非人性化残疾:对身体残疾的人进行微妙和公然的非人性化的证据

Jason Sitruk , Kevin M. Summers , E. Paige Lloyd
{"title":"非人性化残疾:对身体残疾的人进行微妙和公然的非人性化的证据","authors":"Jason Sitruk ,&nbsp;Kevin M. Summers ,&nbsp;E. Paige Lloyd","doi":"10.1016/j.cresp.2023.100162","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<div><p>Extensive research has examined the dehumanization, or perception of others as less than human, of various stigmatized/minoritized groups. Previous literature investigating dehumanization of groups often considers dehumanization along a single dimension (e.g., denial of human emotions, denial of mind), despite the existence of many different models of dehumanization. In the current work, we integrate four popular models of dehumanization (i.e., infrahumanization, dual model of dehumanization, mind perception, and blatant dehumanization). Here, we focus on dehumanization of people with physical disabilities, a stigmatized group often overlooked in the dehumanization literature. In this work, we examined whether people with physical disabilities (i.e., paralysis from a spinal cord injury) are dehumanized relative to people without physical disabilities. Across 2 samples (<em>N</em> = 405), we found that participants dehumanized people with (relative to people without) physical disabilities on the dual model of dehumanization, mind perception, and blatant dehumanization measures. However, we observed the opposite pattern for infrahumanization whereby participants dehumanized people without physical disabilities relative to people with physical disabilities. This research extends dehumanization research first by integrating four popular models of dehumanization and second by considering an overlooked population (i.e., people with physical disabilities) in the literature. Further, this work may aid in informing future intervention approaches aimed at decreasing dehumanization of people with physical disabilities.</p></div>","PeriodicalId":72748,"journal":{"name":"Current research in ecological and social psychology","volume":"5 ","pages":"Article 100162"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2023-01-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S2666622723000758/pdfft?md5=060bfdf054811c8eba48e8e52cd0550b&pid=1-s2.0-S2666622723000758-main.pdf","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Dehumanizing disability: Evidence for subtle and blatant dehumanization of people with physical disabilities\",\"authors\":\"Jason Sitruk ,&nbsp;Kevin M. Summers ,&nbsp;E. Paige Lloyd\",\"doi\":\"10.1016/j.cresp.2023.100162\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"<div><p>Extensive research has examined the dehumanization, or perception of others as less than human, of various stigmatized/minoritized groups. Previous literature investigating dehumanization of groups often considers dehumanization along a single dimension (e.g., denial of human emotions, denial of mind), despite the existence of many different models of dehumanization. In the current work, we integrate four popular models of dehumanization (i.e., infrahumanization, dual model of dehumanization, mind perception, and blatant dehumanization). Here, we focus on dehumanization of people with physical disabilities, a stigmatized group often overlooked in the dehumanization literature. In this work, we examined whether people with physical disabilities (i.e., paralysis from a spinal cord injury) are dehumanized relative to people without physical disabilities. Across 2 samples (<em>N</em> = 405), we found that participants dehumanized people with (relative to people without) physical disabilities on the dual model of dehumanization, mind perception, and blatant dehumanization measures. However, we observed the opposite pattern for infrahumanization whereby participants dehumanized people without physical disabilities relative to people with physical disabilities. This research extends dehumanization research first by integrating four popular models of dehumanization and second by considering an overlooked population (i.e., people with physical disabilities) in the literature. Further, this work may aid in informing future intervention approaches aimed at decreasing dehumanization of people with physical disabilities.</p></div>\",\"PeriodicalId\":72748,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Current research in ecological and social psychology\",\"volume\":\"5 \",\"pages\":\"Article 100162\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":0.0000,\"publicationDate\":\"2023-01-01\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S2666622723000758/pdfft?md5=060bfdf054811c8eba48e8e52cd0550b&pid=1-s2.0-S2666622723000758-main.pdf\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Current research in ecological and social psychology\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"1085\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S2666622723000758\",\"RegionNum\":0,\"RegionCategory\":null,\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"\",\"JCRName\":\"\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Current research in ecological and social psychology","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S2666622723000758","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

摘要

广泛的研究调查了各种被污名化/少数群体的非人性化,或认为他人不如人类。尽管存在许多不同的非人性化模型,但先前研究群体非人性化的文献通常只考虑单一维度的非人性化(例如,否认人类情感,否认心灵)。在目前的工作中,我们整合了四种流行的非人性化模型(即基础人性化,非人性化的双重模型,心灵感知和公然的非人性化)。在这里,我们关注身体残疾人士的非人性化,这是一个在非人性化文献中经常被忽视的被污名化群体。在这项工作中,我们研究了身体残疾的人(即脊髓损伤导致的瘫痪)相对于没有身体残疾的人是否被剥夺了人性。在2个样本(N = 405)中,我们发现参与者在非人化、心理感知和公然非人化措施的双重模型上对身体残疾的人(相对于没有身体残疾的人)进行非人化。然而,我们观察到相反的非人性化模式,即参与者相对于有身体残疾的人来说,没有身体残疾的人失去了人性。本研究首先通过整合四种流行的非人性化模型来扩展非人性化研究,其次通过考虑文献中被忽视的人群(即身体残疾的人)来扩展非人性化研究。此外,这项工作可能有助于为未来的干预方法提供信息,旨在减少身体残疾者的非人化。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。

Dehumanizing disability: Evidence for subtle and blatant dehumanization of people with physical disabilities

Dehumanizing disability: Evidence for subtle and blatant dehumanization of people with physical disabilities

Extensive research has examined the dehumanization, or perception of others as less than human, of various stigmatized/minoritized groups. Previous literature investigating dehumanization of groups often considers dehumanization along a single dimension (e.g., denial of human emotions, denial of mind), despite the existence of many different models of dehumanization. In the current work, we integrate four popular models of dehumanization (i.e., infrahumanization, dual model of dehumanization, mind perception, and blatant dehumanization). Here, we focus on dehumanization of people with physical disabilities, a stigmatized group often overlooked in the dehumanization literature. In this work, we examined whether people with physical disabilities (i.e., paralysis from a spinal cord injury) are dehumanized relative to people without physical disabilities. Across 2 samples (N = 405), we found that participants dehumanized people with (relative to people without) physical disabilities on the dual model of dehumanization, mind perception, and blatant dehumanization measures. However, we observed the opposite pattern for infrahumanization whereby participants dehumanized people without physical disabilities relative to people with physical disabilities. This research extends dehumanization research first by integrating four popular models of dehumanization and second by considering an overlooked population (i.e., people with physical disabilities) in the literature. Further, this work may aid in informing future intervention approaches aimed at decreasing dehumanization of people with physical disabilities.

求助全文
通过发布文献求助,成功后即可免费获取论文全文。 去求助
来源期刊
CiteScore
1.70
自引率
0.00%
发文量
0
审稿时长
140 days
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术官方微信