On the Nature of Objectification: Implications of Considering People as Means to Goals

Abstract

People are objectified when they are treated as a means to a goal. The most common example is when women are sexually objectified and reduced to their physical appearance, sexuality, or individual body parts. In such instances, people are used in the same way as objects and are evaluated according to their instrumentality to the others' goals. The aim of this paper is to gain a better understanding of objectification. We will (a) outline basic principles of means-goal relations during goal pursuit, (b) review research in which people are means to goals, (c) explain objectification according to a means-goal psychology in which people serve as means to goals, and (d) explain the implications of our account for the consequences of objectification. Specifically, we argue objectification is inevitable and that the consequences of objectification, including its morality, depend on the goal to which a person serves and whether the objectified person wants to serve that goal.

The Social Interaction Model of Objectification: A process model of goal‐based objectifying exchanges between men and women

“…Generally speaking, activated goals bring to mind people who can enable such objectives, with people evaluating instrumental others more positively and approaching them more readily relative to noninstrumental others (Fitzsimons & Fishbach, 2010;Fitzsimons & Shah, 2008;Gruenfeld et al, 2008). Void of the cultural context, when sexual goals are activated, heterosexual men (and women) should evaluate women (men) who facilitate those goals more positively similar to how we value and approach other useful people (e.g., friends, colleagues, intimate partners; Orehek & Weaverling, 2017).…”

“…Both M and F may hold similar sexual goals and thus be mutually supporting each other's goals and experiencing fit. Strictly speaking, they may be objectifying each other in that context, but because it is mutual and reciprocal (Orehek & Weaverling, 2017), the interactants will view the other person as advancing their goals and choose to continue such interactions. This would represent a typical cost-benefit analysis in a social exchange that is void of the larger cultural context.…”

Attitudes toward hiring people with disabilities: A meta‐cognitive approach to persuasion

“…Furthermore, people with disabilities are often subject to a dehumanization process through which this collective is perceived as unable to have sophisticated mental processes (O'Brien, ). There are very negative consequences that arise from denying both cognitive and meta‐cognitive processes to others (Heflick & Goldenberg, ; Loughnan et al, ; Orehek & Weaverling, ). In order to avoid these dehumanizing attitudes toward people with disabilities, Bogdan and Taylor () proposed that we must perceive them as being able to have a "social place" within a community, see them as unique individuals, and, most importantly, for our current purposes “ attribute thinking to them .”…”

The Dark Triad Predicted by Belief in Determinism and Objectification

“…Objectification has been understood as the seeing and treating others as objects through denial of their humanity, ultimately undermining the target's personhood. Research suggests that targets of objectification typically experience guilt, shame, reduced self-esteem, depression, feelings of worthlessness, and potential self-objectification (i.e., the preoccupation with one's appearance, resulting in frequent body surveillance) as a result of being objectified (Orehek & Weaverling, 2017). Recognizing that interpersonal objectification, at its extreme, involves dehumanization and violence has very straightforward and obvious implications for morality.…”

“…Orehek and Weaverling (2017) argued that, in terms of psychological principles, objectification requires the perception and evaluation of targets based on their instrumentality to an actor's goal. Instrumentality is then established through the means-goal mental relationship, which is reinforced when the goal is successfully achieved (Orehek & Weaverling, 2017). The goal system theory (Shah, Kruglanski, & Friedman, 2003) posits that goals are associated with their means of achievement through their instrumental associations.…”