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

Not as “black and white” as like/dislike – different types of prejudice

Extreme forms of prejudice may deny their targets full humanity

Stereotype Content Model (SCM) Predicts differentiated prejudices

1. Friend-foe judgment (warmth)2. Capability judgment (competence)

Societal groups: intend either help or harm, are either

capable or incapable of enacting these intentions

Stereotype Content Model (SCM) 4 combinations of the dimensions 4 emotions

towards social groups1.Pride2.Envy3.Pity4.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

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

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”

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

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

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

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

Results – Study 1

Significant mPFC activity for pride, envy, pity

No activity above significant threshold for disgust

Results – Study 1

Did find that there was activation in the left insula and the right amygdala

Insula – disgust

Amygdala - fear

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)

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

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