Dehumanisation

Question 1

Define dehumanisation.

Answer 1

The perception of others as belonging to a lower order of humanity. Denial of humanness to others.

Question 2

How has dehumanisation developed over the years?

Answer 2

Some early theories in 70s-90s.
Infrahumanisation in 2000s - Leyens.
Dual model of dehumanisation - 2006 - Haslam.
Mind Perception - 2007 - Gray.

Question 3

What are the two main parts of Leyens’ model of intrahumanisation?

Answer 3

Primary + secondary emotions.

Question 4

What are primary emotions?

Answer 4

Biologically based and shared with other primates.

Question 5

What are secondary emotions?

Answer 5

Related to social interaction and are specific of human beings.

Question 6

Explain Haslam’s dual model of dehumanisation.

Answer 6

Human uniqueness - intelligence, rationality, self-control. Animalistic dehumanisation.
Human nature - warmth, emotional, agency, flexibility. Mechanistic dehumanisation.

Question 7

Explain Gray’s mind perception.

Answer 7

There are two dimensions - agency + experience.
Agency - thinking, self-control, communication.
Experience - emotions, consciousness, personality.

Question 8

Explain Formanowicz’s agency and communion.

Answer 8

Two dimensions - agency and communion.
More agents = more human.
Communion has no effect on perceived humanness.

Question 9

Name some ways to measure dehumanisation.

Answer 9

Use attribute-based measures - emotions, words, traits (HUvsUH).
Use metaphors-based measures - metaphors, visual.

Question 10

How is dehumanisation different from prejudice?

Answer 10

Different from mere negative evaluations or in-group favouritism.
Groups who are not target of prejudice can still be dehumanised.

Question 11

Give an example of where culture has affected perceived humanness.

Answer 11

Bain - European Australians - denial of human nature to East Asian faces.
Chinese people - denial of human uniqueness to White people.

Question 12

Give two consequences on dehumanisation.

Answer 12

Violence justification - higher justification of violence toward the black suspect after being primed with dehumanisation related to stimuli.
Help - people more likely to help with secondary emotions compared to primary emotions.

Question 13

How do secondary and primary emotions affect in-group vs out-group?

Answer 13

More solidarity to in-group if the person used secondary emotions.

Question 14

What happens to helping rates when people are dehumanised?

Answer 14

Helping rates decrease. Less empathy.

Question 15

Name 4 triggers of dehumanisation.

Answer 15

Threat, disgust, language, behaviours.

Question 16

Explain a study + results which showed the affects of threat.

Answer 16

Christians given human-related words for another religion. Group seen as threat or not.
Torture rates higher for high threat group.

Question 17

Explain a study + results which showed the affects of disgust.

Answer 17

Groups that elicit disgust and contempt are a higher target of dehumanisation.

Question 18

Explain how homophobic language affects dehumanisation levels (Fasoli).

Answer 18

When in the derogatory label condition - heterosexual pps dehumanised homosexuals more. Used more animal-related words.

Question 19

Do individuals perceive themselves as more or less human than others?
What is the one exception to this?

Answer 19

More. This is called self-humanisation.

When committing a wrongdoing - perceive themselves as less human.

Question 20

Name the different types of objectification (Nussbaum’s model of objectification).

Answer 20

Instrumentality, denial of autonomy, inertness, fungibility, violability, ownership and denial of subjectivity.

Question 21

What is sexual objectification?

Answer 21

Where people’s bodies are separated out from their identity and reduced to the status of mere instruments.
Treated as bodies that exist for the use and pleasure of others.

Question 22

What three types of objectification did Langton add to Nussbaum’s model?

Answer 22

Reduction to body, reduction to appearance, silencing.

Question 23

What is the sexualised-body inversion hypothesis?

Answer 23

Inverted stimuli picturing humans are more difficult to recognise, however, objects are not effected by inversion.
If woman are perceive as objects, they should be processed as objects. Sexualised women should be easily recognised as women when upright or inverted.

Question 24

Explain three studies that showed that objectification = dehumanisation (Vaes).

Answer 24

Study 1 - objectified women were associated with less human-related words.
Study 2 - women dehumanised objectified women - more ‘vulgar and superficial’ - distancing motive. Men dehumanised objectified women - sexually attracted to them.
Study 3 - Sex goals led men to focus on women’s appearance more than personality. No effect on women.

Question 25

Explain how objectification = mind perception (Loughnan).

Answer 25

Objectified women = perceived as having less mind + rated as less moral.
Same for target males!!! Less competent and moral - less mind.

Question 26

Explain 3 consequences of objectification.

Answer 26

• Men who associated women with objects = higher levels of rape proclivity + more negative judgments toward a rape victim.
  Sexualised women = less mind and moral concern. Blamed more for being victims of sexual harassment.
  Exposed to objectified portrayal of women - slower in recognising a case of harassment and less willingness to help.

Question 27

Define anthropomorphism.

Answer 27

People tend to see non-human agents as human-like.

Question 28

What are the three factors affecting levels of anthropomorphism?

Answer 28

Elicited agent knowledge - similarities with humans and use of human knowledge.
Social motivation - individuals who feel lonely and lack in social connection.
Reflectance motivation - people that need to control & master the environment.

Question 29

Give one example of where elicited knowledge was shown.

Answer 29

Men attributed more humanness to the robot with a male voice and female vice versa.

Question 30

Give one example of where social motivation was shown.

Answer 30

Lonelier people attributed a higher mind attribution and human essence to robots.

Question 31

Give one example of where reflectance motivation was shown.

Answer 31

Pps who anticipated to interact with a robot perceived the robot as more human, especially if he was unpredictable.

Question 32

Explain the uncanny valley (Mori).

Answer 32

When robots are too close to human likeliness - people find them repulsive and strange. People react positively to robots until they become too close to reality.