{"title":"欺骗性的(去)人性化:语言如何揭示对被感知的外部群体撒谎","authors":"David M. Markowitz","doi":"10.1177/0261927X221117497","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"This paper introduces the concept of deceptive (de)humanization, the internal belief that an outgroup is less-than-human while dishonestly acknowledging aspects of their humanity for impression management purposes. In a large online experiment (N = 1,169), participants wrote about their false or truthful opinions on an outgroup they perceived as more evolved or less evolved. Following several automated text analyses, the data indicated psychological differences in attention through word patterns. Consistent with prior work, deceptive texts contained fewer self-references and more negative emotion terms than truthful texts, and dehumanizers used more negative emotions than humanizers. New evidence suggests those who wrote deceptively about evolved groups focused the most on negative emotions compared to other participants. This work extends deception and dehumanization theory by investigating how such psychological constructs interact, and how they are reflected linguistically as communicators attempt to manage impressions and maintain a positive self-image.","PeriodicalId":47861,"journal":{"name":"Journal of Language and Social Psychology","volume":"42 1","pages":"135 - 159"},"PeriodicalIF":2.0000,"publicationDate":"2022-08-02","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Deceptive (De)humanization: How Lying About Perceived Outgroups is Revealed in Language\",\"authors\":\"David M. Markowitz\",\"doi\":\"10.1177/0261927X221117497\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"This paper introduces the concept of deceptive (de)humanization, the internal belief that an outgroup is less-than-human while dishonestly acknowledging aspects of their humanity for impression management purposes. In a large online experiment (N = 1,169), participants wrote about their false or truthful opinions on an outgroup they perceived as more evolved or less evolved. Following several automated text analyses, the data indicated psychological differences in attention through word patterns. Consistent with prior work, deceptive texts contained fewer self-references and more negative emotion terms than truthful texts, and dehumanizers used more negative emotions than humanizers. New evidence suggests those who wrote deceptively about evolved groups focused the most on negative emotions compared to other participants. This work extends deception and dehumanization theory by investigating how such psychological constructs interact, and how they are reflected linguistically as communicators attempt to manage impressions and maintain a positive self-image.\",\"PeriodicalId\":47861,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Journal of Language and Social Psychology\",\"volume\":\"42 1\",\"pages\":\"135 - 159\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":2.0000,\"publicationDate\":\"2022-08-02\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Journal of Language and Social Psychology\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"98\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.1177/0261927X221117497\",\"RegionNum\":3,\"RegionCategory\":\"文学\",\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"Q2\",\"JCRName\":\"COMMUNICATION\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Journal of Language and Social Psychology","FirstCategoryId":"98","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1177/0261927X221117497","RegionNum":3,"RegionCategory":"文学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q2","JCRName":"COMMUNICATION","Score":null,"Total":0}
Deceptive (De)humanization: How Lying About Perceived Outgroups is Revealed in Language
This paper introduces the concept of deceptive (de)humanization, the internal belief that an outgroup is less-than-human while dishonestly acknowledging aspects of their humanity for impression management purposes. In a large online experiment (N = 1,169), participants wrote about their false or truthful opinions on an outgroup they perceived as more evolved or less evolved. Following several automated text analyses, the data indicated psychological differences in attention through word patterns. Consistent with prior work, deceptive texts contained fewer self-references and more negative emotion terms than truthful texts, and dehumanizers used more negative emotions than humanizers. New evidence suggests those who wrote deceptively about evolved groups focused the most on negative emotions compared to other participants. This work extends deception and dehumanization theory by investigating how such psychological constructs interact, and how they are reflected linguistically as communicators attempt to manage impressions and maintain a positive self-image.
期刊介绍:
The Journal of Language and Social Psychology explores the social dimensions of language and the linguistic implications of social life. Articles are drawn from a wide range of disciplines, including linguistics, cognitive science, sociology, communication, psychology, education, and anthropology. The journal provides complete and balanced coverage of the latest developments and advances through original, full-length articles, short research notes, and special features as Debates, Courses and Conferences, and Book Reviews.