Normative dehumanization and the ordinary concept of a true human

Research output: Contribution to journalArticlepeer-review

1 Scopus citations

Abstract

Recently, I presented evidence that there are two broad kinds of dehumanization: descriptive dehumanization and normative dehumanization. An individual is descriptively dehumanized when they are perceived as less than fully human in the biological-species sense; whereas an individual is normatively dehumanized when they are perceived as lacking a deep-seated commitment to good moral values. Here, I develop the concept of normative dehumanization by addressing skepticism about two hypotheses that are widely held by dehumanization researchers. The first hypothesis is that dehumanization is distinct from mere dislike and other non-dehumanizing attitudes. The second hypothesis is that dehumanization is an important predictor of intergroup hostility. Across four studies, I found evidence that normative dehumanization is distinct from mere dislike, and denials of ideal humanness. I also found that it is a unique predictor of intergroup hostility. These findings suggest that research into dehumanization and intergroup hostility will benefit from recognizing the distinction between descriptive and normative dehumanization.

Original languageEnglish (US)
Article number100155
JournalCurrent Research in Ecological and Social Psychology
Volume5
DOIs
StatePublished - Jan 2023
Externally publishedYes

Keywords

  • Active harm
  • Blatant dehumanization
  • Dehumanization
  • Intergroup hostility
  • Passive harm

ASJC Scopus subject areas

  • Human Factors and Ergonomics
  • Social Psychology
  • Geography, Planning and Development
  • Psychology (miscellaneous)

Fingerprint

Dive into the research topics of 'Normative dehumanization and the ordinary concept of a true human'. Together they form a unique fingerprint.

Cite this