Discrimination against blacks linked to dehumanization, study finds

Discrimination against blacks linked to dehumanization, study finds

www.physorg.com

Crude historical depictions of African Americans as ape-like may have disappeared from mainstream U.S. culture, but research presented in a new paper by psychologists at Stanford, Pennsylvania State University and the University of California-Berkeley reveals that many Americans subconsciously associate blacks with apes.

(visit the link for the full news article)

Since I don't live in the United States, I can't fully comment on this study. But if it is true, it isn't good.

Now, before anyone comments on the article, I would urge you to please read the full article first. It would make for a better discussion that way.

Thanks in advanced.

Related Study:
Why We Hate You: The Passions of National Identity and Ethnic Violence

www.physorg.com
(visit the link for the full news article)

how do people like this obtain funding for such pathetic ridiculous experiments

a) It involved mostly white male undergraduates- way to go, set out your enemy from the start, where are the women, the asians etc

b)" In a series of studies that subliminally flashed black or white male faces on a screen for a fraction of a second to "prime" the students, researchers found subjects could identify blurry ape drawings much faster after they were primed with black faces than with white faces. The researchers consistently discovered a black-ape association even if the young adults said they knew nothing about its historical connotations. The connection was made only with African American faces; the paper's third study failed to find an ape association with other non-white groups, such as Asians. Despite such race-specific findings, the researchers stressed that dehumanization and animal imagery have been used for centuries to justify violence against many oppressed groups. "


so, "subliminal" "flashing" for a fraction of a second led identification with blurry ape drawings much faster after they were primed with black faces than white- mohammed wept, possibly, and this is just an out there theory, apes have dark faces, so do black people- fer crying out loud if they did a similar thing with polar bears theyd probably find it easier identiied when primed with white faces.


These people should be forced to work in a mine for a year instead of wasting resources on studies which they clearly had INTENDED the outcome from the start (use of white males for example)

reply to post by blueorder


Be that as of may, generally the majority discriminates against the minority. So in the context of countries such as the United States, it makes sense that the majority of subjects tested were white.

If I could access the journal, I'd be happy to post the exact number of people from the different racial groups tested. Unfortunately I do not have a subscription to the journal.

content.apa.org...

Originally posted by Beachcoma
Be that as of may, generally the majority discriminates against the minority. So in the context of countries such as the United States, it makes sense that the majority of subjects tested were white.

If I could access the journal, I'd be happy to post the exact number of people from the different racial groups tested. Unfortunately I do not have a subscription to the journal.

content.apa.org...

well we are a minority in the world, and this is a "globalisation" driven 21st century, so I, as a white male claim my prize as the most DISCRIMINATED minority there is

[edit on 8-2-2008 by blueorder]

This makes sense really. The attitudes we had for hundreds of years towards none whites haven't really left us, they are just less obvious.

First we thought that God made white people superior to everyone else, then we thought white people were more evolved biologically than the rest of the world.

Early in the 20th century the west kept black people in zoos as parts of exhibitions!

When people started discovering archaic humans they believed that each race evolved seperately in different parts of the world and were essentially seperate species.

Yeah so anyway this makes perfect sense. Old attitudes (although not obvious to us) can still form the way we feel about others. These ways of thinking about others might not be obvious to us because they are culturally ingrained.

Some racist geneticists say that black people are genetically less intelligent. There is no scientific proof for this. For a start there is no such thing as race, race is a cultural category not a biological one. Secondly those making these claims use examples they have no understanding of to prove this, such as black people having ahigher libido, or africa being poor! This shows that we are still dehumanizing black people.






[edit on 8-2-2008 by monkey_descendant]

[edit on 8-2-2008 by monkey_descendant]

Originally posted by monkey_descendant
This makes sense really. The attitudes we had for hundreds of years towards none whites haven't really left us, they are just less obvious.

speak for yourself, and congratulations you have beaten the world's oldest man by several hundred years!

Good work!

First we thought that God made white people superior to everyone else, then we thought white people were more evolved biologically than the rest of the world.

who is this "we"- some did, most whites were too busy grafting a living in fields and factories to indulge in the tosh you are talking about

Some blacks thought whites were aliens, so what

Early in the 20th century the west kept black people in zoos as parts of exhibitions!

a zoo owner as well!

Blacks had curious notions/views as well towards whites and asians

When people started discovering archaic humans they believed that each race evolved seperately in different parts of the world and were essentially seperate species.

some did, some didn't, discussions still go on

Yeah so anyway this makes perfect sense. Old attitudes (although not obvious to us) can still form the way we feel about others.

I claim discrimination from blacks- I flashed a polar bear image in front of a black today and he identitied it quicker than he did when I held it up against oprah!

Originally posted by blueorder

Originally posted by monkey_descendant
This makes sense really. The attitudes we had for hundreds of years towards none whites haven't really left us, they are just less obvious.

speak for yourself, and congratulations you have beaten the world's oldest man by several hundred years!

Good work!

