The DOI matches its Crossref record; 33 of the 33 references it cites were found in a registry or an index; 6 of the 32 sources its claims cite were checked for support.
Dehumanized Perception: A Psychological Means to Facilitate Atrocities, Torture, and Genocide?
Open accessAbstract
Dehumanized perception, a failure to spontaneously consider the mind of another person, may be a psychological mechanism facilitating inhumane acts like torture. Social cognition - considering someone's mind - recognizes the other as a human being subject to moral treatment. Social neuroscience has reliably shown that participants normally activate a social-cognition neural network to pictures and thoughts of other people; our previous work shows that parts of this network uniquely fail to engage for traditionally dehumanized targets (homeless persons or drug addicts; see Harris & Fiske, 2009, for review). This suggests participants may not consider these dehumanized groups' minds. Study 1 demonstrates that participants do fail to spontaneously think about the contents of these targets' minds when imagining a day in their life, and rate them differently on a number of human-perception dimensions. Study 2 shows that these human-perception dimension ratings correlate with activation in brain regions beyond the social-cognition network, including areas implicated in disgust, attention, and cognitive control. These results suggest that disengaging social cognition affects a number of other brain processes and hints at some of the complex psychological mechanisms potentially involved in atrocities against humanity.
Overview
Integrity signals
Registry
Cites
Statistics
Verification
Claims the paper makes
29 Own interpretation · 21 Own result · 13 No full text of the sources · 4 Partly supported · 3 Own method · 1 Supported · 1 Supported so far · 1 Sources not found · 1 Not checked yet · accuracy not yet measured
The cited sources support only part of this claim — read each source’s verdict below.
In the paper
“Social neuroscience has reliably shown that participants normally activate a social-cognition neural network to pictures and thoughts of other people”
§ Dehumanized Perception: A Psychological Means to Facilitate Atrocities, Torture, and Genocide? > Abstract
What the sources say
- Not checked — no full text of the sourcecites Amodio & Frith, 2006 source
- Partly supportedcites Overwalle, 2009 sourceExperimental — accuracy not yet measured
The Conclusions (p. 21) describe a social-cognition circuit involving the TPJ and mPFC when people infer others’ goals and traits. But “Identifying the social other” (pp. 7, 14) distinguishes viewing faces and bodies, which engages visual-perception regions; the paper does not establish that merely viewing pictures of other people normally activates the social-cognition circuit. (LLM, conf=0.83)
boostedcorrelational- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
The cited sources support only part of this claim — read each source’s verdict below.
In the paper
“Besides manipulations of target persons, manipulations of social goals validate this prediction: Inferring preference, a mental-state inference, significantly increases MPFC and STS activity to these otherwise dehumanized targets (Harris & Fiske, 2007).”
§ Dehumanized Perception: A Psychological Means to Facilitate Atrocities, Torture, and Genocide? > Abstract
What the sources say
- Partly supportedcites Harris & Fiske, 2007 sourceExperimental — accuracy not yet measured
The Task main effect and Discussion report significantly greater mPFC activity during vegetable-preference inference than during age judgments, including for the disgust-eliciting targets. They do not report a corresponding STS increase from preference inference: the STS finding is a separate comparison in which activity was greater for other social-group members than for the disgust-eliciting targets, collapsed across tasks. (LLM, conf=0.89)
plaindirect- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
- Partly supported
The cited sources support only part of this claim — read each source’s verdict below.
In the paper
“People also anthropomorphize a range of inanimate objects and animals (Kwan & Fiske, 2008; Gray, Gray, & Wegner, 2007).”
§ Dehumanized Perception: A Psychological Means to Facilitate Atrocities, Torture, and Genocide? > Abstract
What the sources say
- Not matchedcites Kwan & Fiske, 2008
Couldn’t be matched to a paper in Crossref, so it can’t be checked.
- Partly supportedcites Gray, Gray, & Wegner, 2007 sourceExperimental — accuracy not yet measured
In “Dimensions of Mind Perception” (page unavailable), respondents rated mental capacities in three nonhuman animals and a sociable robot, supporting the point that people attribute minds to animals and at least one nonliving entity. The paper does not establish anthropomorphism across a range of inanimate objects; the robot is the only such object studied. (LLM, conf=0.86)
plain- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
- Not matched
The sources with a verdict support this claim; the rest weren’t checked yet, have no full text we could read, or their verdicts aren’t rated yet.
In the paper
“One indication of dehumanized perception may be reduced activation in the social-cognition neural network (see Amodio & Frith, 2006; Overwalle, 2009, for reviews), including medial prefrontal cortex (MPFC; Harris & Fiske, 2006) and superior temporal sulcus (STS; Harris & Fiske, 2007).”
§ Dehumanized Perception: A Psychological Means to Facilitate Atrocities, Torture, and Genocide? > Abstract
What the sources say
- Not checked — no full text of the sourcecites Harris & Fiske, 2006 source
- Supportedcites Harris & Fiske, 2007 source
The Task main effect section reports greater right superior temporal sulcus activity for humanized than dehumanized actors, supporting the STS portion attributed to Harris and Fiske (2007). The Discussion treats the interpretation as possible dehumanization, consistent with the citing sentence’s cautious wording. No page number is available in the supplied copy. (LLM, conf=0.91)
hedgedconditional- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
The cited sources support only part of this claim — read each source’s verdict below.
In the paper
“but more recently, has been active when participants needed to override a prepotent response to endorse sacrificing dehumanized targets (Cikara, Farnsworth, Harris, & Fiske, 2010).”
§ Dehumanized Perception: A Psychological Means to Facilitate Atrocities, Torture, and Genocide? > RESULTS > Results and Discussion
What the sources say
- Partly supportedcites Cikara, Farnsworth, Harris, & Fiske, 2010 sourceExperimental — accuracy not yet measured
The fMRI findings report ACC activation when participants judged sacrificing a low-warmth, low-competence target to save high-warmth, high-competence people; the paper also describes the former targets as dehumanized. But the General discussion says overriding moral aversion is a proposal, not an established explanation: participants may instead have felt less aversion, and the design cannot separate the effects of sacrificing the target from saving the ingroup. (LLM, conf=0.88)
plaincorrelational- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
- Partly supported
A result the paper reports from its own data — it cites no other source for it, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“Study 2 shows that these human-perception dimension ratings correlate with activation in brain regions beyond the social-cognition network, including areas implicated in disgust, attention, and cognitive control.”
§ Dehumanized Perception: A Psychological Means to Facilitate Atrocities, Torture, and Genocide? > Abstract
plaincorrelational- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
A result the paper reports from its own data — it cites no other source for it, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“and rate them differently on a number of human-perception dimensions”
§ Dehumanized Perception: A Psychological Means to Facilitate Atrocities, Torture, and Genocide? > Abstract
plaincorrelational- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
A result the paper reports from its own data — it cites no other source for it, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“Study 1 demonstrates that participants do fail to spontaneously think about the contents of these targets’ minds when imagining a day in their life”
§ Dehumanized Perception: A Psychological Means to Facilitate Atrocities, Torture, and Genocide? > Abstract
boosted- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
A result the paper reports from its own data — it cites no other source for it, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“The 3:1 deviant-cell contrast analyses revealed no significant differences in adjectives, interpretive-action verbs, or descriptive-actions verbs used in the descriptions of any type of social target.”
