Stereotypes and Dehumanization: The Relationship Between the Dual Models of Dehumanization and Stereotype Content

  1. Rodríguez-Pérez, Armando 1
  2. Rodríguez-Gómez, Laura 1
  3. Brambilla, Marco 2
  4. Delgado, Naira 1
  5. Betancor, Verónica 1
  1. 1 Universidad de La Laguna
    info

    Universidad de La Laguna

    San Cristobal de La Laguna, España

    ROR https://ror.org/01r9z8p25

  2. 2 Department of Psychology, University of Milano-Bicocca, Italy
Revista:
Social Psychology

ISSN: 1864-9335,  2151-2590

Año de publicación: 2021

Tipo: Artículo

DOI: 10.1027/1864-9335/A000454 GOOGLE SCHOLAR

Otras publicaciones en: Social Psychology

Resumen

Abstract. Across two studies, we tested the relationship between the stereotype dimensions of sociability, morality, and competence and the two dimensions of humanness (human nature and human uniqueness). Study 1 considered real groups and revealed that sociability had greater power than morality in predicting human nature. For some groups, sociability also trumped competence in predicting human nature. By contrast, the attribution of human uniqueness was predicted by competence and morality. In Study 2, participants read a scenario depicting an unfamiliar group in stereotypical terms. Results showed that competence and sociability were the strongest predictors of human uniqueness and human nature, respectively. Although with nuances, both studies revealed that sociability, morality, and competence relate differently to the two dimensions of humanness.

Referencias bibliográficas

  • Abele A. E., (2021), Psychological Review, 128, pp. 290, 10.1037/rev0000262
  • Abele A. E., (2016), Frontiers in Psychology, 7, pp. Article 1810, 10.3389/fpsyg.2016.01810
  • 10.1207/s15327957pspr0303_3
  • 10.1348/014466610X521383
  • Benet-Martínez V., (2002), European Journal of Personality, 16, pp. 1, 10.1002/per.431
  • Brambilla M., (2018), Journal of Experimental Social Psychology, 78, pp. 34, 10.1016/j.jesp.2018.04.011
  • Brambilla M., (2019), Journal of Experimental Social Psychology, 82, pp. 64, 10.1016/j.jesp.2019.01.003
  • 10.1521/soco.2014.32.4.397
  • Brambilla M., (2017), Motivation and Emotion, 41, pp. 243, 10.1007/s11031-016-9594-2
  • 10.1111/j.2044-8309.2010.02011.x
  • Brambilla M., (2021), Advances in Experimental Social Psychology, 64
  • Brandt M. J., (2011), Perspectives on Psychological Science, 6, pp. 428, 10.1177/1745691611414587
  • Castano E., (2006), Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 90, pp. 804, 10.1037/0022-3514.90.5.804
  • 10.1016/S0065-2601(07)00002-0
  • 10.1016/j.tics.2006.11.005
  • 10.1037/0022-3514.82.6.878
  • Goodwin G. P., (2015), Current Directions in Psychological Science, 24, pp. 38, 10.1177/0963721414550709
  • 10.1037/a0034726
  • 10.1111/j.1467-9280.2006.01793.x
  • 10.1207/s15327957pspr1003_4
  • Haslam N., (2005), Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 89, pp. 937, 10.1037/0022-3514.89.6.937
  • Haslam N., (2004), Personality and Social Psychology Bulletin, 30, pp. 1661, 10.1177/0146167204271182
  • 10.1146/annurev-psych-010213-115045
  • Haslam, N., Loughnan, S. & Holland, E. (2013). The psychology of humanness. In S. Gervais (Ed.), Objectification and (De)Humanization. Nebraska Symposium on Motivation (Vol. 60, pp. 25–51). Springer. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-1-4614-6959-9_2
  • Haslam N., (2008), European Review of Social Psychology, 19, pp. 55, 10.1080/10463280801981645
  • John, O. P. & Srivastava, S. (1999). The Big-Five Trait taxonomy: History, measurement, and theoretical perspectives. In L. A. Pervin, & O. P. John (Eds.), Handbook of personality: Theory and research (pp. 102–138). Guilford Press.
  • Jones-Lumby R., (2005), Dimensions of humanness and stereotype content (Unpublished data)
  • 10.1177/0146167216655984
  • Leach C. W., (2007), Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 93, pp. 234, 10.1037/0022-3514.93.2.234
  • Li M., (2014), TPM: Testing, Psychometrics, Methodology in Applied Psychology, 21, pp. 285
  • Loughnan S., (2007), Psychological Science, 18, pp. 116, 10.1111/j.1467-9280.2007.01858.x
  • Martínez R., (2017), Group Processes & Intergroup Relations, 20, pp. 465, 10.1177/1368430215612219
  • Martínez R., (2017), The Journal of Social Psychology, 157, pp. 165, 10.1080/00224545.2016.1192097
  • Paladino M. P., (2009), British Journal of Social Psychology, 48, pp. 237, 10.1348/014466608X322882
  • Riva P., (2016), British Journal of Social Psychology, 55, pp. 88, 10.1111/bjso.12114
  • Rosenthal R., (1984), American Psychologist, 39, pp. 561, 10.1037/0003-066X.39.5.561
  • Rothbart M., (1986), Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 50, pp. 131, 10.1037/0022-3514.50.1.131
  • Rule N. O., (2008), Journal of Experimental Social Psychology, 44, pp. 1100, 10.1016/j.jesp.2007.12.001
  • Sacchi S., (2014), Journal of Environmental Psychology, 38, pp. 252, 10.1016/j.jenvp.2014.03.001
  • Schwartz, S. H. (1992). Universals in the content and structure of values: Theoretical advances and empirical tests in 20 countries. In M. Zanna (Ed.), Advances in experimental social psychology (Vol. 25, pp. 1–65). Academic Press.
  • Vaes J., (2009), Group Processes & Intergroup Relations, 13, pp. 23, 10.1177/1368430209347331