Protecting ingroup’s humanity: the role of gender and regional belonging ( Proteger la humanidad del grupo: el papel del género y de la pertenencia regional )

Abstract

Spanish

To test the differential effect of gender and regional belonging, we used a method based on the ingroup over-exclusion effect but taking into account both the gender of the participants and the stimuli. Two experiments were conducted to study the role of gender of participants in the categorization of ambiguous faces as humans or animals. According to the over-exclusion hypothesis, individuals protect their ingroup by excluding any individual who casts doubt on the humanity of the group. In our research, we took into account gender of participants and regional belonging, and the stimuli requiring assessment, including human, ape and ambiguous human/ape-like faces created through morphing procedure. Our results support the over-exclusion hypothesis, but only when participants do not share the same gender category with the target. Same-gender participants and stimuli annul the over-exclusion bias on the regional ingroup. These data are discussed in line with various theoretical hypotheses developed within the framework of the psychology of intergroup relations.

Get full access to this article

View all access options for this article.

References

Arcuri

(1982). Three patterns of social categorization in attribution memory. European Journal of Social Psychology, 12(3), 271–282. https://doi.org/10.1002/ejsp.2420120303

Bastian

Jetten

Chen

Radke

Harding

Fasoli

(2013). Losing our humanity: The self-dehumanizing consequences of social ostracism. Personality and Social Psychology Bulleting, 39(2), 156–169. https://doi.org/10.1177/0146167212471205

Blascovich

Wyer

S. L.

Swart

L. A.

Kibler

(1997). Racism and racial categorization. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 72(6), 1364–1372. https://doi.org/10.1037/0022-3514.72.6.1364

Boccato

Capozza

Falvo

Durante

(2008). The missing link: Ingroup, outgroup and the human species. Social Cognition, 26(2), 224–234. https://doi.org/10.1521/soco.2008.26.2.224

Brewer

M. B.

(1988). A dual process model of impression formation. In T. K. SrulL & R. S. Wyer (Eds.), Advances in social cognition (vol. 1, pp. 1–36). Erlbaum. https://doi.org/10.4324/9781315801940

Burton

A. M.

Jenkins

(2011). Unfamiliar face perception. In Calder

Rhodes

Johnson

Haxby

(Eds.), Oxford handbook of face perception (pp. 287–306). Oxford University Press. https://doi.org/10.1093/oxfordhb/9780199559053.013.0015

Capozza

Boccato

Andrighetto

Falvo

(2009). Categorization of ambiguous human/ape faces: Protection of ingroup but not outgroup humanity. Group Processes & Intergroup Relations, 12(6), 777–787. https://doi.org/10.1177/1368430209344868

Casper

Rothermund

Wentura

(2010). Automatic stereotype activation is context dependent. Social Psychology, 41(3), 131–136. https://doi.org/10.1027/1864-9335/a000019

Castano

Yzerbyt

Bourguignon

Seron

(2002). Who may enter? The impact of in-group identification on in-group/out-group categorization. Journal of Experimental Social Psychology, 38(3), 315–322. https://doi.org/10.1006/jesp.2001.1512

10.

Cikara

Eberhardt

Fiske

(2011). From agents to objects: Sexist attitudes and neural responses to sexualized targets. Journal of Cognitive Neuroscience, 23(3), 540–551. https://doi.org/10.1162/jocn.2010.21497

11.

Crisp

R. J.

Hewstone

(1999). Differential evaluation of crossed category groups: Patterns, processes, and reducing intergroup bias. Group Processes & Intergroup Relations, 2(4), 307–333. https://doi.org/10.1177/1368430299024001

12.

Demoulin

Cortes

B. P.

Viki

G. T.

Rodríguez-Pérez

Rodríguez-Torres

Paladino

M. P.

Leyens

J. P.

(2009). The role of ingroup identification in infrahumanization. International Journal of Psychology, 44(1), 4–11. https://doi.org/10.1080/00207590802057654

13.

Faul

Erdfelder

Lang

A. G.

Buchner

(2007). G*Power 3: A flexible statistical power analysis program for the social, behavioral, and biomedical sciences. Behavior Research Methods, 39(2), 175–191. https://doi.org/10.3758/BF03193146

14.

Gaither

S. E.

(2018). The multiplicity of belonging: Pushing identity research beyond binary thinking. Self & Identity, 17(4), 443–454. https://doi.org/10.1080/15298868.2017.1412343

15.