§ Dehumanized Perception: A Psychological Means to Facilitate Atrocities, Torture, and Genocide? > RESULTS > Verb Usage
plain- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: unclear — It is unclear whether the paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
A result the paper reports from its own data — it cites no other source for it, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“we found parametric modulation of the right anterior insula with warmth ratings, t(19) = −4.31, p < 4.76E−4, partial η2 = 0.49, at x = 38, y = 13, z = 15, 312 voxels”
§ Dehumanized Perception: A Psychological Means to Facilitate Atrocities, Torture, and Genocide? > RESULTS > Results and Discussion
plaincorrelational- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
- It may state two separate claims as one. 14
- Probably not a substantial claim. 14
Every source the paper cites for this claim was checked and supports it.
In the paper
“The default, decreased social cognition neural activity to dehumanized targets, replicates across stimuli and contexts (Harris, McClure, van den Bos, Cohen, & Fiske, 2007), suggesting reliability.”
§ Dehumanized Perception: A Psychological Means to Facilitate Atrocities, Torture, and Genocide? > Abstract
What the sources say
- Supportedcites Harris, McClure, van den Bos, Cohen, & Fiske, 2007 source
The Stimulus valence interaction section reports less arMPFC activity for negative than positive people, and the Discussion says the social-tuning finding replicated across social and evaluative tasks. The Regional Distinctions Within the MPFC section relates this pattern to earlier findings of reduced MPFC activity for extremely negative social groups. The paper thus supports replication across stimuli and task contexts; the inference that this suggests reliability is the citing authors’ own. (LLM, conf=0.86)
hedged- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
It may state two separate claims as one.
- Supported
A result the paper reports from its own data — it cites no other source for it, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“We found that 7 out of the 10 human-perception rating dimensions successfully activated ROIs that met our criteria for reporting (intelligence, articulateness, and ease of infer- ring dispositions failed to meet our criteria).”
§ Dehumanized Perception: A Psychological Means to Facilitate Atrocities, Torture, and Genocide? > RESULTS > Results and Discussion
plain- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
It may state two separate claims as one.
A result the paper reports from its own data — it cites no other source for it, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“Self-awareness, suggesting that participants think the target has an “inner life,” responsibility for their situation, and control over their situation, suggesting, respectively, that participants think the target has autonomy and agency, produced no significant differences either.”
§ Dehumanized Perception: A Psychological Means to Facilitate Atrocities, Torture, and Genocide? > RESULTS > Ratings Data
plain- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: unclear — It is unclear whether the paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
It may state two separate claims as one.
A result the paper reports from its own data — it cites no other source for it, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“Perceivers moreover view these targets as less typically human, unfamiliar, dissimilar, unintelligent, inarticulate, cold, incompetent, and having more ups and downs in life”
§ Dehumanized Perception: A Psychological Means to Facilitate Atrocities, Torture, and Genocide? > RESULTS > General Discussion
plain- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
It may state two separate claims as one.
In the paper
“Similarly, children commonly create imaginary others, both people (imaginary friends) and objects (imaginary food treats), effortlessly interacting with these targets as if they exist (see Kwan & Fiske, 2008, for examples).”
§ Dehumanized Perception: A Psychological Means to Facilitate Atrocities, Torture, and Genocide? > Abstract
What the sources say
- Not checked — no full text of the sourcecites Kwan & Fiske, 2008 source
plain- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: fails — The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
Probably not a substantial claim. The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it.
What the paper did — it cites no source for this, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“One-way, four-level ANOVAs, followed by a 3:1 deviant- cell contrast, best examined the data, because our a priori hypothesis concerns a deviant cell in the four-cell SCM warmth-by-competence space.”
§ Dehumanized Perception: A Psychological Means to Facilitate Atrocities, Torture, and Genocide? > METHOD > Data Analysis Strategy
plain- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
Probably not a substantial claim. It may state two separate claims as one.
What the paper did — it cites no source for this, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“First, a pair of independent raters separately classified 200 verbs, resulting in an inter-rater r(100) = .75, p < .05.”
§ Dehumanized Perception: A Psychological Means to Facilitate Atrocities, Torture, and Genocide? > METHOD > Coding Scheme
plaincorrelational- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
Probably not a substantial claim.
In the paper
“The most abstract, mental-state verbs, describe actions in terms of the target’s internal state (e.g., quench). Then follow interpretive-action verbs that interpret the target’s action (e.g., guzzle) and finally descriptive-action verbs (e.g., drink) simply describe the action.”
§ Dehumanized Perception: A Psychological Means to Facilitate Atrocities, Torture, and Genocide? > Study 1
What the sources say
- Not checked — no full text of the sourcecites Semin & Fiedler, 1988 source
plain- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
Probably not a substantial claim. It may state two separate claims as one.
None of the sources cited for this claim have been checked yet.
In the paper
“The anterior insula has been implicated in disgust (Calder, 2003), interoception (Craig, 2009), and as part of a pain and punishment neural network (Seymour, Singer, & Dolan, 2007).”
§ Dehumanized Perception: A Psychological Means to Facilitate Atrocities, Torture, and Genocide? > RESULTS > Results and Discussion
What the sources say
plaincorrelational- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
Probably not a substantial claim. It may state two separate claims as one.
What the paper did — it cites no source for this, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“Wording created no differences, so all analyses collapse across wording.”
§ Dehumanized Perception: A Psychological Means to Facilitate Atrocities, Torture, and Genocide? > METHOD > Procedure
plain- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: fails — The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
Probably not a substantial claim. The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it. It may state two separate claims as one.
A conclusion the paper draws from its own results — it cites no other source for it, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“By denying a person full humanity, perhaps inhumane behavior like torture and genocide becomes permissible.”
§ Dehumanized Perception: A Psychological Means to Facilitate Atrocities, Torture, and Genocide? > RESULTS > General Discussion
hedgedconditional- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: fails — The paper may give no reason why it holds.
Probably not a substantial claim. The paper may give no reason why it holds.
A conclusion the paper draws from its own results — it cites no other source for it, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“These results provide significant leads for further investigating the dehumanized perception that may underlie the ability to inflict severe harm on other people.”
§ Dehumanized Perception: A Psychological Means to Facilitate Atrocities, Torture, and Genocide? > RESULTS > General Discussion
hedgedconditional- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: fails — It may be too vague to check against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
Probably not a substantial claim. It may be too vague to check against evidence.
A conclusion the paper draws from its own results — it cites no other source for it, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“Having a mind is a uniquely human trait, suggesting dehumanized others may be treated more like objects in the environment without internal states.”
§ Dehumanized Perception: A Psychological Means to Facilitate Atrocities, Torture, and Genocide? > RESULTS > General Discussion
hedgedconditional- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
Probably not a substantial claim. It may state two separate claims as one.
