Lecture 8- Dehumanisation

Question 1

What does Genocide mean?

Answer 1

Genocide is defined under international law as specific acts committed with the intention to destroy, in whole or part, a national, ethnic, racial or religious group.

Question 2

What theory can we link to dehumanisation?

Answer 2

Ingroup favouritism + outgroup derogation

SIT predicts:
Preference for ingroup
Negative bias toward outgroup
👉 Outgroup begins to be seen as:
Inferior
Less complex
Less “fully human”

3. Denial of humanness
   This is where dehumanisation comes in:
   Outgroups are denied:
   Human Nature (warmth, emotion) → seen as cold/robotic
   Human Uniqueness (morality, civility) → seen as animal-like
   👉 This matches Haslam’s model of dehumanisation
4. Reduced empathy and moral concern
   Because the outgroup is seen as “less human”:
   Less empathy
   Less guilt when harming them
   Easier justification of:
   Discrimination
   Violence

Question 3

Give some theories of dehumanisation (Kelman, Oporto, Bandar)

Answer 3

Early approaches focused on mass genocide and morality (i.e., dehumanization as a tool)

• Kelman (1976) and Staub (1989) focus on dehumanization to explain mass genocide
• Opotow (1990) dehumanization not a denial but a moral exclusion
• Bandar (1999) dehumanization allows aggressors to disengage from morality

Question 4

Leyens et al 2001 conceptualised dehumanisation differently, what did he state?

Answer 4

Proposed a ‘new look’ to help explain the psychology of dehumanization

• Argued that dehumanization is not unique to specific conflicts but generic
• We view outgroups differently to ingroups – the effect can be subtle
• They termed this nuanced view as ‘infrahumanization’. You need to remember SIT and SCT

Question 5

What does the Infra-Humanisation theory state?

Answer 5

Dehumanisation is therefore related to how we see the outgroup vs the ingroup ie it is fundamentally a group process that involves cognitive categorisation.

• What distinguishes humans from animals is our intelligence, languages, and emotions
• Humans have unique emotions such as joy (positive) or embarrassment (negative)
• We see outgroups as less nuanced than the ingroup on range of ‘sentiments’ (French term) or secondary emotions
• Note – that since secondary emotions can be positive or negative this proposes that dehumanization itself is not tied to negative prejudice. Instead, it is a function of how we see groups.
• This is one argument for arguing that dehumanization is fundamentally a group categorization process

Question 6

Paladino et al 2002- evidence for infra humanisation

Answer 6

Paladino et al. (2002) show that participants assign different (or fewer) unique secondary emotions to outgroup members compared to ingroup members, e.g., ‘hope’ is more likely to be assigned to an ingroup member. Demonstrated on paper tasks and the IAT

Question 7

Viki and Abrams 2003- support for infra humanisation

Answer 7

Viki and Abrams (2003) tested 285 students from Kent. Participants had to assign secondary emotions such as melancholy or compassion towards women. They also completed sexism scales. No sig differences between women and men… But male students who scored highly on hostile sexism were more likely to deny positive secondary emotions towards women. Men who scored high on benevolent sexism assigned more positive secondary emotions. Suggests it’s less about group membership but saliency matters.

Question 8

What did Forscher and Kteily 2020 find?

Answer 8

Surveyed far-right extremists on a wide range of topics like trust in the media, political opinions, free-speech, etc. Over half agreed that “We need to do more to stop the mixing of the White race with the other races”. Looked at how the alt right see other groups in terms of their humanity in the ascent of man scale. Forscher and Kteily reiterate the need to focus on blatant dehumanization.

Question 9

How could subtle infra humanisation explain helping descisions or policy support?

Answer 9

• There is even evidence that we see outgroup members as suffering less pain (Cuddy et al. 2007). They asked 116 passersby at a NJ train station. White (ingroup) respondents how much pain Black (outgroup) victims felt following Hurricane Katrina. White Ps assigned fewer unique secondary emotions such as anguish or despair to Black outgroup victims and were less willing to help. Ps who did not dehumanize were more willing to volunteer.
• Could Infrahumanization explain helping differences towards outgroup members?

Question 10

What is the Dual Model of Dehumanisation: Haslam 2006

Answer 10

• Haslam (2006) proposed a dual model that encompasses Infrahumanization
• Haslam argued that Infrahumanization did not fully explain dehumanization as it focuses on what makes us distinct from animals
  -The dual model of dehumanisation (Haslam, 2006) proposes that people dehumanise others in two ways: by denying human uniqueness, leading to animalistic dehumanisation (seeing others as primitive or uncivilised), or by denying human nature, leading to mechanistic dehumanisation (seeing others as cold or emotionless like machines).
• Haslam’s model does not disagree that we offer fewer complex emotions towards the outgroup or that dehumanization is a function of group processes (if anything they allude to this more strongly)
• But the dual model suggests that we also see humans as different from machines (human nature) as well as different from animals (human uniqueness).

