Research suggests that members of advantaged groups who feel dehumanized by other groups respond aggressively. But little is known about how meta-dehumanization affects disadvantaged minority group members, historically the primary targets of dehumanization. We examine this important question in the context of the 2016 U.S. Republican Primaries, which have witnessed the widespread derogation and dehumanization of Mexican immigrants and Muslims. Two initial studies document that Americans blatantly dehumanize Mexican immigrants and Muslims; this dehumanization uniquely predicts support for aggressive policies proposed by Republican nominees, and dehumanization is highly associated with supporting Republican candidates (especially Donald Trump). Two further studies show that, in this climate, Latinos and Muslims in the United States feel heavily dehumanized, which predicts hostile responses including support for violent versus non-violent collective action and unwillingness to assist counterterrorism efforts. Our results extend theorizing on dehumanization, and suggest that it may have cyclical and self-fulfilling consequences.
AndrighettoL.RivaP.GabbiadiniA.VolpatoC. (2016). Excluded from all humanity: Animal metaphors exacerbate the consequences of social exclusion. Journal of Language and Social Psychology. Advance online publication. doi: 10.1177/0261927X16632267
2.
AribargA.AroraN.HendersonT.KimY. (2014). Private label imitation of a national brand: Implications for consumer choice and law. Journal of Marketing Research, 51, 657-675.
3.
BastianB.DensonT. F.HaslamN. (2013). The roles of dehumanization and moral outrage in retributive justice. PloS One, 8(4), e61842.
4.
BastianB.HaslamN. (2010). Excluded from humanity: The dehumanizing effects of social ostracism. Journal of Experimental Social Psychology, 46, 107-113. doi:10.1016/j.jesp.2009.06.022
5.
BastianB.HaslamN. (2011). Experiencing dehumanization: Cognitive and emotional effects of everyday dehumanization. Basic and Applied Social Psychology, 33, 295-303. doi:10.1080/01973533.2011.614132
6.
BranscombeN. R.EllemersN.SpearsR.DoosjeB. (1999). The context and content of social identity threat. In EllemersN.SpearsR.DoosjeB. (Eds.), Social identity: Context, commitment, content (pp. 35-58). Oxford, UK: Blackwell Science.
7.
BranscombeN. R.SchmittM. T.HarveyR. D. (1999). Perceiving pervasive discrimination among African Americans: Implications for group identification and well-being. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 77, 135-149. doi:10.1037/0022-3514.77.1.135
8.
BuhrmesterM.KwangT.GoslingS. D. (2011). Amazon’s Mechanical Turk a new source of inexpensive, yet high-quality, data?Perspectives on Psychological Science, 6(1), 3-5.
9.
CacioppoJ. T.CacioppoS.GonzagaG. C.OgburnE. L.VanderWeeleT. J. (2013). Marital satisfaction and break-ups differ across on-line and off-line meeting venues. Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences, 110, 10135-10140.
DoosjeB.LosemanA.van den BosK. (2013). Determinants of radicalization of Islamic youth in the Netherlands: Personal uncertainty, perceived injustice, and perceived group threat. Journal of Social Issues, 69, 586-604.
ForscherP. S.CoxW. T.GraetzN.DevineP. G. (2015). The motivation to express prejudice. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 109, 791-812. doi:10.1037/pspi0000030
14.
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, 292-306. doi:10.1037/0022-3514.94.2.292
15.
GuadagnoliE.VelicerW. (1988). Relation of sample size to the stability of component patterns. Psychological Bulletin, 103, 265-275.
16.
HaddockG.ZannaM. P.EssesV. M. (1993). Assessing the structure of prejudicial attitudes: The case of attitudes toward homosexuals. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 65, 1105-1118. doi:10.1037/0022-3514.65.6.1105
17.
HaslamN.BainP.BastianB.DougeL.LeeM. (2005). More human than you: Attriburing humanness to self and others. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 89 (6), 937-950.
18.