- Rests on an assumption: Having a mind is a uniquely human trait.
In the paper
“Of course, dehumanization has been studied in social psychology since Allport (1954) described it as the worst kind of prejudice.”
§ Dehumanized Perception: A Psychological Means to Facilitate Atrocities, Torture, and Genocide? > RESULTS > General Discussion
What the sources say
- Not checked — no full text of the sourcecites Allport, 1954
plain- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: fails — The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
Probably not a substantial claim. The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it.
A conclusion the paper draws from its own results — it cites no other source for it, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“Therefore, violating these rules should lead to feelings of remorse and guilt unless the victim is recategorized as nonhuman beyond the boundaries of moral protection.”
§ Dehumanized Perception: A Psychological Means to Facilitate Atrocities, Torture, and Genocide? > RESULTS > General Discussion
hedgeddirect- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
It may state two separate claims as one.
A conclusion the paper draws from its own results — it cites no other source for it, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“The variety of modulation with this rating dimension suggests a number of psychological processes engaged during this estimation.”
§ Dehumanized Perception: A Psychological Means to Facilitate Atrocities, Torture, and Genocide? > RESULTS > Results and Discussion
hedgedcorrelational- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: fails — It may be too vague to check against evidence.
- Load-bearing: fails — The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
Probably not a substantial claim. It may be too vague to check against evidence. The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it.
A claim is checked only against the cited paper’s full text, never its abstract, and none is available for its sources.
In the paper
“Denial of typically human characteristics, such as intelligence or language, reduces targets to the level of animals (Haslam, 2006), a phenomenon observed in African-American perception (Goff, Eberhardt, Williams, & Jackson, 2008).”
§ Dehumanized Perception: A Psychological Means to Facilitate Atrocities, Torture, and Genocide? > RESULTS > General Discussion
What the sources say
plaindirect- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
It may state two separate claims as one.
A conclusion the paper draws from its own results — it cites no other source for it, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“This suggests that estimations of less typical humanity to social targets relate to increased conflict resolution, perhaps because participants are obviously aware that the targets are indeed human beings.”
§ Dehumanized Perception: A Psychological Means to Facilitate Atrocities, Torture, and Genocide? > RESULTS > Results and Discussion
hedgedcorrelational- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
It may state two separate claims as one.
A claim is checked only against the cited paper’s full text, never its abstract, and none is available for its sources.
In the paper
“Theory has suggested that acting beyond societal norms leads to moral exclusion (Bar-Tal, 1989), and out- groups allegedly operate beyond moral rules and values (Opotow, 1990; Staub, 1989).”
§ Dehumanized Perception: A Psychological Means to Facilitate Atrocities, Torture, and Genocide? > RESULTS > General Discussion
What the sources say
hedgeddirect- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
Probably not a substantial claim. It may state two separate claims as one.
In the paper
“This neural region is implicated in cognitive control or conflict resolution (Botvinick, Braver, Barch, Carter, & Cohen, 2001)”
§ Dehumanized Perception: A Psychological Means to Facilitate Atrocities, Torture, and Genocide? > RESULTS > Results and Discussion
What the sources say
- Not checked — no full text of the sourcecites Botvinick, Braver, Barch, Carter, & Cohen, 2001 source
plaincorrelational- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
Probably not a substantial claim.
A conclusion the paper draws from its own results — it cites no other source for it, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“However, the fact that this most important person perception dimension negatively correlates with a neural region implicated in these processes suggests that increased insula activation probably facilitates dehumanization (and perhaps harmful behaviors such as torture).”
§ Dehumanized Perception: A Psychological Means to Facilitate Atrocities, Torture, and Genocide? > RESULTS > Results and Discussion
hedgedconditional- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
It may state two separate claims as one.
A conclusion the paper draws from its own results — it cites no other source for it, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“This should be considered as another possible psychological mechanism of torture, as implicated in people denying obvious humanity to other people.”
§ Dehumanized Perception: A Psychological Means to Facilitate Atrocities, Torture, and Genocide? > RESULTS > Results and Discussion
hedgedconditional- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: fails — It may be too vague to check against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
Probably not a substantial claim. It may be too vague to check against evidence.
The paper relies on this without support.
Considering another person's mind is what recognizes them as a human being entitled to moral treatment.
“Social cognition – considering someone’s mind – recognizes the other as a human being subject to moral treatment.”
The paper relies on this without support.
Person perception sets moral norms for the social interaction that follows.
“Since person perception imbues the subsequent social interaction with moral norms”
The paper relies on this without support.
Having a mind is a uniquely human trait.
“Having a mind is a uniquely human trait”
Statistics recomputed
Every reported test result, recomputed from its test statistic and degrees of freedom. A result shows as not adding up only once an independent check has confirmed it.
- Consistentr(100) = 0.75reported p < .05 · recomputed p < .001
“r(100) = .75, p < .05”
- ConsistentF(3, 93) = 0.2reported p = .9 · recomputed p = .896
“F(3, 93) = .20, p = .90”
- Consistentt(86.22) = 2.52reported p < .05 · recomputed p = .014
“t(86.22) = 2.52, p < .05”
- Consistentt(115) = -6.11reported p < .05 · recomputed p < .001
“t(115) = −6.11, p < .05”
- Consistentt(115) = -3.26reported p < .05 · recomputed p = .001
“t(115) = −3.26, p < .05”
- Consistentt(115) = -3.53reported p < .05 · recomputed p < .001
“t(115) = −3.53, p < .05”
- Consistentt(115) = -3.36reported p < .05 · recomputed p = .001
“t(115) = −3.36, p < .05”
- Consistentt(115) = -5.23reported p < .05 · recomputed p < .001
“t(115) = −5.23, p < .05”
- Consistentt(115) = -7.19reported p < .05 · recomputed p < .001
“t(115) = −7.19, p < .05”
- Consistentt(115) = -2.26reported p < .05 · recomputed p = .026
“t(115) = −2.26, p < .05”
- Consistentt(115) = -3.1reported p < .05 · recomputed p = .002
“t(115) = −3.10, p < .05”
- Consistentt(55.54) = 3.49reported p < .05 · recomputed p < .001
“t(55.54) = 3.49, p < .05”
- Consistentt(114) = -1.72reported p = .09 · recomputed p = .088
“t(114) = −1.72, p = .09”
- Consistentt(19) = -4.31reported p < .000476 · recomputed p < .001
“t(19) = −4.31, p < 4.76e-4”
- Consistentt(19) = 4.27reported p < .000521 · recomputed p < .001
“t(19) = 4.27, p < 5.21e-4”
- Consistentt(19) = -4.01reported p < .000769 · recomputed p < .001
“t(19) = −4.01, p < 7.69e-4”
- Consistentt(19) = 4.15reported p < .000597 · recomputed p < .001
“t(19) = 4.15, p < 5.97e-4”
Self-check
Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.
Each contradiction between two passages listed here was confirmed by an independent check.
