Intergroup Contact and Outgroup Humanization: Is the Causal Relationship Uni- or Bidirectional?

Abstract

The attribution of uniquely human characteristics to the outgroup may favor the search for contact with outgroup members and, vice versa, contact experiences may improve humanity attributions to the outgroup. To explore this bidirectional relationship, two studies were performed. In Study 1, humanity perceptions were manipulated using subliminal conditioning. Two experimental conditions were created. In the humanization condition, the unconditioned stimuli (US) were uniquely human words; in the dehumanization condition, the US were non-uniquely human and animal words. In both conditions, conditioned stimuli were typical outgroup faces. An approach/avoidance technique (the manikin task) was used to measure the willingness to have contact with outgroup members. Findings showed that in the humanization condition participants were faster in approaching than in avoiding outgroup members: closeness to the outgroup was preferred to distance. Latencies of approach and avoidance movements were not different in the dehumanization condition. In Study 2, contact was manipulated using the manikin task. One approach (contact) condition and two control conditions were created. The attribution of uniquely human traits to the outgroup was stronger in the contact than in the no-contact conditions. Furthermore, the effect of contact on humanity attributions was mediated by increased trust toward the outgroup. Thus, findings demonstrate the bidirectionality of the relationship between contact and humanity attributions. Practical implications of findings are discussed.

Meta-humanization reduces prejudice, even under high intergroup threat.

“…In line with previous literature (Kteily et al, 2016) and given that meta-humanization and meta-dehumanization are essentially one construct representing opposite ends of a spectrum, we expect that meta-humanization will reduce hostility and prejudice and increase the desire for intergroup contact, outgroup befriending, and donation intentions.. In line with previous literature on humanization and prejudice (Capozza et al, 2017;Davies et al, 2018), and literature on humanization and threat (Periera et al, 2009), we expect meta-humanization to be effective in ameliorating intergroup attitudes when it interacts with high levels of threat. The study was designed using Qualtrics and was conducted online in one session.…”

“…and promoting intergroup contact (Capozza, Di Bernardo, & Falvo, 2017;Periera, Vala, & Leyens, 2009). In parallel to research on humanization and dehumanization, a growing body of literature has recently investigated these variables as meta-perceptions.…”

Can street-level bureaucrats be nudged to increase effectiveness in welfare policy?

“…Humanity perceptions are malleable and can be affected by personal experiences, mindsets or nudges. For example, previous personal contacts (Capozza et al, 2013) or simple and fast experimental manipulations based on making several social categories simultaneously salient (Prati et al, 2016), or even merely inviting respondents to approach the target in a computerised task (Capozza et al, 2017) have been found to increase humanisation of others. We thus reasoned that a system 2 nudge that attracts SLBs' attention to the beneficiaries' life-course is likely to result in a more complex, broad, and humanised representation of them.…”

Does the out‐group recognize our mental skills? Cross‐group friendships, extended contact, and the expectation of humanizing perceptions from the out‐group

“…Also imagined contact-the mental simulation of a positive encounter with out-group members (Crisp & Turner, 2012)-can lead to stronger attributions of uniquely human characteristics (e.g., Vezzali, Capozza, Stathi, & Giovannini, 2012). This effect is mediated by higher feelings of trust toward the out-group (see also Capozza, Di Bernardo, & Falvo, 2017).…”

“…However, regarding causality, many experimental studies have demonstrated the causal relationship from contact to out-group humanization, although based on other forms of contact and not focused on meta-attributions (see, e.g., Capozza et al, 2017;Vezzali et al, 2012; for a longitudinal investigation, see Brown et al, 2007). Further studies should be performed, in which contact is experimentally manipulated and mind meta-attributions are the outcome.…”