The main goal of this research was to develop a new measure focused on a set of propositional beliefs linked to what people consider humanness to be, to evaluate global and overt expressions of dehumanization. Study 1 (N = 277) was aimed to build a scale that included 13 items (α = .94) and explore its dimensionality (EFA). Study 2 (N = 296) was aimed to confirm its unidimensional structure and to analyse the relationship between the humanness scale (HS) and relevant variables as an affective thermometer, a subtle and blatant prejudice scale and a perceived social status scale. Study 3 (N = 290) contrasted the HS with other measures of dehumanization on the prediction of social distance. Results showed that the ingroup was perceived as being the most human group, while the other groups were distributed across the humanness dimension. Moreover, HS scores were significantly but moderately related to the other measures and the best predictor of social distance. This research provides a new and easy way of measuring dehumanization in everyday social perception.
Get full access to this article
View all access options for this article.
References
1.
AllportG. (1954). The nature of prejudice. Addison Wesley.
2.
AndrighettoL.BaldissarriC.LattanzioS.LoughnanS.VolpatoC. (2014). Human-itarian aid? Two forms of dehumanization and willingness to help after natural disasters. The British Journal of Social Psychology, 53(3), 573–584. https://doi.org/10.1111/bjso.12066
3.
BainP. G.VaesJ.LeyensJ. P. (2014). Advances in understanding humanness and dehumanization. In BainP. G.VaesJ.LeyensJ. P. (Eds.), Humanness and dehumanization (pp. 1–9). Psychology Press.
4.
BanduraA.BarbaranelliC.CapraraG. V.PastorelliC. (1996). Mechanisms of moral disengagement in the exercise of moral agency. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 71(2), 364–374. https://doi.org/10.1037/0022-3514.71.2.364
5.
BastianB.DensonT. F.HaslamN. (2013). The roles of dehumanization and moral outrage in retributive justice. PLoS ONE, 8(4), 1–10. https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0061842
6.
BastianB.HaslamN. (2010). Excluded from humanity: The dehumanizing effects of social ostracism. Journal of Experimental Social Psychology, 46(1), 107–113. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jesp.2009.06.022
7.
BetancorV.AriñoE.Rodríguez-PérezA.DelgadoN. (2016). Do they feel the same as us? The infrahumanization of individuals with down syndrome. Psicothema, 28(3), 311–317. https://doi.org/10.7334/psicothema2016.10
8.
BogardusE. S. (1933). A social distance scale. Sociology & Social Research, 17, 265–271.
9.
BrewerM. B. (1999). The psychology of prejudice: Ingroup love or outgroup hate?Journal of Social Issues, 55(3), 429. https://doi.org/10.1111/0022-4537.00126
10.
BruneauE.JacobyN.KteilyN.SaxeR. (2018). Denying humanity: The distinct neural correlates of blatant dehumanization. Journal of Experimental Psychology: General, 147 (7), 1078–1093. Supplemental https://doi.org/10.1037/xge0000417.supp
11.
BruneauE.KteilyN.LaustsenL. (2018). The unique effects of blatant dehumanization on attitudes and behavior towards Muslim refugees during the European ‘refugee crisis’ across four countries. European Journal of Social Psychology, 48(5), 645–662. https://doi.org/10.1002/ejsp.2357
12.
CuddyA. J. C.RockM. S.NortonM. I. (2007). Aid in the aftermath of Hurricane Katrina: Inferences of secondary emotions and intergroup helping. Group Processes & Intergroup Relations, 10(1), 107–118. https://doi.org/10.1177/1368430207071344
13.
De HouwerJ.Van DesselP.MoranT. (2021). Attitudes as propositional representations. Trends in Cognitive Sciences, 25(10), 870–882. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.tics.2021.07.003
14.
DelgadoN.BetancorV.Rodríguez-PérezA.AriñoE. (2012). Si los exogrupos son solidarios, entonces son humanos. El efecto de un contexto prosocial en la infrahumanización. Revista de Psicología Social, 27(2), 131–140. https://doi.org/10.1174/021347412800337889
15.
GawronskiB.BodenhausenG. V. (2006). Associative and propositional processes in evaluation: An integrative review of implicit and explicit attitude change. Psychological Bulletin, 132(5), 692–731. https://doi.org/10.1037/0033-2909.132.5.692
16.
GawronskiB.BrannonS. M.BodenhausenG. V. (2017). The associative-propositional duality in the representation, formation, and expression of attitudes. In DeutschR.GawronskiB.HofmannW. (Eds.), Reflective and impulsive determinants of human behavior (pp. 103–118). Routledge/Taylor & Francis Group.