Rated minor: it would not touch a result — a value no result rests on, a p-value that stays on the same side of the significance level, or a conflict that is clerical, resolved elsewhere in the paper, or outside its own findings.
In the paper
§ Dehumanized Perception: A Psychological Means to Facilitate Atrocities, Torture, and Genocide? > RESULTS > Ratings Data
“dehumanized targets are rated significantly lower on 10 out of 14 rating dimensions”
§ Dehumanized Perception: A Psychological Means to Facilitate Atrocities, Torture, and Genocide? > RESULTS > Ratings Data
“competence t(115) = −6.11, p < .05, warmth t(115) = −3.26, p < .05, similarity t(115) = −3.53, p < .05, familiarity t(115) = −3.36, p < .05, articulateness t(115) = −5.23, p < .05, intelligence t(115) = −7.19, p < .05, ease of mentalizing t(115) = −2.26, p < .05, and ease of inferring dispositions t(115) = −3.10, p < .05”
Rated minor: it would not touch a result — a value no result rests on, a p-value that stays on the same side of the significance level, or a conflict that is clerical, resolved elsewhere in the paper, or outside its own findings.
In the paper
§ Dehumanized Perception: A Psychological Means to Facilitate Atrocities, Torture, and Genocide? > RESULTS > Results and Discussion
“right anterior insula with warmth ratings, t(19) = −4.31, p < 4.76E−4, partial η2 = 0.49, at x = 38, y = 13, z = 15, 312 voxels”
§ Dehumanized Perception: A Psychological Means to Facilitate Atrocities, Torture, and Genocide? > RESULTS > Results and Discussion
“left posterior insula with competence ratings, t(19) = 4.27, p < 5.21E−4, partial η2 = 0.49, at x = 38, y = 13, z = 15, 54 voxels”
Citations
Cites
(1954) · Cited by 15,935
Fiske, S. T., Cuddy, A. J. C., Glick, P., & Xu, J. (2002) · Journal of Personality and Social Psychology · doi:10.1037/0022-3514.82.6.878 · Cited by 7,364 · cited 4×
“Two pretested pictures represented each quadrant of the warmth-by-competence Stereotype Content Model (SCM; Fiske et al., 2002), as follows (the typical emotion for each pair of social targets appears in parentheses): female college student and male American firefighter (pride), business woman and…”
BackgroundInfluentialSelf-citationConflict monitoring and cognitive control
Botvinick, M. M., Braver, T. S., Barch, D. M., Carter, C. S., & Cohen, J. D. (2001) · Psychological Review · doi:10.1037/0033-295x.108.3.624 · Cited by 7,351
How do you feel — now? The anterior insula and human awareness
(Bud) Craig, A. D. (2009) · Nature Reviews Neuroscience · doi:10.1038/nrn2555 · Cited by 6,657 · cited 1×
“The anterior insula has been implicated in disgust (Calder, 2003), interoception (Craig, 2009), and as part of a pain and punishment neural network (Seymour, Singer, & Dolan, 2007).”
BackgroundUniversal dimensions of social cognition: warmth and competence
Fiske, S. T., Cuddy, A. J. C., & Glick, P. (2007) · Trends in Cognitive Sciences · doi:10.1016/j.tics.2006.11.005 · Cited by 4,567
Self-citationMeeting of minds: the medial frontal cortex and social cognition
Amodio, D. M., & Frith, C. D. (2006) · Nature Reviews Neuroscience · doi:10.1038/nrn1884 · Cited by 3,782 · cited 1×
“One indication of dehumanized perception may be reduced activation in the social-cognition neural network (see Amodio & Frith, 2006; Overwalle, 2009, for reviews), including medial prefrontal cortex (MPFC; Harris & Fiske, 2006) and superior temporal sulcus (STS; Harris & Fiske, 2007).”
BackgroundAn Experimental Study of Apparent Behavior
Heider, F., & Simmel, M. (1944) · The American Journal of Psychology · doi:10.2307/1416950 · Cited by 3,340 · cited 1×
“Participants infer the intentions of point-light walkers (Heberlein, Adolphs, Tranel, & Damasio, 2004) and shapes in biological motion (Heider & Simmel, 1944), objects that objectively do not have N IH -PA Author M anuscript N IH -PA Author M anuscript cognitions and emotions.”
BackgroundDehumanization: An integrative review
Haslam, N. (2006) · Personality and Social Psychology Review · doi:10.1207/s15327957pspr1003_4 · Cited by 2,919 · cited 1×
“Denial of typically human characteristics, such as intelligence or language, reduces targets to the level of animals (Haslam, 2006), a phenomenon observed in African-American perception (Goff, Eberhardt, Williams, & Jackson, 2008).”
BackgroundGray, H. M., Gray, K., & Wegner, D. M. (2007) · Science · doi:10.1126/science.1134475 · Cited by 2,342
Social cognition and the brain: A meta-analysis
Van Overwalle, F. (2009) · Human Brain Mapping · doi:10.1002/hbm.20547 · Cited by 1,792
Cited by
Sorted by citations
Dehumanization and Infrahumanization
Haslam, N., & Loughnan, S. (2013) · Annual Review of Psychology · doi:10.1146/annurev-psych-010213-115045 · Cited by 1,286
“A small number of neuroimaging studies (Harris & Fiske 2006, 2011) reveal a lack of activation of social cognition networks in the brain when low-low targets are present.”
BackgroundResultInfluentialInstitutionalizing passion in world politics: fear and empathy
Crawford, N. C. (2014) · International Theory · doi:10.1017/s1752971914000256 · Cited by 287
Tyler, T. R., Goff, P. A., & MacCoun, R. J. (2015) · Psychological Science in the Public Interest · doi:10.1177/1529100615617791 · Cited by 280
“The other is the literature on the dehumanization of out-groups (Goff, Eberhardt, Williams, & Jackson, 2008; L. T. Harris & Fiske, 2011; Haslam, 2006; Staub, 1992), especially as it is manifested in the military and police professions.”
BackgroundDehumanization and self-reported proclivity to torture prisoners of war
Viki, G. T., Osgood, D., & Phillips, S. (2012) · Journal of Experimental Social Psychology · doi:10.1016/j.jesp.2012.11.006 · Cited by 196
Grewal, D., Kroschke, M., Mende, M., Roggeveen, A. L., & Scott, M. L. (2020) · Journal of Interactive Marketing · doi:10.1016/j.intmar.2020.03.001 · Cited by 175
“Dehumanization is frequently linked to decreases in the inferred warmth and competence of an observed target (Harris & Fiske, 2011).”
BackgroundHackel, L. M., Looser, C. E., & Bavel, J. J. V. (2013) · Journal of Experimental Social Psychology · doi:10.1016/j.jesp.2013.12.001 · Cited by 168
“For example, inferring a mind in others allows us to see them as worthy of moral consideration (Gray, Gray, & Wegner, 2007; Gray, Young, & Waytz, 2012), and the failure to perceive a mind in others may facilitate prejudice and inhumane acts such as torture (Harris & Fiske, 2011).”
