On the Behavioral Consequences of Infrahumanization: The Implicit Role of Uniquely Human Emotions in Intergroup Relations.

Abstract

Four experiments confirmed the hypothesis that people discriminate the out-group on the basis of the expression of uniquely human emotions. In Study 1, using a lost e-mail paradigm, the expression of a uniquely human emotion resulted in "nicer" replies when the sender was an in-group compared with an out-group member. The same pattern of results was obtained in Studies 2 and 3 using a conformity paradigm. In addition, perceived similarity was measured and proposed as a potential underlying mechanism (Study 3). Finally, using an approach-avoidance procedure, Study 4 showed that people not only deprive the out-group of positive consequences as in the former studies but that people also act against the out-group. The role of infrahumanization underlying prejudice and discrimination is discussed.

We are human, they are not: Driving forces behind outgroup dehumanisation and the humanisation of the ingroup

“…Vaes and colleagues investigated people's reactions when an outgroup member expressed secondary emotions, examining a range of different situations involving perspective taking , political credibility (Vaes, Paladino, & Magagnotti, 2011), imitation, avoidance reactions (Vaes, Paladino, Castelli, Leyens, & Giovanazzi, 2003), and helping behaviour (Vaes et al, 2003;Vaes, Paladino, & Leyens, 2002). In all these contexts a similar pattern of results was reported that is best demonstrated with an example.…”

From infra-humanization to discrimination: The mediation of symbolic threat needs egalitarian norms

“…Twenty-eight emotional words (eight used as training examples; 20 used in the manipulation check) were pre-tested for their degree of humanity, their valence and the desirability of their expression (e.g., Vaes et al, 2003). As expected, the only main ef-fect was found for humanity, F(1, 24) = 222.67, p < .001, g 2 = .90.…”

“…To achieve full humanity, these outgroups have to show that they share core similarities (i.e., emotional vocabulary) with the ingroup. The problem is that the proof cannot come from outgroups themselves (e.g., Vaes et al, 2003), but has to be delivered by neutral third parties. Nevertheless, the possibility of humanizing a disliked outgroup is a great step towards harmony between groups.…”

“…Although these studies have shown a relationship between infra-humanization and negative outcomes, the correlational design raises questions about the causal direction of the findings. Vaes, Paladino, Castelli, Leyens, and Giovanazzi (2003) used experimental designs, but they did it with specific aims in mind. They showed that the spontaneous expression of secondary emotions by ingroup and outgroup members caused a general tendency to be friendly with, to take as a model, and to approach ingroup members as compared with outgroup members who were plainly rejected.…”

Humanos, animales y máquinas: entendiendo el proceso de deshumanización

“…También el uso de sentimientos provocó que los participantes se mostraran más proclives a adoptar la perspectiva de los miembros del endogrupo que del exogrupo (Vaes, Paladino, y Leyens, 2004). De forma complementaria, el impacto de los sentimientos también ha sido analizado en relación a las conductas de acercamiento y evitación (Vaes et al, 2003, estudio 4), mostrando que describir al endogrupo y al exogrupo con sentimientos, facilita las respuestas de acercamiento de los sujetos al endogrupo y de evitación del exogrupo.…”