Dining against Dehumanization: A Mixed-Methods and Interdisciplinary Approach to Assessing the Humanizing Effects of Sharing a Meal with Individuals Experiencing Homelessness

Abstract

Aside from loving God, the hallmark of a Christ-filled life is to love one’s neighbor as oneself (Mark 12:31). Thus, spiritual formation should be evidenced by an increased depth and breadth of love for others. Using qualitative (Study 1) and quantitative (Study 2) methods, we explored how sharing a meal and fellowshipping with a member of a marginalized group (a theological practice) shaped college students’ perceptions of their unhoused neighbors. Results demonstrated that students recognized human-like traits associated with an individual experiencing homelessness after a shared meal, but that the encounters did not significantly reduce the dehumanization of individuals experiencing homelessness as a whole (relative to a control no dinner condition). In addition to theoretical implications for psychologists interested in intergroup contact, our findings have implications for those trying to cultivate Christian virtues such as neighbor love through classroom or ministerial practices.

Keywords

interpersonal outcome studies spiritual growth/spiritual well-being/spiritual maturity theoretical integration integration on models/paradigms

Get full access to this article

View all access options for this article.

References

Allport

G. W.

(1954). The nature of prejudice. Doubleday.

Andrighetto

Baldissarri

Lattanzio

Loughnan

Volpato

(2014). Humanitarian aid? Two forms of dehumanization and willingness to help after natural disasters. British Journal of Social Psychology, 53(3), 573–584. https://doi.org/10.1111/bjso.12066

Bastian

Denson

T. F.

Haslam

(2013). The roles of dehumanization and moral outrage in retributive justice. PLOS ONE, 8(4), e61842.

Bastian

Haslam

(2011). Experiencing dehumanization: Cognitive and emotional effects of everyday dehumanization. Basic and Applied Social Psychology, 33(4), 295–303. https://doi.org/10.1080/01973533.2011.614132

Bastian

Laham

S. M.

Wilson

Haslam

Koval

(2011). Blaming, praising, and protecting our humanity: The implications of everyday dehumanization for judgments of moral status. British Journal of Social Psychology, 50, 469–483. https://doi.org/10.1348/014466610X521383

Brown

Paterson

(2016). Indirect contact and prejudice reduction: Limits and possibilities. Current Opinion in Psychology, 11, 20–24. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.copsyc.2016.03.005

Bruneau

Jacoby

Kteily

Saxe

(2018). Denying Humanity: The distinct neural correlates of blatant dehumanization. Journal of Experimental Psychology: General, 147, 1078–1093. https://doi.org/10.1037/xge0000417

Capozza

Flavo

Di Bernardo

G. A.

Vezzali

Visintin

E. P.

(2014). Ingergroup contact as a strategy to improve humanness attributions: A review of studies. TPM—Testing, Psychometrics, Methodology in Applied Psychology, 21, 349–362. https://doi.10.4473/TPM21.3.9

Capozza

Trifiletti

Vezzali

Favara

(2013). Can intergroup contact improve humanity attributions? International Journal of Psychology, 48, 527–541. https://doi.org/10.1080/00207594.2012.688132

10.

City of Seattle. (2017). State of Emergency Final Report. https://www.seattle.gov/documents/Departments/HumanServices/AboutUs/SOE%20Final%20Report.pdf

11.

Couture

S. M.

Penn

D. L.

(2003). Interpersonal contact and the stigma of mental illness: A review of the literature. Journal of Mental Health, 12, 291–305. https://doi.org/10.1080/09638231000118276

12.

Cuddy

A. J. C.

Rock

M. S.

Norton

M. I.

(2007). Aid in the aftermath of Hurricane Katrina: Inferences of secondary emotions and intergroup helping. Group Processes and Intergroup Relations, 10(1), 107–118. https://doi.org/10.1177/1368430207071344

13.