BackgroundOwusu-Bempah, A. (2017) · Theoretical Criminology · doi:10.1177/1362480616677493 · Cited by 135
“The concept is commonly employed in war, genocide, and ethnic conflict (Harris and Fiske, 2011).”
BackgroundThe Emotional Cost of Humanity
Cameron, C. D., Harris, L. T., & Payne, B. K. (2015) · Social Psychological and Personality Science · doi:10.1177/1948550615604453 · Cited by 148
“Yet we often engage in dehumanization: the denial of mental states to other human beings (Fiske, 2013; Harris & Fiske, 2006, 2011; Haslam, 2006; Haslam & Loughnan, 2014; Leyens et al., 2001).”
BackgroundSelf-citationSeven Challenges for the Dehumanization Hypothesis
Over, H. (2020) · Perspectives on Psychological Science · doi:10.1177/1745691620902133 · Cited by 114
“…they are frequently attributed others In some theories, dehumanization is characterized as a failure to consider the mind of another person (Harris & Fiske, 2011; see also Hackel et al., 2014; Harris & Fiske, 2006, 2011; Leyens et al., 2007; Rai et al., 2017; Waytz, Gray, Epley, & Wegner, 2010).”
BackgroundInfluentialDenying humanity: The distinct neural correlates of blatant dehumanization.
Bruneau, E., Jacoby, N., Kteily, N., & Saxe, R. R. (2018) · Journal of Experimental Psychology General · doi:10.1037/xge0000417 · Cited by 105
Threat Perception and American Support for Torture
Conrad, C., Croco, S. E., Gomez, B. T., & Moore, W. (2018) · Political Behavior · doi:10.1007/s11109-017-9433-5 · Cited by 79
Seeing human: Distinct and overlapping neural signatures associated with two forms of dehumanization
Jack, A. I., Dawson, A. J., & Norr, M. E. (2013) · NeuroImage · doi:10.1016/j.neuroimage.2013.04.109 · Cited by 106
Social, psychological, and demographic characteristics of dehumanization toward immigrants
Markowitz, D. M., & Slovic, P. (2020) · Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences · doi:10.1073/pnas.1921790117 · Cited by 94
Torture and the limits of democratic institutions
Conrad, C. R., Hill, D. W., & Moore, W. H. (2017) · Journal of Peace Research · doi:10.1177/0022343317711240 · Cited by 98
Young children perceive less humanness in outgroup faces
Mcloughlin, N. C., Tipper, S. P., & Over, H. (2017) · Developmental Science · doi:10.1111/desc.12539 · Cited by 75
“More generally, outgroup members are thought to have less of a mind (Hackel, Looser, & Van Bavel, 2014; Harris & Fiske, 2006, 2011; Krumhuber, Swiderska, Tsankova, Kamble, & Kappas, 2015).”
Background“Yuck, you disgust me!” Affective bias against interracial couples
Skinner, A. L., & Hudac, C. M. (2016) · Journal of Experimental Social Psychology · doi:10.1016/j.jesp.2016.05.008 · Cited by 82
Virtuous violence from the war room to death row
Slovic, P., Mertz, C. K., Markowitz, D. M., Quist, A., & Västfjäll, D. (2020) · Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences · doi:10.1073/pnas.2001583117 · Cited by 66
“36).”
Agency's Role in Dehumanization: Non‐human Metaphors of Out‐groups
Tipler, C. N., & Ruscher, J. B. (2014) · Social and Personality Psychology Compass · doi:10.1111/spc3.12100 · Cited by 71
The limited importance of dehumanization in collective violence
Lang, J. (2020) · Current Opinion in Psychology · doi:10.1016/j.copsyc.2020.02.002 · Cited by 61
Kinship intensity and the use of mental states in moral judgment across societies
Curtin, C. M., Barrett, H. C., Bolyanatz, A., Crittenden, A. N., Fessler, D. M. T., Fitzpatrick, S., Gurven, M., Kanovský, M., Kushnick, G., Laurence, S., et al. (2020) · Evolution and Human Behavior · doi:10.1016/j.evolhumbehav.2020.07.002 · Cited by 56
Incitement on Trial: Prosecuting International Speech Crimes
Wilson, R. A. (2017) · Cited by 54
Moral coherence processes: constructing culpability and consequences
Clark, C. J., Chen, E. E., & Ditto, P. H. (2015) · Current Opinion in Psychology · doi:10.1016/j.copsyc.2015.07.016 · Cited by 50
“, the homeless) may serve as a justification for treating them poorly [69].”
BackgroundPluta, A., Mazurek, J., Wojciechowski, J., Wolak, T. P., Soral, W., & Bilewicz, M. (2023) · Scientific Reports · doi:10.1038/s41598-023-31146-1 · Cited by 59
Varieties of (De) Humanization: Divided by Competition and Status
Fiske, S. T. (2013) · Nebraska Symposium on Motivation/The Nebraska symposium on motivation · doi:10.1007/978-1-4614-6959-9_3 · Cited by 47
“Questionnaire data converged with the neuro-imaging data (Harris and Fiske 2011).”
MethodSelf-citationA Framework for the Computational Linguistic Analysis of Dehumanization
Mendelsohn, J., Tsvetkov, Y., & Jurafsky, D. (2020) · Frontiers in Artificial Intelligence · doi:10.3389/frai.2020.00055 · Cited by 148
Enock, F. E., Flavell, J. C., Tipper, S. P., et al. (2021) · Cognition · doi:10.1016/j.cognition.2021.104682 · Cited by 44
“According to this perspective, to the extent a group is dehumanized, they are viewed as lacking beliefs, desires and intentions (Harris & Fiske, 2006; Harris & Fiske, 2011).”
The System‐Justifying Function of Gratitude Norms
Eibach, R. P., Wilmot, M. O., & Libby, L. K. (2015) · Social and Personality Psychology Compass · doi:10.1111/spc3.12184 · Cited by 42
Clark, J. A., & Fessler, D. M. T. (2014) · Topoi · doi:10.1007/s11245-014-9240-0 · Cited by 42
“For example, a cornerstone of many arguments against disgust is a set of neuroimaging studies by Harris and Fiske (2006, 2007, 2009, 2011) in which they argue that disgust produces dehumanization of stigmatized groups.”
BackgroundFalsifying the Dehumanization Hypothesis
Over, H. (2020) · Perspectives on Psychological Science · doi:10.1177/1745691620969657 · Cited by 40
The neuroscience of intergroup threat and violence
Lantos, D., & Molenberghs, P. (2021) · Neuroscience & Biobehavioral Reviews · doi:10.1016/j.neubiorev.2021.09.025 · Cited by 40
The Neuroscience of Human and Artificial Intelligence Presence
Harris, L. T. (2023) · Annual Review of Psychology · doi:10.1146/annurev-psych-013123-123421 · Cited by 46
Self-citationSöderlund, M. (2020) · Journal of Retailing and Consumer Services · doi:10.1016/j.jretconser.2020.102209 · Cited by 39
“Furthermore, it has been suggested that also disgust evoked by a target person can reduce the perceived humanness of the person (Harris and Fiske, 2011; Valtorta et al., 2019).”