HaslamN.LoughnanS.SunP. (2011). Beastly: What makes animal metaphors offensive?Journal of Language and Social Psychology, 30, 311-325. doi:10.1177/0261927X11407168
19.
HayesA. F. (2013). Introduction to mediation, moderation, and conditional process analysis: A regression-based approach. New York: Guilford Press.
HoA. K.SidaniusJ.KteilyN.Sheehy-SkeffingtonJ.PrattoF.HenkelK. E.FoelsR.StewartA. L. (2015). The nature of social dominance orientation: Theorizing and measuring preferences for intergroup inequality using the new SDO7 scale. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 109(6), 1003-1028.
22.
JacksonL. E.GaertnerL. (2010). Mechanisms of moral disengagement and their differential use by right wing authoritarianism and social dominance orientation in support of war. Aggressive behavior, 36, 238-250.
23.
JostJ. T.BanajiM. R. (1994). The role of stereotyping in system-justification and the production of false consciousness. British Journal of Social Psychology, 33(1), 1-27.
24.
KamansE.GordijnE. H.OldenhuisH.OttenS. (2009). What I think you see is what you get: Influence of prejudice on assimilation to negative meta-stereotypes among Dutch Moroccan teenagers. European Journal of Social Psychology, 39, 842-851. doi:10.1002/ ejsp.593
25.
KteilyN.BruneauE.WaytzA.CotterillS. (2015). The ascent of man: Theoretical and empirical evidence for blatant dehumanization. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 109, 901-931. doi:10.1037/pspp0000048
26.
KteilyN.HodsonG.BruneauE. (2016). They see us as less than human: Metadehumanization predicts intergroup conflict via reciprocal dehumanization. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 110, 343-370. doi:10.1037/pspa0000044
27.
LeidnerB.CastanoE.GingesJ. (2013). Dehumanization, retributive and restorative justice, and aggressive versus diplomatic intergroup conflict resolution strategies. Personality and Social Psychology Bulletin, 39, 181-192. doi:10.1177/0146167212472208
28.
LeyensJ.-P.PaladinoP. M.Rodriguez-TorresR.VaesJ.DemoulinS.Rodriguez-PerezA.GauntR. (2000). The emotional side of prejudice: The attribution of secondary emotions to ingroups and outgroups. Personality and Social Psychology Review, 4(2) 186-197.
29.
Lyons-PadillaS.GelfandM. J.MirahmadiH.FarooqM.van EgmondM. (2015). Belonging nowhere: Marginalization & radicalization risk among Muslim immigrants. Behavioral Science & Policy, 1(2), 1-12.
30.
MacCallumR. C.WidamanK. F.PreacherK. J.HongS. (2001). Sample size in factor analysis: The role of model error. Multivariate Behavioral Research, 36, 611-637.
MirandaM.Gouveia-PereiraM.VaesJ. (2014). When in Rome: Identification and acculturation strategies among minority members moderate the dehumanisation of the majority outgroup. European Journal of Social Psychology, 44, 327-336.
33.
SteigerJ. H. (1980). Tests for comparing elements of a correlation matrix. Psychological Bulletin, 87(2), 245-251.
34.
StevensJ. P. (1992). Applied multivariate statistics for the social sciences (2nd ed.). Hillsdale, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum.
35.
Triangle Center on Terrorism and Homeland Security. (2013). Muslim-American terrorism: Declining further. Chapel Hill, NC: Charles Kurzman.
36.
WrightS. C.AronA.TroppL. R. (2002). Including others (and groups) in the self. In ForgasJ. P.WilliamsK. D. (Eds.), The social self: Cognitive, interpersonal, and intergroup perspectives (pp. 343-364). Philadelphia, PA: Psychology Press.
Supplementary Material
Please find the following supplemental material available below.
For Open Access articles published under a Creative Commons License, all supplemental material carries the same license as the article it is associated with.
For non-Open Access articles published, all supplemental material carries a non-exclusive license, and permission requests for re-use of supplemental material or any part of supplemental material shall be sent directly to the copyright owner as specified in the copyright notice associated with the article.