Enock

F. E.

Flavell

J. C.

Tipper

S. P.

Over

(2021). No convincing evidence outgroups are denied uniquely human characteristics: Distinguishing intergroup preference from trait-based dehumanization. Cognition, 212, Article 104682. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.cognition.2021.104682

14.

Fiske

S. T.

(2015). Intergroup biases: A focus on stereotype content. Current Opinion in Behavioral Sciences, 3, 45–50. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.cobeha.2015.01.010

15.

Forbes

K. F.

Zampelli

E. M.

(2013). The impacts of religion, political ideology, and social capital on religious and secular giving: Evidence from the 2006 social capital community survey. Applied Economics, 45, 2481–2490.

16.

Gallagher

(2009). The sacred meal. Thomas Nelson.

17.

Gregory

E. S.

(2017). Reading the Gospelskarl Barth (The gospel within the commandment). Wm. B. Eerdmans.

18.

Halteman Finger

. (2007). Of widows and meals: Communal meals in the Book of Acts. Wm. B. Eerdmans.

19.

Harris

L. T.

Fiske

S. T.

(2011). Dehumanized perception: A psychological means to facilitate atrocities, torture, and genocide? Zeitschrift fur Psychologie, 219(3), 175–181. https://doi.org/10.1027/2151-2604/a000065

20.

Haslam

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

21.

Haslam

(2019). The many roles of dehumanization in genocide. In Leonard

S. Newman

(Ed.), Confronting humanity at its worst: Social psychological perspectives on genocide (pp. 119–138). Oxford University Press. https://doi.org/10.1093/oso/9780190685942.003.0005

22.

Haslam

Bain

Douge

Lee

Bastian

(2005). More human than you: Attributing humanness to self and others. Journal of Personality and Socialpsychology, 89, 937–950. https://doi.org/10.1037/0022-3514.89.6.937

23.

Haslam

Loughnan

(2014). Dehumanization and infrahumanization. Annual Review of Psychology, 65, 399–423. https://doi.org/10.1146/annurev-psych-010213-115045

24.

Kteily

Bruneau

Waytz

Cotterill

(2015). The Ascent of man: Theoretical and empirical evidence for blatant dehumanization. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 109(5), 901–931. https://doi.org/10.1037/pspp0000048

25.

Lemmer

Wagner

(2015). Can we really reduce ethnic prejudice outside the lab? A meta-analysis of direct and indirect contact interventions. European Journal of Social Psychology, 45(2), 152–168. https://doi.org/10.1002/ejsp.2079

26.

Loughnan

Haslam

Sutton

R. M.

Spencer

(2014). Dehumanization and Social Class. Animality in the Stereotypes of “white trash”, “Chavs” and “Bogans”. Social Psychology, 45, 54–61. https://doi.org/10.1027/1864-9335/a000159

27.

Mancini

Mears

D. P.

Stewart

E. A.

Beaver

K. M.

Pickett

J. T.

(2015). Whites’ perceptions about Black criminality: A closer look at the contact hypothesis. Crime & Delinquency, 61, 996–1022. https://doi.org/10.1177/0011128712461900

28.

McKeown

Dixon

(2017). The “contact hypothesis”: Critical reflections and future directions. Social and Personality Psychology Compass, 11, Article e12295. http://dx.doi.org/10.1111/spc3.12295

29.

McKinney

Snedker

(2017). Hosting a tent city: Student engagement and homelessness. Teaching Sociology, 45, 252–259. https://doi.org/10.1177/0092055X17694908

30.

Mousa

(2020). Building social cohesion between Christians and Muslims through soccer in post-ISIS Iraq. Science, 369(6505), 866–870. https://doi.org/10.1126/science.abb3153

31.

Paluck

E. L.

Green

S. A.

Green

D. P.

(2019). The contact hypothesis re-evaluated. Behavioural Public Policy, 3, 129–158.

32.

