1 / 15

Dehumanizing the Lowest of the Low: Neuroimaging Responses to Extreme Out-Groups

Dehumanizing the Lowest of the Low: Neuroimaging Responses to Extreme Out-Groups. Lasana T. Harris and Susan T. Fiske Princeton University, 2006. Introduction - Prejudice. Allport (1954), father of prejudice research Antipathy based on a perceived social category

sofia
Télécharger la présentation

Dehumanizing the Lowest of the Low: Neuroimaging Responses to Extreme Out-Groups

An Image/Link below is provided (as is) to download presentation Download Policy: Content on the Website is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use and may not be sold / licensed / shared on other websites without getting consent from its author. Content is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use only. Download presentation by click this link. While downloading, if for some reason you are not able to download a presentation, the publisher may have deleted the file from their server. During download, if you can't get a presentation, the file might be deleted by the publisher.

E N D

Presentation Transcript

  1. Dehumanizing the Lowest of the Low:Neuroimaging Responses to Extreme Out-Groups Lasana T. Harris and Susan T. Fiske Princeton University, 2006

  2. Introduction - Prejudice Allport (1954), father of prejudice research • Antipathy based on a perceived social category Not as “black and white” as like/dislike – different types of prejudice Extreme forms of prejudice may deny their targets full humanity

  3. Stereotype Content Model (SCM) • Predicts differentiated prejudices • Friend-foe judgment (warmth) • Capability judgment (competence) • Societal groups: • intend either help or harm, are either capable or incapable of enacting these intentions

  4. Stereotype Content Model (SCM) • 4 combinations of the dimensions  4 emotions towards social groups • Pride • Envy • Pity • Disgust • Not all groups provoke animosity • Competent + warm = middle-class, pride and admiration • Competent + not warm = rich people, envy and jealousy • Warm + incompetent = elderly people, pity and sympathy

  5. Stereotype Content Model (SCM) Low warmth + low competence = most extreme out-groups, disgust and contempt • Based on perceived moral violations and subsequent negative outcomes these groups allegedly cause themselves • Dislike and disrespect • Extreme discrimination: • Excluding out-groups from full humanity

  6. The Medial Prefrontal Cortex (mPFC) • fMRI data: • mPFC differentially activated in social compared to nonsocial cognition • especially when required to make social judgments about people “Social groups falling into the low-warmth/low-competence quadrant of the SCM might not significantly activate the mPFC”

  7. Participants • 22 Princeton University undergraduates, for course credit • Right-handed • Reported no abnormal neurological condition, head trauma, brain lesions • Normal or corrected vision • Mean age across the two studies: 19.5 years • 12 participants were women • 6 were ethnic minorities

  8. Method • Participants shown images of • Different social groups (Study 1, 10 subjects) • Different objects (Study 2, 12 subjects) • Assessed each picture • which of the four SCM emotions best described how the image made them feel • Once inside the scanner, once outside • Blood-oxygen-level-dependent (BOLD) signal changes recorded

  9. The Images Study 1 • 48 colour photographs of eight different social groups Study 2 • Eight images of objects, each shown three times each Each study had six filler neutral images Each picture depicted one of the four SCM quadrants • 254 undergraduate students had pretested 80 images: • “How much of the following emotions does this picture make you feel?” on a 5-point scale • ANOVA, t-tests – only pictures with reliable effects selected

  10. Results – Study 1 Support for the dehumanization hypothesis • Participants identified the predicted emotions for the pictures of the social groups • Outside scanner: low-low rated higher on disgust

  11. Results – Study 1 • Significant mPFC activity for pride, envy, pity • No activity above significant threshold for disgust

  12. Results – Study 1 • Did find that there was activation in the left insula and the right amygdala • Insula – disgust • Amygdala - fear

  13. Results – Study 2 • No mPFC activity above baseline for disgust-inducing objects • Small yet significant mPFC activation for objects inducing envy • Pride, envy, pity: social emotions felt during presence (implied or actual) of a person • Participants reported envy towards an object only if the presence of a person was implied (stack of money)

  14. Discussion • Used to investigate and reduce “hate crimes, prisoner abuse” • Clear to read • Focus on previous research and the introduction • Almost no discussion • Specific examples of extreme out-groups • What eight social groups shown – which ones elicited disgust • Significance of testing inside and outside the scanner

  15. Discussion • Rating of photos to standardize • Done by Princeton students as well: more likely to have similar opinions as their peers – no random sampling for study or standardization • Objects induced people’s emotions when they weren’t meant to • In study 2, the pictures were repeated three times, to be consistent: have 48 pictures as well • Amygdala and insula mentioned only in passing – study that further to see if combined that is what they imply or if its only when they are separate • Aspects that make people feel this way – living conditions, inability to relate • What manipulations/changes could make people not feel this way

More Related