BackgroundMcCall, C., Hildebrandt, L. K., Hartmann, R., Bączkowski, B. M., & Singer, T. (2016) · Computers in Human Behavior · doi:10.1016/j.chb.2016.01.028 · Cited by 40
Stereotyping: Processes and content.
Fiske, S. T., & Tablante, C. B. (2014) · American Psychological Association eBooks · doi:10.1037/14341-015 · Cited by 32
Self-citationSocial perceptions of warmth and competence influence behavioral intentions and neural processing
Simon, J. C., Styczynski, N., & Gutsell, J. N. (2020) · Cognitive Affective & Behavioral Neuroscience · doi:10.3758/s13415-019-00767-3 · Cited by 32
“…low in warmth predicts increased activity in areas of the brain associated with subjective pleasure (Cikara & Fiske, 2012), while those outgroup members perceived as low in both warmth and competence elicit deactivation of brain areas involved in social cognition (Harris & Fiske, 2006, 2007, 2011).”
BackgroundKuljian, O. R., & Hohman, Z. P. (2022) · British Journal of Social Psychology · doi:10.1111/bjso.12565 · Cited by 30
Guys and Dolls: Relational Life in the Technological Era
Knafo, D. (2015) · Psychoanalytic Dialogues · doi:10.1080/10481885.2015.1055174 · Cited by 31
“Most writers (Harris & Fiske, 2011; Keen, 1991; Livingstone Smith, 2011), including psychoanalysts (Altman, 2008; Dalal, 2006; Kernberg, 2003), address dehumanization as it relates to prejudice and social stereotyping, war, and genocide.”
BackgroundSimon, J. C., & Gutsell, J. N. (2021) · Social Cognitive and Affective Neuroscience · doi:10.1093/scan/nsab014 · Cited by 28
The Evil Animal: A Terror Management Theory Perspective on the Human Tendency to Kill Animals
Lifshin, U., Greenberg, J., Zestcott, C. A., & Sullivan, D. (2017) · Personality and Social Psychology Bulletin · doi:10.1177/0146167217697092 · Cited by 28
Ferris, L. J., Jetten, J., Johnstone, M., Girdham, E., Parsell, C., & Walter, Z. C. (2016) · Frontiers in Psychology · doi:10.3389/fpsyg.2016.00016 · Cited by 31
Journey to the edges: Social structures and neural maps of inter‐group processes
Fiske, S. T. (2012) · British Journal of Social Psychology · doi:10.1111/j.2044-8309.2011.02092.x · Cited by 25
“…that shows relevant neural differences (e.g., SCM quadrant), validated by correlations with theoretically predicted dependent variables (e.g., Harris & Fiske, 2011); or (d) using half the scanning runs to identify regions of interest and testing their correlates with predicted behavior on…”
MethodSelf-citationBeal, B. (2019) · Perspectives on Psychological Science · doi:10.1177/1745691619867106 · Cited by 18
“In addition to the classic situationist studies discussed above, recent research into dehumanization (Harris & Fiske, 2006, 2011; Haslam, 2006; Haslam & Loughnan, 2014; Leyens et al., 2003; Leyens, Demoulin, Vaes, Gaunt, & Paladino, 2007) and superhumanization (Waytz, Hoffman, & Trawalter, 2015;…”
The construction of racial stereotypes and how they serve as racial propaganda
Melson-Silimon, A. T., Spivey, B. N., & Skinner, A. L. (2023) · Social and Personality Psychology Compass · doi:10.1111/spc3.12862 · Cited by 45
The primacy of communality in humanization
Chu, C., & Martin, A. E. (2021) · Journal of Experimental Social Psychology · doi:10.1016/j.jesp.2021.104224 · Cited by 23
Group membership dictates the neural correlates of social optimism biases
Dricu, M., Schüpbach, L., Bristle, M., Wiest, R., Moser, D. A., & Aue, T. (2020) · Scientific Reports · doi:10.1038/s41598-020-58121-4 · Cited by 22
Evidence of the unidimensional structure of mind perception
Tzelios, K., Williams, L. A., Omerod, J., & Bliss‐Moreau, E. (2022) · Scientific Reports · doi:10.1038/s41598-022-23047-6 · Cited by 21
Morehouse, K. N., Maddox, K. B., & Banaji, M. R. (2023) · Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences · doi:10.1073/pnas.2300995120 · Cited by 21
Essentially subhuman: Psychological essentialism facilitates dehumanization.
Landry, A., Ihm, E. D., Protzko, J., & Schooler, J. W. (2021) · Peace and Conflict Journal of Peace Psychology · doi:10.1037/pac0000587 · Cited by 21
Landry, A., Ihm, E. D., & Schooler, J. W. (2021) · Evolutionary Psychological Science · doi:10.1007/s40806-021-00296-8 · Cited by 20
“Moreover, groups that are stigmatized due to their perceived lack of warmth and competence both elicit disgust and are considered less capable of complex, “uniquely human” experiences (Harris & Fiske, 2011).”
BackgroundDehumanization and mass violence: A study of mental state language in Nazi propaganda (1927–1945)
Landry, A., Orr, R. I., & Mere, K. (2022) · PLoS ONE · doi:10.1371/journal.pone.0274957 · Cited by 26
“[9], or their possession of fundamentally human mental capacities [10] (see [11] for review).”
BackgroundSchofield, T. P., Haslam, N., & Butterworth, P. (2019) · Journal of Applied Social Psychology · doi:10.1111/jasp.12616 · Cited by 24
Humanization of social relations: Nourishing health and resilience through greater humanity.
Castro, S. A., & Zautra, A. (2016) · Journal of Theoretical and Philosophical Psychology · doi:10.1037/teo0000040 · Cited by 20
Elbert, T. R., Schauer, M., Ruf, M., Weierstall, R., Neuner, F., Rockstroh, B. S., & Junghöfer, M. (2011) · Zeitschrift für Psychologie · doi:10.1027/2151-2604/a000064 · Cited by 17
Social optimism biases are associated with cortical thickness
Moser, D. A., Dricu, M., Wiest, R., Schüpbach, L., & Aue, T. (2020) · Social Cognitive and Affective Neuroscience · doi:10.1093/scan/nsaa095 · Cited by 16
“They are also implicated in social group perception (Krill and Platek, 2009; Hein et al., 2010; Harris and Fiske, 2011; Scheepers et al., 2013) and are therefore most likely to be involved in social optimism bias.”
BackgroundKhatry, P., Manokara, K., & Harris, L. T. (2020) · Social Psychological and Personality Science · doi:10.1177/1948550620976206 · Cited by 15
“A seven-item version of the human attributes inventory (Harris & Fiske, 2011) was used (1 ¼ not at all , 7 ¼ extremely ), which included both cognitive (e.g., how competent?”
