Does Human–Animal Similarity Lower the Need to Affirm Humans’ Superiority Relative to Animals? A Social Psychological Viewpoint

Amiot, Catherine E.; Sukhanova, Ksenia; Greenaway, Katharine H.; Bastian, Brock

doi:10.1080/08927936.2017.1335117

Cited by 17 publications

(13 citation statements)

References 37 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Unclassified

Order By: Relevance

“…In a series of studies, Amiot and Bastian (2017) demonstrated that people expressing greater solidarity with animals show greater moral concern for a number of different animals and more strongly oppose practices of animal exploitation. Furthermore, the stronger the (perceived) similarity between animals and humans, the more easily people identify with animals (Amiot, Sukhanova, Greenaway, & Bastian, 2017).…”

Section: Intergroup Perspectives On Human-animal Relationsmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…Conversely, highlighting (perceived) differences between humans and animals in ways that emphasize positive and distinct characteristics of humans in comparison to animals can facilitate desires for optimal group distinctiveness and decrease identification with animals (Amiot et al, 2017). Through this dis-identification process, perceived human-animal differences can strengthen and justify the belief that humans are inherently superior to animals, and increase support for practices of animal exploitation.…”

Section: Intergroup Perspectives On Human-animal Relationsmentioning

confidence: 99%

See 1 more Smart Citation

Rethinking human-animal relations: The critical role of social psychology

Dhont

Hodson

Loughnan

et al. 2019

Group Processes & Intergroup Relations

Self Cite

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

People deeply value their social bonds with companion animals, yet routinely devalue other animals, considering them mere commodities to satisfy human interests and desires. Despite the inherently social and intergroup nature of these complexities, social psychology is long overdue in integrating human-animal relations in its theoretical frameworks. The present body of work brings together social psychological research advancing our understanding of: 1) the factors shaping our perceptions and thinking about animals as social groups, 2) the complexities involved in valuing (caring) and devaluing (exploiting) animals, and 3) the implications and importance of human-animal relations for human intergroup relations. In this article, we survey the diversity of research paradigms and theoretical frameworks developed within the intergroup relations literature that are relevant, perchance critical, to the study of human-animal relations. Furthermore, we highlight how understanding and rethinking human-animal relations will eventually lead to a more comprehensive understanding of many human intergroup phenomena.

show abstract

Section: Intergroup Perspectives On Human-animal Relationsmentioning

confidence: 99%

Section: Intergroup Perspectives On Human-animal Relationsmentioning

confidence: 99%

Rethinking human-animal relations: The critical role of social psychology

Dhont

Hodson

Loughnan

et al. 2019

Group Processes & Intergroup Relations

Self Cite

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…In line with this idea, stronger endorsement of human–animal inequality and human supremacy beliefs is associated with more meat consumption, and with stronger support for animal exploitation (Dhont & Hodson, ). Furthermore, deemphasizing the hierarchical divide between animals and humans has been shown to expand moral inclusivity of animals and to reduce speciesism (Bastian, Costello, Loughnan, & Hodson, ; see also Amiot, Sukhanova, Greenaway, & Bastian, ). In sum, accumulating evidence suggests that beliefs in human supremacy are associated with general negative attitudes towards animals, similar to the general effects of social dominance orientation across human outgroups (Kteily, Ho, & Sidanius, ; Meeusen & Dhont, ).…”

Section: Human Supremacy and Vegetarianism Threatmentioning

confidence: 99%

Longitudinal effects of human supremacy beliefs and vegetarianism threat on moral exclusion (vs. inclusion) of animals

Leite

Dhont

Hodson

2018

Euro J Social Psych

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Stronger beliefs in human supremacy over animals, and stronger perceived threat posed by vegetarianism to traditional practices, are associated with stronger speciesism and more meat consumption. Both variables might also be implicated in the moral exclusion of animals. We tested this potential in a 16‐month longitudinal study in the USA (N = 219). Human supremacy showed longitudinal effects on the moral exclusion of all animals. Vegetarianism threat only predicted moral exclusion of food animals (e.g., cows and pigs), and, unexpectedly, appealing wild animals (e.g., chimps and dolphins). These findings demonstrate the importance of both human supremacy and perceived threat in explaining moral exclusion of animals and highlight potential paradoxical negative consequences of the rise of vegetarianism.

show abstract

“…Perceived status of farm animals was measured by adapting the four items developed by Amiot, Sukhanova, Greenaway, and Bastian (; α = .94). For the first item (“Do you think cows have lower or higher status compared to dogs?”), participants responded on a 1 = Cows are much LOWER in status than dogs to 7 = Cows are much HIGHER in status than dogs scale.…”

Section: Methodsmentioning

confidence: 99%

Compartmentalization of Animals: Toward an Understanding of How We Create Cognitive Distinctions between Animals and Their Implications

Amiot

Lépine

Zaky

2019

Anal Soc Iss & Public Policy

Self Cite

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

The nature of our relationships with nonhuman animals is complex and varies greatly across different types and species of animals. The goal of the current research is to investigate the differences that exist in our perceptions of animals based on their type, specifically by focusing on the phenomenon of compartmentalization. Two studies investigated the compartmentalization of farm animals relative to other types of animals (e.g., pets, wild animals). In Study 1, a greater tendency to compartmentalize farm animals correlated negatively with the attribution of a higher status to these animals, with more differentiated perceptions between the standing of farm animals and pets, and with a lower inclusion of animals in the self. In Study 2, different justifying beliefs taping into human superiority, the endorsement of carnism, and feeling threatened by vegetarianism mediated the negative relation between compartmentalization of farm animals and the negative emotional outcomes felt when eating meat. Together, these findings confirm the relevance of applying the notion of compartmentalization to the specific realm of human-animal relations.

show abstract

Does Human–Animal Similarity Lower the Need to Affirm Humans’ Superiority Relative to Animals? A Social Psychological Viewpoint

Cited by 17 publications

References 37 publications

Rethinking human-animal relations: The critical role of social psychology

Rethinking human-animal relations: The critical role of social psychology

Longitudinal effects of human supremacy beliefs and vegetarianism threat on moral exclusion (vs. inclusion) of animals

Compartmentalization of Animals: Toward an Understanding of How We Create Cognitive Distinctions between Animals and Their Implications

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About