Pettigrew

T. F.

Tropp

L. R.

Wagner

Christ

(2011). Recent advances in intergroup contact theory. International Journal of Intercultural Relations, 35(3), 271–280. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ijintrel.2011.03.001

33.

Pineda

A. M.

(Ed.). (1997). Hospitality. Jossey-Bass.

34.

Pohl

(1999). Making room: Recovering hospitality as a Christian tradition. Wm. B. Eerdmans.

35.

Rai

T. S.

Valdesolo Graham

(2017). Dehumanization increases instrumental violence, but not moral violence. Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences of the United States of America, 114, 8511–8516.

36.

Roth

Tausen

B. M.

(2020). Just as Human as Me: How direct and indirect contact impact the dehumanization of individuals who are homeless. Society for Personality and Social Psychology.

37.

Schroeder

Epley

(2020). Demeaning: Dehumanizing others by minimizing the importance of their psychological needs. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology: Attitudes and Social Cognition, 119, 765–791. https://doi.org/10.1037/pspa0000199

38.

Schroeder

Risen

(2016). Befriending the enemy: Outgroup friendship longitudinally predicts intergroup attitudes in a coexistence program for Israelis and Palestinians. Group Processes & Intergroup Relations, 19, 72–93. https://doi.org/10.1177/1368430214542257

39.

Smith

(2001). Churches and the urban poor: Interaction and social distance. Sociology of Religion, 62, 301–313.

40.

Tausen

B. M.

Charleson

Fingerhut

(2021). Proximity with limited humanity: How hosting a tent city impacted college students’ perceptions of individuals experiencing homelessness. Journal of Community Psychology, 49, 2853–2873.

41.

Tausen

B. M.

Dennis

I. A.

Dischinger

A. S.

Lee

J. H.

(2022). When dehumanization does (and does not) matter: Exploring the relationship between social justice motivations, avoidant behaviors, and intentions to help individuals experiencing homelessness. https://osf.io/vmkg7/?view_only=ea842e8bbc1f403e87a93d028198bc8e

42.

Tsai

Lee

C. Y. S.

Shen

Southwick

S. M.

Pietrzak

R. H.

(2019). Public exposure and attitudes about homelessness. Community Psychology, 47, 76–92. https://doi.10.1002/jcop.22100

43.

Vezzali

Hewstone

Capozza

Giovannini

Wölfer

(2014). Improving intergroup relations with extended and vicarious forms of indirect contact. European Review of Social Psychology, 25, 314–389. https://doi.10.1080/10463283.2014.982948

44.

Walton

J. A. P.

Walters

(2011). Eat this class: Breaking bread in the undergraduate classroom. In Smith

A. I.

Smity

J. K. A.

(Eds.), Teaching and Christian practices: Reshaping faith and learning (pp. 80–101). Cambridge University Press.

45.

Waytz

Schroeder

Epley

(2014). The lesser minds problem. In Bain

Vaes

Leyens

J. P.

(Eds.), Humanness and Dehumanization (pp. 49–67). Psychology Press.

46.

Wilder

D. A.

(1984). Intergroup contact: The typical member and the exception to the rule. Journal of Experimental Social Psychology, 20, 177–194. https://doi.org/10.1016/0022-1031(84)90019-2

47.

Wolsko

Park

Judd

C. M.

Bachelor

(2003). Intergroup contact: Effects on group evaluations and perceived variability. Group Processes and Intergroup Relations, 6, 93–110.

48.

Wright

B. R. E.

Wallace

Scola Wisnesky

Donnelly

C. M.

Missari

Sozula

(2015). Religion, race, and discrimination: A field experiment of how American churches welcome newcomers. Journal for the Scientific Study of Religion, 54, 185–204.

49.

Zhang

Chan

D. K.-S.

Xia

Tian

Zhu

(2017). Cognitive, emotional, and motivational consequences of dehumanization. Social Cognition, 35(1), 18–39. https://doi.org/10.1521/soco.2017.35.1.18