Different approaches have been used to empirically measure infrahumanization among diverse social groups and many of them employ attributing characteristics to people of their own social group (e.g., community, nation, and race) and people who do not belong to it.

One line was developed by Leyens et al. (2000), who created a list of emotions previously described as uniquely human (positive and negative sentiments) and non-uniquely human (positive and negative emotions). The attribution pattern found was confirmed explicitly and through the manipulation of implicit attitudes (Paladino et al., 2002), showing that people tended to attribute more uniquely human emotions to ingroup members, rather than outgroup members.

Another approach was developed using the Stereotype Content Model ([SCM], Fiske, Cuddy, Glick, & Xu, 2002) which separates stereotypes in different groups, and thus forms a category of warmth (high or low) and another of competence (high or low). The resulting map creates four dimensions where information with a stereotype-related valence could be assigned, such as the high-competence-and-warm group (e.g., olympic athletes, black professionals) or the low-competence-and-warmth group (e.g., welfare recipients, drug addicts), and therefore, attributions of different degrees of humanity can be analyzed. Also, it is argued that the “lowest” groups (i.e., low warmth and low competence) elicit disgust-related states and fail to elicit mental states when compared to the other ones (Harris & Fiske, 2011). Furthermore, by using magnetic resonances, it has been shown a significantly lower activation of the medial prefrontal cortex (mPFC) when a person was in front of people of this cluster (Harris & Fiske, 2006), which is particularly important due to the association the mPFC (not solely, though) has with social cognition (e.g., Amodio & Frith, 2006; Denny, Kober, Wager, & Ochsner, 2012; Mitchell, Banaji, & Macrae, 2005; Ochsner et al., 2004).

Finally, and continuing with personality trait attributions, there is the approach used by Costello (2008 [second study]) who used 24 personality traits (based on Haslam, Bain, Douge, Lee, & Bastian, 2005) to describe different people from the person’s own group and outgroup. This approach, elaborated from the Big Five personality model (McCrae & Allik, 2002), consists of the attribution of personality traits that are uniquely human (e.g., openness) and not (e.g., neuroticism), finding the same pattern previously described.

Although these evaluation approaches use different information as a method of measuring infrahumanization (i.e., primary and secondary emotions, uniquely human or non-uniquely human personality traits), they all share an attributive outlook because the object of attribution is always related towards outgroup members. We, therefore, consider that an interesting proposal for reducing infrahumanization should have (in positive terms) an outgroup member-oriented perspective.

As an attempt to reduce infrahumanization towards an out-group, an interesting approach would be the framework of collective activities and rituals, due to its implications and beneficial outcomes both to inter- and intra-group reality, which to our knowledge, has not been tested in experimental efforts to do so. Specifically, it has been confirmed that participation in rituals, not only reinforces individual and collective emotions, but also facilitates social integration, and increases positive social beliefs and social cohesion (Beristain, Páez, & González, 2000; Gasparre, Bosco, & Bellelli, 2010; Kanyangara, Rimé, Philippot, & Yzerbyt, 2007; Páez, Javaloy, Wlodarczyk, Espelt, & Rimé, 2013; Zumeta, Basabe, Wlodarczyk, Bobowik, & Páez, 2016). Further, participation in collective activities has been related to an improvement of positive affect (Pargament, 1997), prosocial behavior (Rossano, 2012), and well-being (Hopkins & Reicher, 2016), and these positive effects can also be found even though when group action is decoupled from affect and purpose (Valdesolo, Ouyang, & DeSteno, 2010; Wiltermuth & Heath, 2009). One of the paths through which collective participation boosts positive out-group outcomes, is the emotional one, due to different longitudinal studies that show how perceived emotional synchrony (PES) boosts social integration (Páez, Rimé, Basabe, Wlodarczyk, & Zumeta, 2015 [study 1]) and how positive emotions and shared flow can mediate the increase of group identification and identity fusion with the outgroup on the one side, and positive transcendent emotions can increase empathy, which in turn rises prosocial behavior (Zumeta et al., 2016).