Gaither

S. E.

Pauker

Slepian

M. L.

Sommers

S. R.

(2016). Social belonging motivates categorization of racially ambiguous faces. Social Cognition, 34(2), 97–118. https://doi.org/10.1521/soco.2016.34.2.97

16.

Goff

P. A.

Eberhardt

J. L.

Williams

M. J.

Jackson

M. C.

(2008). Not yet human: Implicit knowledge, historical dehumanization, and contemporary consequences. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 94(2), 292–306. https://doi.org/10.1037/0022-3514.94.2.292

17.

Haslam

(2006). Dehumanization: An integrative review. Personality and Social Psychology Review, 10(3), 252–264. https://doi.org/10.1207/s15327957pspr1003_4

18.

Ito

T. A.

Urland

G. R.

(2003). Race and gender on the brain: Electrocortical measures of attention to the race and gender of multiply categorizable individuals. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 85(4), 616–626. https://doi.org/10.1037/0022-3514.85.4.616

19.

Ito

T. A.

Urland

G. R.

(2005). The influence of processing objectives on the perception of faces: An ERP study of race and gender perception. Cognitive, Affective, & Behavioral Neuroscience, 5(1), 21–36. https://doi.org/10.3758/CABN.5.1.21

20.

Kang

S. K.

Chasteen

A. L.

(2009). Beyond the double-jeopardy hypothesis: Assessing emotion on the faces of multiply categorizable targets of prejudice. Journal of Experimental Social Psychology, 45(6), 1281–1285. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jesp.2009.07.002

21.

Lammers

Stapel

(2011). Power increases dehumanization. Group Processes & Intergroup Relations, 14(1), 13–26. https://doi.org/10.1177/1368430210370042

22.

Leyens

J. P.

Cortes

Demoulin

Dovidio

Fiske

Gaunt

(2003). Emotional prejudice, essentialism, and nationalism: The 2002 Tajfel lecture. European Journal of Social Psychology, 33(6), 703–717. https://doi.org/10.1002/ejsp.170

23.

Leyens

J. P.

Demoulin

Vaes

Gaunt

Paladino

M. P.

(2007). Infrahumanization: The wall of group differences. Social Issues and Policy Review, 1(1), 139–172. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1751-2409.2007.00006.x

24.

Leyens

J. P.

Rodríguez-Pérez

Rodríguez-Torres

Gaunt

Paladino

P. M.

Vaes

Demoulin

(2001). Psychological essentialism and the differential attribution of uniquely human emotions to ingroups and outgroups. European Journal of Social Psychology, 31(4), 395–411. https://doi.org/10.1002/ejsp.50

25.

Leyens

J. P.

Yzerbyt

V. Y.

(1992). The ingroup overexclusion effect: Impact of valence and confirmation on stereotypical information search. European Journal of Social Psychology, 22(6), 549–569. https://doi.org/10.1002/ejsp.2420220604

26.

Liberman

Woodward

A. L.

Kinzler

K. D.

(2017). The origins of social categorization. Trends in Cognitive Sciences, 21(7), 556–568. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.tics.2017.04.004

27.

Loughnan

Haslam

(2007). Animals and androids: Implicit associations between social categories and nonhumans. Psychological Science, 18(2), 116–121. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1467-9280.2007.01858.x

28.

Loughnan

Haslam

Sutton

R. M.

Spencer

(2014). Dehumanization and social class: Animality in the stereotypes of “white trash,” “chavs,” and “bogans”. Social Psychology, 45(1), 54–61. https://doi.org/10.1027/1864-9335/a000159

29.

Lundqvist

Flykt

Öhman

(1998). The Karolinska Directed Emotional Faces - KDEF, CD ROM from Department of Clinical Neuroscience, Psychology section. Karolinska Institutet. Pictures: AF01NES and AF08NES.

30.

Macrae

C. N.

Bodenhausen

G. V.

(2000). Social cognition: Thinking categorically about others. Annual Review of Psychology, 51(1), 93–120. https://doi.org/10.1146/annurev.psych.51.1.93

31.

Macrae

C. N.

Bodenhausen

G. V.

Milne

A. B.

(1995). The dissection of selection in person perception: Inhibitory processes in social stereotyping. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 69(3), 397–407. https://doi.org/10.1037/0022-3514.69.3.397

32.

