Although the act of dehumanizing an outgroup is a pervasive and potent intergroup process that drives discrimination and conflict, no formal research has examined the consequences of being dehumanized by an outgroup-that is, "metadehumanization." Across 10 studies (N = 3,440) involving several real-world conflicts spanning 3 continents, we provide the first empirical evidence that metadehumanization (a) plays a central role in outgroup aggression that is (b) mediated by outgroup dehumanization, and (c) distinct from metaprejudice. Studies 1a and 1b demonstrate experimentally that Americans who learn that Arabs (Study 1a) or Muslims (Study 1b) blatantly dehumanize Americans are more likely to dehumanize that outgroup in return; by contrast, experimentally increasing outgroup dehumanization did not increase metadehumanization (Study 1c). Using correlational data, Study 2 documents indirect effects of metadehumanization on Americans' support for aggressive policies toward Arabs (e.g., torture) via Arab dehumanization. In the context of Hungarians and ethnic minority Roma, Study 3 shows that the pathway for Hungarians from metadehumanization to aggression through outgroup dehumanization holds controlling for outgroup prejudice. Study 4 examines Israelis' metaperceptions with respect to Palestinians, showing that: (a) feeling dehumanized (i.e., metadehumanization) is distinct from feeling disliked (i.e., metaprejudice), and (b) metadehumanization uniquely influences aggression through outgroup dehumanization, controlling for metaprejudice. Studies 5a and 5b explore Americans' metaperceptions regarding ISIS and Iran. We document a dehumanization-specific pathway from metadehumanization to aggressive attitudes and behavior that is distinct from the path from metaprejudice through prejudice to aggression. In Study 6, American participants learning that Muslims humanize Americans (i.e., metahumanization) humanize Muslims in turn. Finally, Study 7 experimentally contrasts metadehumanization and metahumanization primes, and shows that resulting differences in outgroup dehumanization are mediated by (a) perceived identity threat, and (b) a general desire to reciprocate the outgroup's perceptions of the ingroup. In summary, our research outlines how and why metadehumanization contributes to cycles of ongoing violence and animosity, providing direction for future research and policy. (PsycINFO Database Record

Download full-text PDF

Source
http://dx.doi.org/10.1037/pspa0000044DOI Listing

Publication Analysis

Top Keywords

outgroup dehumanization
20
outgroup
9
metadehumanization
9
metaprejudice studies
8
study
8
aggression outgroup
8
dehumanization
7
human metadehumanization
4
metadehumanization predicts
4
predicts intergroup
4

Similar Publications

Previous research found that political polarization goes hand in hand with being strongly identified with a political ingroup. In this research, we assumed this should be the case only among those who identify with their political ingroup in a narcissistic way (stemming from frustrated needs and predicting outgroup hostility). This hypothesis was tested in one experimental (Study 4, n = 525) and three cross-sectional (Study 1, n = 320; Study 2, n = 316; Study 3, n = 500) studies conducted among American and Polish participants.

View Article and Find Full Text PDF

Dehumanization of others has been attributed to institutional processes that spread dehumanizing norms and narratives, as well as to individuals' denial of mind to others. We propose that blatant dehumanization also arises when people actively contemplate others' minds. We introduce the construct of imagined otherness-perceiving that a prototypical member of a social group construes an important facet of the social world in ways that diverge from the way most humans understand it-and argue that such attributions catalyze blatant dehumanization beyond the effects of general perceived difference and group identification.

View Article and Find Full Text PDF

Efforts to bridge political divides often focus on navigating complex and divisive issues, but eight studies reveal that we should also focus on a more basic misperception: that political opponents are willing to accept basic moral wrongs. In the United States, Democrats, and Republicans overestimate the number of political outgroup members who approve of blatant immorality (e.g.

View Article and Find Full Text PDF

Previous research has demonstrated that exposure to outgroup descriptions that use person-first, as compared to identity-first, language can attenuate negative stereotypes or prejudice and enhance support for policies that seek to advance outgroup rights. However, those benefits of person-first language may not apply to all social groups equally. The present study examines a boundary condition of the effects of person-first language.

View Article and Find Full Text PDF

Salience Matters: Filler groups on the ascent of human scale impact ratings for target groups.

PLoS One

November 2023

Department of Psychology, Neuroscience, and Behaviour, McMaster University, Hamilton, Canada.

Researchers using the ascent of human scale (AOH) to study dehumanization typically include filler groups in addition to the main comparator groups, to hide the true intent of the study. However, there is little work examining the impact of filler group choice on dehumanization ratings between groups of interest. Across two studies (including one pre-registered study) we manipulated the salience of a target out-group (i.

View Article and Find Full Text PDF

Want AI Summaries of new PubMed Abstracts delivered to your In-box?

Enter search terms and have AI summaries delivered each week - change queries or unsubscribe any time!