Question 11

What evidence is there in support of the dual model- Hallam 2005, Haslam 2008?

Answer 11

• Haslam (2005) observed that, in anthropology, human nature is a common concept across cultures, whereas what makes humans unique develops later and differs across cultures- suggesting there are distinct forms of being human.
• Halsam (2008) both traits predict humanness but are statistically unique from each other

Together, this evidence supports the dual model by demonstrating that humanness has two distinct components, which can be denied separately—leading to either animalistic or mechanistic dehumanisation.

Question 12

What is the Stereotype Content Model? Fiske 2002, Harris and Fiske 2006

Answer 12

iske (2002) and Harris and Fiske (2006) proposed a cognitive model of stereotyping that could explain dehumanization

• The SCM was initially developed to explain stereotyping
• SCM uses social neuroscience to understand how neural activations can account for stereotyping, which in turn lead to prejudice and dehumanization
• The medial PFC and temporal sulcus fail to activate for certain (out)groups meaning that we vary in terms of how much ‘warmth’ and ‘competence’ we assign to certain groups (Fiske, 2002)
• These constructs serve evolutionary functions (reproductive fitness) – warmth is related to nurturing; competence is related to ability to provide benefits, e.g., strength, resources, etc.
• Warmth and competence form orthogonal constructs in which different groups can be placed

Question 13

What evidence is there is support of the Stereotype Content Model?

Answer 13

• Russell & Fiske (2008) had student participants at Princeton play an online game for a cash prize. Participants showed less warmth towards groups they were in competition with but viewed high status targets (upper middle-class vs. working-class) as more competent
• Cuddy et al., (2009) surveyed across 10 countries: 7 x European (individualist) and 3 x East Asian (collectivist) N = 1,028. Warmth and competence reliably predict different types of social groups. Confirmed that high status groups seen as competent and competitive groups as lacking warmth. Outgroups tend to be high on one dimension but lower on another

Question 14

Over 2021- Criticisms of dehumanisation

Answer 14

1. If we dehumanise, then why specifically engage in actions that are relevant for human beings, e.g., say someone is a criminal (systematic rape is an extreme example of this argument)
2. Furthermore, why do we compare our ingroups to animals, e.g., in sport?
3. Evidence of people being associated with animals, e.g., Black people and monkeys, doesn’t prove that the associator believes that a Black person is a monkey.
4. Outgroup members are assigned different traits, but not denied all traits, e.g., homeless people are thought to be incompetent or irresponsible
5. Outgroup members are often assigned uniquely human attributes, e.g., the Nazis thought that the Jews were cunning and spiteful
6. Groups are sometimes persecuted because of their humanity, e.g., religious groups

Question 15

What is human uniqueness?

Answer 15

Human uniqueness refers to traits that distinguish humans from animals, such as civility, morality, and rationality.

Question 16

What is animalistic dehumanisation?

Answer 16

Animalistic dehumanisation occurs when people deny human uniqueness and view others as primitive or animal-like.

Question 17

What is mechanistic dehumanisation?

Answer 17

Mechanistic dehumanisation occurs when people deny human nature and view others as cold, emotionless, or machine-like.

Question 18

Why is the dual model important?

Answer 18

It shows that dehumanisation is not one process but two distinct processes, helping explain different forms of prejudice and discrimination.

Question 19

How does the dual model differ from infrahumanisation theory?

Answer 19

Infrahumanisation focuses only on denying traits that distinguish humans from animals, whereas the dual model also includes denial of traits that distinguish humans from machines.

Question 20

What is the key idea behind infrahumanisation?

Answer 20

Dehumanisation is a subtle, everyday process where outgroups are seen as less fully human than ingroups.

Question 21

What does infrahumanisation suggest about prejudice?

Answer 21

Dehumanisation is not always linked to negative prejudice but reflects how groups are cognitively categorised.

Question 22

How can infrahumanisation affect behaviour?

Answer 22

It can reduce helping behaviour, as people may see outgroup members as experiencing less pain or suffering

Question 23

What is the neural basis of the SCM?

Answer 23

Certain brain areas (e.g., medial prefrontal cortex) show reduced activation for some outgroups, indicating dehumanisation

Question 24

How does the SCM explain dehumanisation?

Answer 24

Groups low in both warmth and competence may be seen as less human, leading to dehumanisation. Warmth relates to nurturing and cooperation, while competence relates to resources and survival benefits.