3. Hate Speech + Explicit Bias Flashcards
(11 cards)
Dehumanisation
social cognition being witheld from people (this definition covers both subtle and blatant examples)
- failure of inference process
- social context + goals may reduce cognition
- torture, genocide ,slavery → however no causal evidence as would be severely unethical to recreate
- social cognition may get in the way
- trigger emotional processes that prohibit goal-congruent behaviour (Harris & Fiske, 2009)
- dehuminisation is not good or bad. Functional: controlling empathy e.g. medical professionals
Historical examples in propaganda depict animals, machinery
Functions of dehuminisation
- facilitate behaviour not typically reserved for human beings (because humans are typically hardwired to think about other people’s minds)
- moral disengagement (Bandura, 1999)
- proactive emotion regulation (Cameron et al., 2016)
- post-hoc justification for atrocious behaviour (Castano & Giner-Sorolla, 2006)
Rai et al. (2017) : Type of harm matters
2x2 design
- participants read viginettes about harm occurence, described humans in either humanised or dehumanised way and Ps had to rate approval of violence against the victim
- harm either intentional (moral), or instrumental (accidental)
FINDINGS:
- dehuminisation manip. was most effective in instrumental harm condition → regulated social cognition
- implies dehuminastion may not be driving active violence in the way it has been previously considered, more useful when it comes to ignoring moral feelings of guilt
- in cases of intentional harm, opp. occurs as they need to figure out attempts of harm are effective
Kteily et al., (2015): Ascent of man
- Cultural narrative around evolution of races which suggests diff. racial groups belong to diff categorisations of great apes (scientific racism)
- Researchers showed Ps depiction of evolution of man and asked particpants to rate races on how evolved they are → people’s deep belief about scientific claims about the ascent of man mean so deeply ingrained they dont view these ratings as politically incorrect despite the fact it has been debunked → most people just don’t understand genetics very well!
- Second graph shows ratings of blatant human dehuminisation of muslims following terror attacks
Goff et al. (2008): Dehumanisation and legal DM
- Philadelphia Inquirer from 1979-1999
- Any mention from Baldus database (cases where defendant could be sentenced to death)
- 788 articles - media coverages
- Mention of one of 54 bestial words
- 2 samples of 24 participants given word in context of article and asked to think of an animal that was being described
- 35 words elicited monkey, ape, or gorilla in more than 50% of respondents
- Independent coders tallied number of ape words in each article and extent of coverage
- found that if a defendant was black, significantly more dehuminising language used in the media coverage compared to if their life was spared (correlational evidence)
Propagation of Propaganda (Brady et al., 2020)
- valence of headline encourages ‘clicks’ → algorithms trained to tap into this esp. if high negative emotive content about something threatening
-promotes sensationalism
- algorithim sells to advertisers (propogtes within monopoly of social media channels)
- algorithm tracking engagement
Paradigm
- Serbian propagandist charged at the ICTY with instigating persecutions of non-Serbs)
- Based on an original analysis conducted by Anthony Oberschall as part of his expert report for the prosecution
- Between 1990 to 1994: writings, speeches, radio + television broadcasts, newspaper + magazine interviews
- One sentence to two paragraphs in length, from 44 volumes of Šešelj’s authored texts + materials provided by the ICTY
- Four independent coders: direct threat, past atrocities, victimisation, nationalism, negative out-group stereotypes, dehumanisation, revenge, justice systems + politics
Political Speeches (Kiper et al., 2023)
Grouping & Manipulations:
Assigned to East-Mongolian ingroup or West-Mongolian outgroup
Read one fictional speech: Past Victimization, Revenge, Dehumanization, or Neutral Control
Measures Collected:
Behavioral Ratings:
Moral justification of violence
Empathy for in-/out-group
Perceived intent of each group
Facial EMG (levator labii superioris):
Index of subtle disgust responses
Key Findings:
Moral Justification of Violence:
Past Victimization was the strongest predictor—participants more likely to endorse violence after reading about having been victimized by the other group.
Revenge and Dehumanization did not predict violence justification.
Empathy:
Out-group empathy: Dehumanization was the biggest reducer of empathy.
In-group empathy: Not driven by dehumanization alone.
Perceived Intent:
In-group intent: Significantly influenced by dehumanization.
Out-group intent: Influenced by dehumanization alongside other themes.
Physiological Disgust (EMG):
Only the Revenge speech targeting the outgroup elicited increased levator labii activity (disgust).
Dehumanization and Control speeches did not produce that response.
EB: Symbolic racism (McConaughey & Sears, 1976)
- African-Americans no longer face much prejudice or discrimination
- African-Americans’ failure to progress results from their unwillingness to work hard
- African-Americans are demanding too much too fast
- African-Americans have gotten more than they deserve
EB: Ambivalent Sexism (Glick & Fiske, 1996)
- Hostile Sexism:
- classic definition of bias
- Benevolent Sexism:
- viewing women in traditional roles that are subjectively positive in tone, elicit pro-social behaviours, and intimacy seeking
- high predictive power
- benevolent sexism is driven by hostile sexism
EB: Ageism (North & Fiske, 2013)
- Succession:
- enviable resources and societal positions
- Consumption
- passive depletion of shared resources
- Identity
- limiting involvement of older people in activities reserved for younger people
