All human social groups are human, but some are more human than others: A comprehensive investigation of the implicit association of “Human” to US racial/ethnic groups

Author:

Morehouse Kirsten N.1,Maddox Keith2ORCID,Banaji Mahzarin R.1ORCID

Affiliation:

1. Department of Psychology, Harvard University, Cambridge, MA 02138

2. Department of Psychology, Tufts University, Medford, MA 02155

Abstract

All human groups are equally human, but are they automatically represented as such? Harnessing data from 61,377 participants across 13 experiments (six primary and seven supplemental), a sharp dissociation between implicit and explicit measures emerged. Despite explicitly affirming the equal humanity of all racial/ethnic groups, White participants consistently associated Human (relative to Animal) more with White than Black, Hispanic, and Asian groups on Implicit Association Tests (IATs; experiments 1–4). This effect emerged across diverse representations of Animal that varied in valence ( pets , farm animals , wild animals , and vermin ; experiments 1–2). Non-White participants showed no such Human=Own Group bias (e.g., Black participants on a White–Black/Human–Animal IAT). However, when the test included two outgroups (e.g., Asian participants on a White–Black/Human–Animal IAT), non-White participants displayed Human=White associations. The overall effect was largely invariant across demographic variations in age, religion, and education but did vary by political ideology and gender, with self-identified conservatives and men displaying stronger Human=White associations (experiment 3). Using a variance decomposition method, experiment 4 showed that the Human=White effect cannot be attributed to valence alone; the semantic meaning of Human and Animal accounted for a unique proportion of variance. Similarly, the effect persisted even when Human was contrasted with positive attributes (e.g., God, Gods, and Dessert; experiment 5a). Experiments 5a-b clarified the primacy of Human=White rather than Animal=Black associations. Together, these experiments document a factually erroneous but robust Human=Own Group implicit stereotype among US White participants (and globally), with suggestive evidence of its presence in other socially dominant groups.

Publisher

Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences

Subject

Multidisciplinary

Reference70 articles.

1. E. Mayr Systematics and the origin of species from the viewpoint of a zoologist. Systematics and the origin of species from the viewpoint of a zoologist [Internet] (1942). https://www.cabdirect.org/cabdirect/abstract/19431601558. Accessed 3 January 2023.

2. E. Mayr, “The biological species concept” in Species Concepts and Phylogenetic Theory, Q. D. Wheeler, R. Meier, Eds. (A Debate Columbia University Press, 2000), pp. 17–29.

3. E. H. Erikson The concept of identity in race relations--notes and queries [Internet] (1966). https://eric.ed.gov/?id=ED012730. Accessed 3 January 2023.

4. Infra-humanization: The Wall of Group Differences

5. The Emotional Side of Prejudice: The Attribution of Secondary Emotions to Ingroups and Outgroups

Cited by 8 articles. 订阅此论文施引文献 订阅此论文施引文献,注册后可以免费订阅5篇论文的施引文献,订阅后可以查看论文全部施引文献

同舟云学术

1.学者识别学者识别

2.学术分析学术分析

3.人才评估人才评估

"同舟云学术"是以全球学者为主线,采集、加工和组织学术论文而形成的新型学术文献查询和分析系统,可以对全球学者进行文献检索和人才价值评估。用户可以通过关注某些学科领域的顶尖人物而持续追踪该领域的学科进展和研究前沿。经过近期的数据扩容,当前同舟云学术共收录了国内外主流学术期刊6万余种,收集的期刊论文及会议论文总量共计约1.5亿篇,并以每天添加12000余篇中外论文的速度递增。我们也可以为用户提供个性化、定制化的学者数据。欢迎来电咨询!咨询电话:010-8811{复制后删除}0370

www.globalauthorid.com

TOP

Copyright © 2019-2024 北京同舟云网络信息技术有限公司
京公网安备11010802033243号  京ICP备18003416号-3