InfluentialSelf-citationMetaphors They Kill by: Dehumanization of Palestinians by Israeli Officials and Sympathizers
Maalej, Z. A., & Zibin, A. S. (2024) · International Journal of Arabic-English Studies · doi:10.33806/ijaes.v25i1.693 · Cited by 15
The Developmental Origins of Dehumanization
Mcloughlin, N. C., & Over, H. (2017) · Advances in child development and behavior · doi:10.1016/bs.acdb.2017.10.006 · Cited by 17
Lantos, D., & Harris, L. T. (2021) · Journal of Theoretical Social Psychology · doi:10.1002/jts5.114 · Cited by 15
Self-citationCross-species Analyses of Intra-species Behavioral Differences in Mammals and Fish
Demin, K. A., Lakstygal, A. M., Volgin, A. D., de Abreu, M. S., Genário, R., Alpyshov, E. T., Serikuly, N., Wang, D., Wang, J., Yan, D., et al. (2020) · Neuroscience · doi:10.1016/j.neuroscience.2019.12.035 · Cited by 17
Lee, V. K., Kranton, R. E., Conzo, P., & Huettel, S. A. (2021) · Journal of Economic Psychology · doi:10.1016/j.joep.2021.102424 · Cited by 16
Deep Learning in a Disorienting World
Wergin, J. F. (2019) · Cambridge University Press eBooks · doi:10.1017/9781108647786 · Cited by 18
Law and Sentiment in International Politics
Traven, D. (2021) · Cambridge University Press eBooks · doi:10.1017/9781108954280 · Cited by 12
Poublan‐Couzardot, A., & Talmi, D. (2024) · Annals of the New York Academy of Sciences · doi:10.1111/nyas.15141 · Cited by 14
“165 Given that some degree of dehumanization is manifest across everyday social interactions, 166 the theory of constructed emotion is well placed to explain the flexible engagement and disengagement of emotion models.”
BackgroundCovid, racism and Black Lives Matter: A deadly constellation
Music, G. (2020) · Developmental Child Welfare · doi:10.1177/2516103220959814 · Cited by 9
“Strikingly, while the empathy circuits in the volunteers’ brains lit up for all the others, for both the homeless person and the drug addict areas dominant for disgust, such as the insula, were most active (Harris & Fiske, 2011).”
BackgroundImagined otherness fuels blatant dehumanization of outgroups
van Loon, A., Goldberg, A., & Srivastava, S. B. (2024) · Communications Psychology · doi:10.1038/s44271-024-00087-4 · Cited by 20
“The other approach is exempli fi ed by research on stereotype content 27,28,42 and dementalization 29,43,44 .”
First impressions: Do faces with scars and palsies influence warmth, competence and humanization?
Paruzel‐Czachura, M., Workman, C. I., Toukhy, N. E., & Chatterjee, A. K. (2024) · British Journal of Psychology · doi:10.1111/bjop.12719 · Cited by 10
Recoquillon, C. (2020) · Géographie et cultures · doi:10.4000/gc.15201 · Cited by 9
Tausen, B. M., Lee, J. H., Dischinger, A. S., & Dennis, I. A. (2023) · Journal of Applied Social Psychology · doi:10.1111/jasp.12971 · Cited by 11
Language Matters in British Newspapers: A Participatory Analysis of the Autism UK Press Corpus
Karaminis, T. N., Botha, M., Longley, S., Waldock, K. E., Storey, S., Strachan, K., Ransom, N., & Pellicano, E. (2024) · Autism in Adulthood · doi:10.1089/aut.2023.0105 · Cited by 11
Cognitive bots and algorithmic humans: toward a shared understanding of social intelligence
McDonald, K. R., & Pearson, J. M. (2019) · Current Opinion in Behavioral Sciences · doi:10.1016/j.cobeha.2019.04.013 · Cited by 10
Centeno, M. Á., & Yang, V. (2016) · Cited by 9
Animalistic slurs increase harm by changing perceptions of social desirability
Enock, F. E., & Over, H. (2023) · Royal Society Open Science · doi:10.1098/rsos.230203 · Cited by 9
Paskuj, B., & Orosz, G. (2022) · Frontiers in Psychology · doi:10.3389/fpsyg.2022.910848 · Cited by 8
“Research on dehumanized perception argues that perceiving the mind of others is an effortful social cognitive mechanism that may or may not be spontaneously engaged, depending on a host of situational variables (Harris and Fiske, 2011).”
BackgroundSin, K. F., Yang, L., & Ye, F. T.-F. (2023) · BMC Psychology · doi:10.1186/s40359-023-01178-3 · Cited by 9
“Recent development in the field has enriched the understanding of dehumanization as a border conceptual framework that encompasses attributing uniquely human emotions [19, 20], warmth and competence [21, 22], mental states [23], and personality traits [24].”
BackgroundTausen, B. M., & Fossum, J. L. (2024) · Journal of Applied Social Psychology · doi:10.1111/jasp.13050 · Cited by 8
Novel theory of mind task demonstrates representation of minds in mental state inference
Long, E. L., Cuve, H. C., Conway, J. R., Catmur, C., & Bird, G. (2022) · Scientific Reports · doi:10.1038/s41598-022-25490-x · Cited by 13
Schofield, T. P., & Butterworth, P. (2018) · Basic and Applied Social Psychology · doi:10.1080/01973533.2018.1496335 · Cited by 8
“Groups stereotyped as low in warmth and competence, including recipients of unemployment benefits, are also seen as less human than other groups (Harris & Fiske, 2011; Schofield et al., unpublished manuscript submitted for publication; Waytz & Epley, 2012).”
BackgroundMorris, V. (2023) · Contemporary Justice Review · doi:10.1080/10282580.2023.2284424 · Cited by 7
“Out-groups are dehumanized, so the in-group views them as objects rather than humans, evoking disgust rather than empathy and normalizing discrimination and violence (Harris & Fiske, 2011).”
BackgroundWeaverdyck, M. E., Thornton, M. A., & Tamir, D. (2021) · NeuroImage · doi:10.1016/j.neuroimage.2021.118258 · Cited by 7
A Functional and Neuroanatomical Model of Dehumanization
Mendez, M. F. (2022) · Cognitive and Behavioral Neurology · doi:10.1097/wnn.0000000000000316 · Cited by 9
Tausen, B. M., Douglass, K. M., Hodges, R., Rivera, B., & Thomas, C. (2022) · Journal of Psychology and Theology · doi:10.1177/00916471221130325 · Cited by 7
“At worst, they may fuel apathy, justification for the unequal distribution of resources, or even direct forms of harm (Bastian et al., 2011, 2013; Harris & Fiske, 2011; Loughnan et al., 2014; Rai et al., 2017)— behaviors directly opposed to the Christian ethic of neighbor love.”
BackgroundVarga, S. (2016) · Synthese · doi:10.1007/s11229-015-0994-8 · Cited by 10
“Also, the literature on dehumanization confirms that failure to perceive minds in other people may aggravate prejudice and facilitate humiliation and torture (Harris and Fiske 2006, 2011; Haslam and Loughnan 2014; Viki et al. 2013).”
