, participants were able to directly learn but not robustly infer the corresponding type of dehumanization. We suggest that the relationship between the two types of dehumanization can be understood using cognitive models of metaphor-making.

Dehumanization and Social Class

Three studies examined whether animality is a component of low-SES stereotypes. In Study 1a–c, the content of “white trash” (USA), “chav” (UK), and “bogan” (Australia) stereotypes was found to be highly consistent, and in every culture it correlated positively with the stereotype content of apes. In Studies 2a and 2b, a within-subjects approach replicated this effect and revealed that it did not rely on derogatory labels or was reducible to ingroup favoritism or system justification concerns. In Study 3, the “bogan” stereotype was associated with ape, rat, and dog stereotypes independently of established stereotype content dimensions (warmth, competence, and morality). By implication, stereotypes of low-SES people picture them as primitive, bestial, and incompletely human.

Internalizing objectification: Objectified individuals see themselves as less warm, competent, moral, and human

People objectify others by viewing them as less warm, competent, moral, and human (Heflick & Goldenberg, 2009, J. Exp. Soc. Psychol., 45, 598; Vaes, Paladino, & Puvia, 2011, Eur. J. Soc. Psychol., 41, 774). In two studies, we examined whether the objectified share this view of themselves, internalizing their objectification. In Study 1 (N = 114), we examined sexual objectification, and in Study 2 (N = 62), we examined workplace objectification. Consistent across both studies, we found that objectification resulted in participants seeing themselves as less warm, competent, moral (Study 2 only), and lacking in human nature and human uniqueness. These effects were robust to perceiver gender and familiarity (Study 1), and whether another person or a situation caused the objectification (Study 2). In short, the objectified see themselves the manner they are seen by their objectifiers: as lacking warmth, competence, morality, and humanity.

Meta-Milgram: an empirical synthesis of the obedience experiments

Milgram's famous experiment contained 23 small-sample conditions that elicited striking variations in obedient responding. A synthesis of these diverse conditions could clarify the factors that influence obedience in the Milgram paradigm. We assembled data from the 21 conditions (N = 740) in which obedience involved progression to maximum voltage (overall rate 43.6%) and coded these conditions on 14 properties pertaining to the learner, the teacher, the experimenter, the learner-teacher relation, the experimenter-teacher relation, and the experimental setting. Logistic regression analysis indicated that eight factors influenced the likelihood that teachers continued to the 450 volt shock: the experimenter's directiveness, legitimacy, and consistency; group pressure on the teacher to disobey; the indirectness, proximity, and intimacy of the relation between teacher and learner; and the distance between the teacher and the experimenter. Implications are discussed.

When Meat Gets Personal, Animals’ Minds Matter Less

Why are many Westerners outraged by dog meat, but comfortable with pork? This is particularly puzzling, given strong evidence that both species are highly intelligent. We suggest that although people consider intelligence a key factor in determining animals’ moral status, they disregard this information when it is self-relevant. In Study 1, we show that intelligence plays a major role in the moral concern afforded to animals in the abstract. In Study 2, we manipulated the intelligence of three animals—pigs, tapirs, and a fictional animal—and find that only for pigs does this information not influence moral standing. Finally, in Study 3, we show that people believe that learning about pig intelligence will lead to high levels of moral concern, yet when they themselves learn about pig intelligence, moral concern remains low. These findings demonstrate an important, predictable inconsistency in how people think about minds and moral concern.

A microsatellite linkage map of the blacklip abalone, Haliotis rubra

There is considerable scope for genetic improvement of cultured blacklip abalone Haliotis rubra in Australia using molecular marker-assisted, selective-breeding practices. Such improvement is dependent on the availability of primary genetic resources, such as a genetic linkage map. This study presents a first-generation linkage map of H. rubra, containing 122 microsatellite markers typed in a single full-sib family. These loci mapped to 17 and 20 linkage groups for the male and female respectively, and when aligned, the consensus map represented 18 linkage groups. The male linkage map contained 102 markers (one unlinked) covering 621 cM with an average intermarker spacing of 7.3 cM, and the female map contained 98 markers (eight unlinked) covering 766 cM with an average intermarker spacing of 9.8 cM. Analysis of markers informative in both parents showed a significantly higher recombination rate in the female parent, with an average male-to-female recombination ratio of 1:1.45 between linked pairs of markers. This linkage map represents a significant advancement in the genetic resource available for H. rubra and provides a framework for future quantitative trait loci mapping and eventual implementation of marker-assisted selection.

The object of my aggression: Sexual objectification increases physical aggression toward women

Objectification involves reducing someone to a sexual object, rather than seeing them as a full person. Despite numerous theoretical claims that people are more aggressive toward the objectified, and empirical evidence that objectification is linked to high willingness to aggress, rape proclivity, and aggressive attitudes, no research has examined a causal link between objectification and physical aggression, particularly in the context of provocation. In two experiments, we examined this predicted link. In Experiment 1, using a 2 (objectification: no/yes) × 2 (provocation: no/yes) factorial between-subjects design, we investigated the effects of objectification, induced via body focus during a face-to-face interaction, and provocation on physical aggression toward a female confederate. Our results revealed a significant main effect of provocation, a marginal main effect of objectification, and a significant interaction between these variables. In the absence of a provocation, focusing on a woman's body increased aggression toward her. Experiment 2 replicated Experiment 1 using a video of a target woman instead of a face-to-face interaction. Again, our results showed a significant two-way interaction between objectification and provocation, wherein objectification increased aggression in the absence of provocation. Overall, this research indicates that objectification can lead to heightened physical aggression toward objectified women.

The Dominance, Prestige, and Leadership Account of Social Power Motives

The power motive predicts influential social behaviour; however, its heterogeneous conceptualisations have produced inconsistent results. To overcome this problem, we developed and validated a unitary taxonomy of social power motives based on established delineations of social hierarchies: the dominance, prestige, and leadership account. While we could measure these motives both reliably and distinctively (study 1), we also showed they strongly related to a common power desire (study 2). Assessing their nomological networks (studies 3 and 4), we demonstrated distinct associations between the dominance motive (D: wanting to coerce others into adhering to one's will) and anger and verbal aggression; the prestige motive (P: wanting to obtain admiration and respect) and the fear of losing reputation and claiming to have higher moral concerns; the leadership motive (L: wanting to take responsibility in and for one's group) and emotional stability and helping behaviour. Furthermore, while D uniquely predicted agonistic/retaliatory behaviour in dictator games (study 5), L uniquely predicted the attainment of higher employment ranks in various professions (study 7). Finally, at least to some degree, P and L related positively, and D negatively to prosocial donating behaviour (study 6). This taxonomy represents a novel and powerful approach to predicting influential social behaviour. © 2018 European Association of Personality Psychology