To psychologists Adler (1927/1954) and Maslow (1954), fully mature individuals care deeply for all humanity, not just for their own ingroups. This paper reports a series of studies with a new measure of that caring, the Identification With All Humanity Scale (IWAH). These studies together show that identification with all humanity is more than an absence of ethnocentrism and its correlates and more than the presence of dispositional empathy, moral reasoning, moral identity, and the value of universalism. Across these studies, the IWAH predicted concern for global human rights and humanitarian needs (Studies 1 and 2), was temporally stable (Study 3), and correlated with how close others see one as being (Study 4). The IWAH strongly distinguished members of 2 known groups from a general adult sample (Study 5). It predicted valuing the lives of ingroup and outgroup members equally (Study 7), knowledge of global humanitarian concerns (Study 8) and choosing to learn about these concerns (Study 9), and a willingness to contribute to international humanitarian relief (Study 10). In regression analyses, it predicted these results beyond related constructs. Although psychologists have focused extensively upon negative qualities such as ethnocentrism and its roots, we suggest that the positive quality of identification with all humanity also merits extensive study.

The search for the personological roots of generalized prejudice (or ethnocentrism) began with the authoritarian personality, but in recent years, the twin constructs of right-wing authoritarianism and social dominance orientation have been widely treated as the dual processes that lead to generalized prejudice. However, studies conducted for this article show that other constructs, notably empathy and principled moral reasoning, contribute important additional variance. Whereas authoritarianism and social dominance positively predict generalized prejudice, empathy and principled moral reasoning are related negatively to it. For the final study, a structural model of these relationships was tested. To fully understand individual differences in the propensity for generalized prejudice, it is necessary to move beyond the dual processes union of authoritarianism and social dominance.

We review psychological research on global human identification and citizenship, Thomas Paine's belief that "The world is my country, and all mankind are my brethren." In turn, we review the theoretical foundations that guided our work, research with measures that preceded our own, and our own work with our correlated scales. We review its foundations, its effects upon attitudes and behaviors, and how it might be enlarged. Global human identification and citizenship is related negatively to ethnocentrism, authoritarianism, the social dominance orientation, and self-centeredness, but positively to dispositional empathy, openness to experience, and the values of universalism, care, and justice. It is expressed in attitudes and behaviors that support human rights and work to reduce global suffering and inequalities. It is associated with greater global knowledge and with efforts to acquire that knowledge. Childrearing that emphasizes cross-cultural exposure and awareness of others' suffering may promote global human identification and citizenship, as does education that encourages global mindedness. Environments that support global human identification also induce it, as does envisioning it as a moral ideal.

In the week before the 2003 American attack on Iraq, the effects of authoritarianism and the social dominance orientation on support for the attack were examined. Based on prior research on the nature of these constructs, a structural model was developed and tested. As predicted, authoritarianism strengthened support for the attack by intensifying the perception that Iraq threatened America. Social dominance increased support by reducing concern for the likely human costs of the war. Both also increased blind patriotism, which in turn reduced concern for the war's human costs and was reciprocally related to the belief that Iraq threatened America.

Previous studies of human rights attitudes are reviewed, new measures are reported, and a three-factor model is identified (Human Rights Endorsement, Commitment, and Restriction). Individual differences that predict attitudes on each factor overlapped but differed. Dispositional empathy, education, and global knowledge contributed to an endorsement of human rights ideals, but none of these affected commitment or restriction. Globalism (vs. nationalism) and principled moral reasoning strengthened human rights commitment, while ethnocentrism and the social dominance orientation weakened it. Authoritarianism, ethnocentrism, and belief that the world cannot be changed increased a willingness to restrict the rights of unpopular groups, while principled moral reasoning and self-rated liberalism decreased it. In short, the individual differences that influence human rights attitudes depend substantially upon which dimension of these attitudes is considered.