{"title":"Discrimination, objectification, and dehumanization: toward a pantheoretical framework.","authors":"Bonnie Moradi","doi":"10.1007/978-1-4614-6959-9_7","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><p>In this chapter, I have called for greater attention to targets' experiences in theory and research on dehumanization. I have also argued that what we know from theory and research on targets' experiences of stigma and discrimination can inform how we pursue the understanding of targets' experiences of dehumanization. To this end, I have emphasized the utility of attention to the intersectionality of minority statuses in shaping discrimination experiences. I have also described theoretical frameworks grounded in different populations' experiences--including theories of discrimination as stressful life events or daily hassles, minority stress frameworks, and objectification theory--and offered examples of integrating these frameworks as a way to attend to intersectionality. As well, I have noted parallels between the areas of convergence across discrimination theories and emerging findings regarding the consequences of dehumanization for targets. Finally, I have described the broad outlines of a pantheoretical framework that reflects areas of convergence and complementary integration across the discrimination and dehumanization literatures. My hope is that this framework will encourage further attention to the potential distinctions between internalization and cognizance of discrimination, exploration of their potentially distinctive intermediary consequences, and consideration of a broader range of outcomes beyond individual health and well-being indicators, and including individual and collective social activism. I also hope that readers will contribute to the critical evaluation and refinement of this pantheoretical framework with continued attention to the intersectionality that characterizes people's identities and experiences of discrimination.</p>","PeriodicalId":54204,"journal":{"name":"Nebraska Symposium on Motivation","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2013-01-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://sci-hub-pdf.com/10.1007/978-1-4614-6959-9_7","citationCount":"56","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Nebraska Symposium on Motivation","FirstCategoryId":"102","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1007/978-1-4614-6959-9_7","RegionNum":4,"RegionCategory":"心理学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q2","JCRName":"Psychology","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 56
Abstract
In this chapter, I have called for greater attention to targets' experiences in theory and research on dehumanization. I have also argued that what we know from theory and research on targets' experiences of stigma and discrimination can inform how we pursue the understanding of targets' experiences of dehumanization. To this end, I have emphasized the utility of attention to the intersectionality of minority statuses in shaping discrimination experiences. I have also described theoretical frameworks grounded in different populations' experiences--including theories of discrimination as stressful life events or daily hassles, minority stress frameworks, and objectification theory--and offered examples of integrating these frameworks as a way to attend to intersectionality. As well, I have noted parallels between the areas of convergence across discrimination theories and emerging findings regarding the consequences of dehumanization for targets. Finally, I have described the broad outlines of a pantheoretical framework that reflects areas of convergence and complementary integration across the discrimination and dehumanization literatures. My hope is that this framework will encourage further attention to the potential distinctions between internalization and cognizance of discrimination, exploration of their potentially distinctive intermediary consequences, and consideration of a broader range of outcomes beyond individual health and well-being indicators, and including individual and collective social activism. I also hope that readers will contribute to the critical evaluation and refinement of this pantheoretical framework with continued attention to the intersectionality that characterizes people's identities and experiences of discrimination.