BackgroundMalmqvist, K. (2019) · Emotions and Society · doi:10.1332/263168919x15670063481536 · Cited by 7
Political Institutions, Plausible Deniability, and the Decision to Hide TorturePreprint
Conrad, C. R., Hill, D. W., & Moore, W. H. (2014) · SSRN Electronic Journal · doi:10.2139/ssrn.2481762 · Cited by 7
Landry, A. (2021) · doi:10.31234/osf.io/egxt6 · Cited by 7
Gonzalez-Puerto, J. A., & Fernández, S. (2024) · British Journal of Social Psychology · doi:10.1111/bjso.12823 · Cited by 6
“Cruelty is often facilitated by the perpetrator's dehumanized perception of the victim (Harris & Fiske, 2011).”
Orr, R. I., & Gilead, M. (2022) · Behavior Research Methods · doi:10.3758/s13428-022-01911-7 · Cited by 7
“Research into this theoretical framework has utilized neuroimaging methods to provide evidence for reduced “mentalizing network” activity towards outgroup members, relative to the ingroup (Cikara et al., 2011; Harris & Fiske, 2006; Harris & Fiske, 2011).”
BackgroundAmes, D. R., & Lee, A. J. (2015) · Journal of Experimental Social Psychology · doi:10.1016/j.jesp.2015.05.002 · Cited by 6
“…torture attitudes reflect not just consequentialist reasoning (e.g., assumed information payoffs) but also other motives as well, such as retribution, ingroup glorification, and dehumanization (Carlsmith & Sood, 2009; Harris & Fiske, 2011; Leidner et al., 2010; Liberman, 2013; Waytz & Epley, 2012).”
BackgroundGender Role Beliefs and Ontologization of Mothers: A Moderated Mediation Analysis
Battista, S. D. (2023) · Social Sciences · doi:10.3390/socsci12010048 · Cited by 6
Construction and Validation of a Tool for Measuring Prejudice Toward Childfree People
Ciesielski, P. (2024) · European Journal of Psychological Assessment · doi:10.1027/1015-5759/a000822 · Cited by 6
Disgust, Prejudice, and Stigma
Vartanian, L. R., McCutcheon, T. B., & Rubenstein, S. A. (2021) · Springer eBooks · doi:10.1007/978-3-030-84486-8_10 · Cited by 8
Wojtczak, S. (2018) · Filozofia Publiczna i Edukacja Demokratyczna · doi:10.14746/fped.2016.5.1.5 · Cited by 6
Humanizing animals does not reduce blatant dehumanization by children or adults
Zhou, W., Bowie, A., Tan, J., & Hare, B. A. (2024) · Current Research in Ecological and Social Psychology · doi:10.1016/j.cresp.2024.100194 · Cited by 5
Hate Speech on the Map of Stereotype Content
Soral, W., Bieńkowski, M., & Bilewicz, M. (2024) · Social Psychology · doi:10.1027/1864-9335/a000562 · Cited by 5
To what extent is research on infrahumanization confounded by intergroup preference?
Bunce, C., Eggleston, A., Brennan, R., et al. (2025) · Royal Society Open Science · doi:10.1098/rsos.241348 · Cited by 5
The nonmoral conditions of moral cognition
Beal, B. (2021) · Philosophical Psychology · doi:10.1080/09515089.2021.1942811 · Cited by 6
“…al., 2012; Schein & Gray, 2015, 2018), while also analyzing the literature on moral dilemmas (e.g., Foot, 1967; Greene, 2013; Kohlberg, 1981; Mikhail, 2007; Thomson, 1985), dehumanization (e.g., e.g., Harris & Fiske, 2006, 2011; Haslam, 2006; Haslam & Loughnan, 2014; J.P. Leyens et al., 2007; J-P.”
Deceptive (De)humanization: How Lying About Perceived Outgroups is Revealed in Language
Markowitz, D. M. (2022) · Journal of Language and Social Psychology · doi:10.1177/0261927x221117497 · Cited by 4
“Other forms of subtle dehumanization relate to the mind attribution model popularized by social psychologists (Gray et al., 2007), where perceivers ascribe less of a mind or fail to consider the minds of outgroups (Harris & Fiske, 2006, 2009, 2011; Kozak et al., 2006).”
BackgroundAnimalistic dehumanisation as a social influence strategy
Quiamzade, A., & Lalot, F. (2023) · Frontiers in Psychology · doi:10.3389/fpsyg.2022.999959 · Cited by 5
How voice and helpfulness shape perceptions in human–agent teams
Westby, S., Radke, R. J., Riedl, C., & Welles, B. F. (2024) · Computers in Human Behavior Artificial Humans · doi:10.1016/j.chbah.2024.100101 · Cited by 5
Challenge 8: A Response to Over (2021)
Smith, D. L. (2020) · Perspectives on Psychological Science · doi:10.1177/1745691620917351 · Cited by 5
Metadata
- Authors
- Harris, L. T., & Fiske, S. T.
- Affiliations
- Duke University (US)
- Princeton University (US)
- Venue
- Zeitschrift für Psychologie
- Publisher
- Hogrefe Publishing Group
- Published
- 2011-01
- Volume
- 219
- Issue
- 3
- Pages
- 175-181
- ISSN
- 0044-3409 (ISSN-L)
- 2190-8370
- 2151-2604
- PMC
- PMC3915417
- OpenAlex
- W2017180264
- Cited by
- 173
- References
- 33
- Citations by year
- 2026: 7 · 2025: 5 · 2024: 17 · 2023: 18 · 2022: 19 · 2021: 16 · 2020: 21 · 2019: 20 · 2018: 5 · 2017: 11 · 2016: 8 · 2015: 9 · 2014: 7 · 2013: 4 · 2012: 4
- FWCI
- 18.15
- Type
- journal article
- Language
- en
- Open access
- green
- www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov
- Locations
- Zeitschrift für Psychologie (publishedVersion)
- PubMed (publishedVersion)
- PubMed Central (acceptedVersion)
- Europe PMC (PubMed Central) (acceptedVersion)
- Funders
- Princeton University
- Eunice Kennedy Shriver National Institute of Child Health and Human Development (R24HD047879)
- Topics
- Social Sciences › Sociology and Political Science › Social and Intergroup Psychology
- Social Sciences › Psychology › Social Psychology › Death Anxiety and Social Exclusion
- Life Sciences › Neuroscience › Cognitive Neuroscience › Psychology of Moral and Emotional Judgment
- Keywords
- dehumanization, social cognition, theory of mind, cognitive control, attention, atrocities, torture, homeless people, drug addicts
About these checks
Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.
A language model drew the claims from the paper on 2026-09-28, under version 3 of the claim definition (prompt extract-v3).
A second model labelled each claim on 2026-09-28 (model jev-1.13-20260917, definition revision gold-guideline-v0.2).
Cited sources are checked with a language model’s help (gpt-6-sol).
Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.
Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.
What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›
Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review