17.
GoffP. A.EberhardtJ. L.WilliamsM. J.JacksonM. 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
18.
GrayH. M.GrayK.WegnerD. M. (2007). Dimensions of mind perception. Science, 315(5812), 619. https://doi.org/10.1126/science.1134475
19.
GreenhalghE. M.WattS. E. (2015). Preference for consistency and value dissimilarities in dehumanization and prejudice toward asylum seekers in Australia. European Journal of Social Psychology, 45(1), 110–119. https://doi.org/10.1002/ejsp.2066
20.
HaslamN. (2006). Dehumanization: An integrative review. Personality & Social Psychology Review, 10, 252–264. https://doi.org/10.1207/s15327957pspr1003_4
21.
HaslamN.LoughnanS. (2014). Dehumanization and Infrahumanization. Annual Review of Psychology, 65(1), 399–423. https://doi.org/10.1146/annurev-psych-010213-115045
22.
HaslamN.LoughnanS. (2012). Prejudice and dehumanization. In DixonJ.LevineM. (Eds.), Beyond prejudice: Extending the social psychology of conflict, inequality and social change (pp. 89–104). Cambridge University Press.
23.
HaslamN.StratemeyerM. (2016). Recent research on dehumanization. Current Opinion in Psychology, 11, 25–29. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.copsyc.2016.03.009
KoftaM.BaranT.TarnowskaM. (2014). Dehumanization as a denial of human potentials: The naive theory of humanity perspective. In BainP. G.VaesJ.LeyensJ. (Eds.), Humanness and dehumanization (pp. 256–275). Psychology Press.
26.
KteilyN.BruneauE. (2017). Backlash: The politics and real-world consequences of minority group dehumanization. Personality & Social Psychology Bulletin, 43(1), 87–104. https://doi.org/10.1177/0146167216675334
27.
KteilyN.BruneauE.WaytzA.CotterillS. (2015). The ascent of man: Theoretical and empirical evidence for blatant dehumanization. Journal of Personality & Social Psychology, 109(5), 901–931. https://doi.org/10.1037/pspp0000048.supp
28.
KteilyN. S.LandryA. P. (2022). Dehumanization: Trends, insights, and challenges. Trends in Cognitive Sciences, 26(3), 222–240. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.tics.2021.12.003
29.
LeidnerB.CastanoE.GingesJ. (2013). Dehumanization, retributive and restorative justice, and aggressive versus diplomatic intergroup conflict resolution strategies. Personality & Social Psychology Bulletin, 39(2), 181–192. https://doi.org/10.1177/0146167212472208
30.
LeyensJ.Rodriguez-PerezA.Rodriguez-TorresR.GauntR.PaladinoM.VaesJ.DemoulinS. (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
31.
MartínezR.Rodríguez-BailónR.MoyaM. (2012). Are they animals or machines? Measuring dehumanization. The Spanish Journal of Psychology, 15(3), 1110–1122. https://doi.org/10.5209/rev_sjop.2012.v15.n3.39401
32.
MoreraM. D.QuilesM. N.CorreaA. D.DelgadoN.LeyensJ. (2018). Perception of mind and dehumanization: Human, animal, or machine?International Journal of Psychology, 53(4), 253–260. https://doi.org/10.1002/ijop.12375
33.
MoreraM. D.QuilesM. N.González-MéndezR. (2022). Integrating dehumanization and attachment in the prediction of teen dating violence perpetration. Journal of Interpersonal Violence, 37(3–4), 1939–1962. https://doi.org/10.1177/0886260520933042
34.
PettigrewT. F.MeertensR. W. (1995). Subtle and blatant prejudice in Western Europe. European Journal of Social Psychology, 25(1), 57–75. https://doi.org/10.1002/ejsp.2420250106
35.
SainzM.LoughnanS.MartínezR.MoyaM.Rodríguez-BailónR. (2020). Dehumanization of socioeconomically disadvantaged groups decreases support for welfare policies via perceived wastefulness. International Review of Social Psychology, 33(1), 1–13. https://doi.org/10.5334/irsp.414
36.
StruchN.SchwartzS. H. (1989). Intergroup aggression: Its predictors and distinctness from in-group bias. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 56(3), 364–373. https://doi.org/10.1037/0022-3514.56.3.364
37.
VikiT.OsgoodD.PhillipsS. (2013). Dehumanization and self-reported proclivity to torture prisoners of war. Journal of Experimental Social Psychology, 49(3), 325–328. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jesp.2012.11.006