First we thought that God made white people superior to everyone else, then we thought white people were more evolved biologically than the rest of the world.

who is this "we"- some did, most whites were too busy grafting a living in fields and factories to indulge in the tosh you are talking about

Some blacks thought whites were aliens, so what

Early in the 20th century the west kept black people in zoos as parts of exhibitions!

a zoo owner as well!

Blacks had curious notions/views as well towards whites and asians

When people started discovering archaic humans they believed that each race evolved seperately in different parts of the world and were essentially seperate species.

some did, some didn't, discussions still go on

Yeah so anyway this makes perfect sense. Old attitudes (although not obvious to us) can still form the way we feel about others.

I claim discrimination from blacks- I flashed a polar bear image in front of a black today and he identitied it quicker than he did when I held it up against oprah!

This is silly. Europeans and Americans about a hundred years ago believed that Black people weren't as human as white people. There are even evolutionary trees from the time period describing how black people aren't completely human. Didn't slave owners use the excuse that black people were animals and so didn't have souls?

Discussion about whether different races are different species happens among the uneducated. There is no debate, we are all one species, and all one race.

And I don't know what you mean by your first sentence...

Anyway attitudes do take a long time to leave us. Many attitudes aren't obvious, or seem like they are the truth but they are in fact cultural, we just aren't aware of them.

[edit on 8-2-2008 by monkey_descendant]

ALL discrimination can be boiled down to some level, some degree of dehumanization. It necessarily goes hand in hand. You are taking that "group" that has some difference relative to your "group" and you are applying a dehumanizing factor to that difference for the purpose of making them less than you (i.e. less human than you, less worthy than you, less less less) because of that difference.

Originally posted by monkey_descendant

This is silly. Europeans and Americans about a hundred years ago believed that Black people weren't as human as white people.

some did, most europeans never even got involved in such matters and existed purely to work in fields and factories to eek out some meagre existence for their impoverished families- I have no doubt some blacks back then viewed whites as "lesser" people (many still do today, equating us with an abnormality, some even thinking we are devils)

There are even evolutionary trees from the time period describing how black people aren't completely human. Didn't slave owners use the excuse that black people were animals and so didn't have souls?

again, some did, a tiny fraction, impossibly tiny fraction of those europeans alive at the time- africans are just as capable of such dehumanization amongst other tribes, never mind other races

Discussion about whether different races are different species happens among the uneducated. There is no debate, we are all one species, and all one race.

some dirt poor factory worker 200 years ago in Salford was not discussing evolutionary matters

so because some africans thought white people were spirits or ancestors it's ok for us to think that black people aren't fully human?

Two wrongs don't makea right and all that.

Anyway, I can assure you that a fieldworker was just as capable of thinking black people were lesser beings than scholars.

Originally posted by monkey_descendant
so because some africans thought white people were spirits or ancestors it's ok for us to think that black people aren't fully human?

Two wrongs don't makea right and all that.

no, and as I never said either was right, Im not sure why you structured your comment that way

Also, I didnt say they thought we were spirits or ancestors, I said some africans viewed (and still do) whites as less than human

Anyway, I can assure you that a fieldworker was just as capable of thinking black people were lesser beings than scholars.

No you can't assure me, you can do nothing of the sort, a factory worker 200 years ago was not thinking in racial terms like you are in your comfortable internet world today- he/she was thinking about survival.

[edit on 8-2-2008 by blueorder]

I hope the mods don't delete this on some type of PC agenda.

That "science experiment" was nothing put racial propaganda to induce some type of guilt in whites and maybe some hatred or low self worth it blacks. It works to divide us by introducing some form of perceived racial barrier that implies that whites view themselves better than blacks. It's all not true. It is simply based on recognition of basic physical characteristics, not some deep seated racist agenda.

Anyone who finds this story insulting or surprising needs to check their humor and their eyesight - and perhaps in that psychologists case, her self esteem.

Exhibit A: President Bush. This white man looks very similar to a chimpanzee.

www.gwjokes.com...

^^^^^^ Anti-racist icebreaker ^^^^^^^^^

I'd like to see the pictures from the experiment. I bet they chose pictures of blacks who actually resembled apes ala GW chimp man.

The fact is, Apes DO LOOK REMARKABLY LIKE HUMANS.

... and apes are black - just like Jesus, Santa, and God. Many blacks have broad noses, a dense brow, larger lips, and a disposition to be muscular - like an ape. Not all blacks look like apes, and neither do all whites.

In is interesting that some people of both races resemble dogs, turtles, cats, and your odd duck. In the future, some people are supposed to begin resembling goblins, but I would swear that it's already happening.

So, the rapper, 50 Cent (who's popular nickname just so happens to be "Grape Ape") looks remarkably like a gorilla (well, just as much as GW looks like a chimp).

50 cent, aka grape ape:
blog.ugo.com...

... and grape cent, aka 50 ape
webpages.charter.net...

Both have a dense brow, broad flat nose, very muscular, and smaller recessed ears?

The other fact is, Chimps DO LOOK REMARKABLY LIKE HUMANS.

... and chimps are usually smaller, with longer heads, bigger ears, with a disposition to be less muscular.

Chimps resemble old, tanned white people with big ears - hence "monkey face" George Bush!

