Dehumanization and Political Opponents: Understanding the Impact of Imagined Otherness

The act of dehumanizing people from different social, political, or cultural groups has been a significant issue throughout human history, leading to atrocities like genocide and slavery. However, a new study co-authored by Haas professor Sameer Srivastava sheds light on a different aspect of dehumanization.

The research, published in the journal Communications Psychology, suggests that our tendency to dehumanize others can be influenced by how we perceive their worldview compared to our own. The greater the difference between our perceptions and those of a “typical” person, the more likely we are to dehumanize them.

Using the concept of schemas, which are the ways people categorize and associate ideas, the researchers conducted experiments with self-identified Republicans and Democrats in the U.S. Participants were asked to define what they believed represented “America” and then characterize how they thought members of their own party, the opposing party, and a typical person would define it.

The results showed that when individuals perceived a significant difference in the opposing party’s worldview compared to a typical person, they were more likely to dehumanize them. This effect was confirmed in a second experiment where participants were shown fabricated results indicating differences in schemas between parties.

The study highlights the importance of understanding the roots of dehumanization in politics and suggests potential interventions to reduce it. By correcting misperceptions about opposing party schemas and crafting messaging that humanizes the other side, there is hope for a more humane political discourse.

This research provides valuable insights into the psychology behind dehumanization and offers strategies to combat this harmful tendency in society.