Advanced Search

Journal Navigation

Journal Home

Subscriptions

Archive

Contact Us

Table of Contents

Sign In to gain access to subscriptions and/or personal tools.
Group Processes & Intergroup Relations
This Article
Right arrow Full Text (PDF)
Right arrow References
Right arrow Alert me when this article is cited
Right arrow Alert me if a correction is posted
Right arrow Citation Map
Services
Right arrow Email this article to a friend
Right arrow Similar articles in this journal
Right arrow Alert me to new issues of the journal
Right arrow Add to Saved Citations
Right arrow Download to citation manager
Right arrowRequest Permissions
Right arrow Request Reprints
Right arrow Add to My Marked Citations
Citing Articles
Right arrow Citing Articles via HighWire
Right arrow Citing Articles via Scopus
Google Scholar
Right arrow Articles by Capozza, D.
Right arrow Articles by Falvo, R.
Social Bookmarking
Add to CiteULike   Add to Complore   Add to Connotea   Add to Del.icio.us   Add to Digg   Add to Reddit   Add to Technorati   Add to Twitter  
What's this?

Categorization of Ambiguous Human/Ape Faces: Protection of Ingroup but Not Outgroup Humanity

Dora Capozza

University of Padova, dora.capozza{at}unipd.it

Giulio Boccato

University of Verona

Luca Andrighetto

University of Milan-Bicocca

Rossella Falvo

University of Padova

In two studies, we tested the hypothesis that categorization of ambiguous human/ape faces depends on group membership: people are inclined to protect ingroup humanity, but not that of the outgroup. We used as stimuli: human, ape, ambiguous human/ape faces. Ambiguous human/ape faces were generated using a computerized morphing procedure. Participants categorized stimuli as human or ape. Two conditions were introduced: in the ingroup condition, participants were informed that human exemplars were ingroup members, in the outgroup condition that they were outgroup members. We expected participants, in an effort to protect ingroup humanity, to categorize ambiguous stimuli as ape more often in the ingroup than outgroup condition. Predictions were confirmed. Results are discussed in the context of infrahumanization theory.

Key Words: infrahumanization • ingroup bias • ingroup overexclusion • morphed faces

Group Processes & Intergroup Relations, Vol. 12, No. 6, 777-787 (2009)
DOI: 10.1177/1368430209344868
Add to CiteULike CiteULike   Add to Complore Complore   Add to Connotea Connotea   Add to Del.icio.us Del.icio.us   Add to Digg Digg   Add to Reddit Reddit   Add to Technorati Technorati   Add to Twitter Twitter    What's this?


This article has been cited by other articles:


Home page
 Group Processes Intergroup RelationsHome page
E. Castano and M. Kofta
Dehumanization: Humanity and its Denial
Group Processes Intergroup Relations, November 1, 2009; 12(6): 695 - 697.
[Abstract] [PDF]