Martinez

Piff

Mendoza-Denton

Hinshaw

(2011). The power of a label: Mental illness diagnoses, ascribed humanity, and social rejection. Journal of Social and Clinical Psychology, 30(1), 1–23. https://doi.org/10.1521/jscp.2011.30.1.1

33.

Nicolas

De la Fuente

Fiske

S. T.

(2017). Mind the overlap in multiple categorization: A review of crossed categorization, intersectionality, and multiracial perception. Group Processes & Intergroup Relations, 20(5), 621–631. https://doi.org/10.1177/1368430217708862

34.

Rakic

Steffens

M. C.

Wiese

(2018). Same-gender distractors are not so easy to reject: ERP evidence of gender categorization. Cognitive, Affective, & Behavioral Neuroscience, 18(5), 825–836. https://doi.org/10.3758/s13415-018-0607-3

35.

Remedios

J. D.

Chasteen

A. L.

Rule

N. O.

Plaks

J. E.

(2011). Impressions at the intersection of ambiguous and obvious social categories: Does gay + Black = likable? Journal of Experimental Social Psychology, 47(6), 1312–1315. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jesp.2011.05.015.

36.

Rodríguez-Pérez

Coello

Betancor

Rodríguez-Torres

Delgado

(2006). Amenaza al endogrupo y nivel de infrahumanización del exogrupo. Psicothema, 18(1), 73–77.

37.

Saminaden

Loughnan

Haslam

(2010). Afterimages of savages: Implicit associations between primitives, animals and children. British Journal of Social Psychology, 49(1), 91–105. https://doi.org/10.1348/014466609X415293

38.

Tajfel

(1959). Quantitative judgement in social perception. British Journal of Psychology, 50(1), 16–29. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.2044-8295.1959.tb00677.x

39.

Tajfel

Wilkes

A. L.

(1963). Classification and quantitative judgement. British Journal of Psychology, 54(2), 101–114. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.2044-8295.1963.tb00865.x

40.

Tomelleri

Castelli

(2012). On the nature of gender categorization: Pervasive but flexible. Social Psychology, 43(1), 14–27. https://doi.org/10.1027/1864-9335/a000076

41.

Tottenham

Borscheid

Ellertsen

Marcus

Nelson

(2002). Categorization of facial expressions in children and adults: Establishing a larger stimulus set. Journal of Cognitive Neuroscience, 14(Supp.), S74. Pictures: 32M_NE_C; 36M_NE_O.

42.

Urban

L. M.

Miller

(1998). A theoretical analysis of crossed social categorization effects. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 74(4), 894–908. https://doi.org/10.1037/0022-3514.74.4.894

43.

Vaes

Muratore

(2013). Defensive dehumanization in the medical practice: A cross-sectional study from a health care worker’s perspective. British Journal of Social Psychology, 52(1), 180–190. https://doi.org/10.1111/bjso.12008

44.

Vaes

Paladino

(2010). The uniquely human content of stereotypes. Group Processes & Intergroup Relations, 13(1), 23–39. https://doi.org/10.1177/1368430209347331

45.

Vaes

Paladino

Puvia

(2011). Are sexualized females complete human beings? Why males and females dehumanize sexually objectified women. European Journal of Social Psychology, 41(6), 774–785. https://doi.org/10.1002/ejsp.824

46.

Viki

G. T.

Fullerton

Raggett

Tait

Wiltshire

(2012). The role of dehumanization in attitudes toward the social exclusion and rehabilitation of sex offenders. Journal of Applied Social Psychology, 42(10), 2349–2367. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1559-1816.2012.00944.x

47.

Viki

G. T.

Winchester

Titshall

Chisango

Pina

Russell

(2006). Beyond secondary emotions: The infrahumanization of outgroups using human-related and animal-related words. Social Cognition, 24(6), 753–775. https://doi.org/10.1521/soco.2006.24.6.753

48.

Yzerbyt

V. Y.

Leyens

J. P.

Bellour

(1995). The ingroup overexclusion effect: Identity concerns in decisions about group membership. European Journal of Social Psychology, 25(1), 1–16. https://doi.org/10.1002/ejsp.2420250102

49.

Zarate

M. A.

Smith

E. R.

(1990). Person categorization and stereotyping. Social Cognition, 8(2), 161185. https://doi.org/10.1521/soco.1990.8.2.161