Nothing wrong with looking like our primate cousins.

excellent post above, well said.

Notice their chosen target for attack, white males, who make up about a quarter of the US populace, secondly, like I said above, if they flashed a "white" pale animal (like a white wolf) in front of them, the reverse scenario would have happened.

These people are pure dirt, nothing more than division merchants, riding a gravy train for meaningless studies, makes my blood boil

Okay, I have just received a copy of the study in question. I haven't gone through the whole thing yet, but to address the issue previously brought up (of using white male participants, and hence choosing their target of attack), it would appear that it is somewhat of a non-issue.

Participants

One hundred and twenty-one male undergraduates (60 White, 61 non-White) at Stanford University participated in this study in exchange for partial course credit or $10. Participants ranged in age from 18 to 20 (M = 18.64). Of the 61 non-White participants, 7 identified as Black or African American, 39 identified as Asian or Asian American, 5 identified as Latino/a or Hispanic and 10 identified as mixed-race.

As for the issue of animals faces (material)...

Materials

Face stimuli. Participants were subliminally exposed to color photographs of either 50 Black adult male faces with neutral expressions, 50 White adult male faces with neutral expressions, or a no-prime control image that was an uninterpretable line drawing created using Adobe Photoshop software. The faces were of Stanford students or employees. The height, weight, age, and attractiveness of the persons photographed did not vary as a function of race. The backgrounds on the photographs were standardized using Adobe Photoshop software.

Object stimuli. Participants saw movies of four apes and eight non-apes. Non-apes were chosen from pretesting. Twenty-five participants were asked “What animals are least associated with people?” The following eight animals were most often mentioned and therefore used in the study: alligator, dolphin, duck, elephant, fish, kangaroo, seagull, and squirrel. For all 12 animals, a black-and-white line drawing was created, and pixelated “noise” was then added to that image using Adobe Photoshop software. This caused the images to look as if they were on a television with “snow” or bad reception. Noise was added in equal increments 40 times, creating 41 picture frames of each animal ranging from an extremely degraded image of the animal to a clear image of the animal with no degradation added. These picture frames were then shown in a sequence from most degraded (Frame 1) to least (Frame 41). Each frame was presented for 500 ms. Pretesting revealed that the ape movies were as easy to detect as the non-ape movies.

Okay, now are there any more criticisms of the study method? Can we now move on to the results of the study?

I haven't read the article yet, but I wouldn't be surprised that they chose male participants to look at male faces for a particular reason.

Can you tell what it is yet? (a Rolf Harris reference, for all the USAians and others who don't get it).

[edit on 8-2-2008 by melatonin]

well if the study is correct then the attitude is alive and kicking in belgium still.

i noticed an advert on the tv recently advertising coco pops (chocolate rice puffs) being advertised by a black woman with her child. the cartoon character on the packet of coco pops is a monkey (btw - it's very rare to see black people on tv in belgium). i remember i pointed out the advert and its blatant racism to my other half at the time.

A very good study actually. Not sure it tells us anything groundbreaking though, but that could be a hint of academic jealousy, heh.

So, it appears that apes and blacks have been, and still are, strongly associated. This was demostrated by techniques that show a greater implicit (i.e. automatic) association for this particular group c.f. white + ape. We already know that the more stereotypically 'black' a person facial features are, the more this can negatively affect judgments - this could be a related phenomena.

This leads to a degree of what the authors view as dehumanisation, which can readily infuse into relatively simple, but important decision-making (e.g., courts of law etc). I would be interested how this impacts on more complex decision-making.

I think Wheeler & Fiske (2005) and Harris et al. (2006) demonstrated dehumanisation better using fMRI (i.e., we can process outgroup members in a comparable way to inanimate objects), no great issue.

The interesting point for me was they found that when controlling for the normal IAT measure of negative implicit attitudes (black + negative), the black + ape association was still important for certain judgments. So, there are possibly two important factors that might lead to bad outcomes in social decisions for black outgroup members.

And for the people complaining it was just male participants, there is another study that shows white females actually exhibit greater prejudice to blacks, although it's a single study. This study would have used males viewing males to help remove the extraneous variables of sexual attractiveness, I would have thought - provides a nice homogenous sample.


[edit on 9-2-2008 by melatonin]

I don’t know about this study, but there’s no doubt that if you want to get someone to do evil things to somebody else, it’s very useful to dehumanize the intended target.

Originally posted by blueorder
well we are a minority in the world, and this is a "globalisation" driven 21st century, so I, as a white male claim my prize as the most DISCRIMINATED minority there is

[edit on 8-2-2008 by blueorder]

You're more right than you know. I'm getting sick of it now, it seems that because I'm a white male I'm automatically branded as racist/sexist/fascist and lots of other words ending with ''ist''. I think the only solution is for everyone on the planet to wear bags over our heads so no one knows what damn colour anyone is.

One more thing, some black people DO look like apes, but so do some white people too. These studies are a waste of time, I don't know who dreams them up. A while back I read an article describing a study into sperm production, and guess what? Men with bigger balls produce more sperm!!!!!Money well spent eh'? sigh.