In the present study, we designed an experiment aimed to reduce infrahumanization towards Maghrebian immigrants (a group well settled down in the Basque society and a target of prejudice; Cea & Valles, 2014; Fuentes & Vicente, 2007), through a ritualistic collective activity, manipulating the information participants had to use in the ritual (i.e., information relative to different levels of humanity and also utilitarian information). Also, we were interested in exploring the effects this information would produce in the subjective perception of the collective experience.

Since our intention was to analyze the impact of information on infrahumanization in a collective and ritualistic setting, we included information directly related to the degree of humanity Maghrebian immigrants are attributed (i.e., uniquely human or non-uniquely human) and classical descriptions that can be used in mass media in different campaigns in favor of immigrations (i.e., utilitarian information).

We hypothesize that (H1) the quality of the participation in the ritual will be more different and the positive emotions, the perceived emotional synchrony (PES), and the shared flow will be more intense when people use the most humanizing information (i.e., the most alike), compared to non- uniquely human and utilitarian information.

Also, we hypothesize that (H2) the higher reduction of infrahumanization will occur when people use uniquely human information (versus non-uniquely human, and versus utilitarian). This increase of humanity should activate more ingroup-alike beliefs and portrait Maghrebian immigrant as more human, and therefore, both infrahumanization and subtle prejudice measures should be reduced. Finally, (H3) in the particular case of working with the utilitarian condition, any increase in the degree of humanity or positive prejudice towards the Maghrebian should only occur when some gain is perceived.

The sample was composed of 82 students of the University of the Basque Country (63 female, 76.8%) with ages ranged from 19 to 29 years (M = 20.37; SD = 1.96).

Participants were recruited among voluntary university students and received information about the research project and signed an informed consent form. The data collected were alphanumerically coded, thereby ensuring both anonymity and compliance with the Personal Data Protection Act passed by the University Research Ethics Committee.

Participants were invited to participate in a manifestation (fictional) to support Maghrebian immigrants, in which they had to design different slogans so as to create a group poster which would be used in the manifestation. Each participant was randomly assigned to one of three experimental conditions (controlling for sex) based on the information they had to use in the creation of slogans: human condition (n = 29, hereafter, HC), non-uniquely human condition (n = 29, hereafter, NUHC) and utilitarian condition (n = 24, hereafter, UC). The information they had to use was different among the conditions, where (based on Costello, 2008) the HC could only use information which differentiated immigrants from other animal species (i.e., “Maghrebian immigrants are open to new experiences, creative and responsible”); the NUHC had to work with information which does not differentiate humans with other animal species (i.e., “Maghrebian immigrants are relaxed and calm people; also nice and cooperative”); and finally, the UC, designed the slogans with information that puts emphasis on the economic gain immigration produces (i.e., “Maghrebian immigration increases the economic growth and they take the jobs which local people don’t want”, which served as a control group).

In each condition, and after completing the first moment of evaluation (pre), participants had to work in groups (4-6 people) to design the slogans (about 15 min), and finally, on the creation of a single poster altogether (about 30 min). Having finished the group poster made up with the slogans, participants presented each slogan and its purpose, while standing and holding the poster (about 15 min). Immediately after, they fulfilled the during-evaluation measure, and after one week, the post-evaluation.

n order to test the mean differences, in-participation psychological variables between experimental conditions ANOVAs were estimated and effect size indexes were calculated (η²). Pre- and post- means were evaluated for the three experimental conditions and their effect sizes (Cohen’s d). Mediational analyses were carried out to check the beliefs’ indirect effect and directs effects on criterion variables (Infrahumanization, Sublet prejudice, Inter-group-anxiety). The 4^th model estimation procedure was applied (see macro process for SPSS; Hayes, 2013) following the criteria proposed by Hayes and Preacher (2014), and controlling for pre-evaluation measures. Standard errors and confidence intervals based on a bootstrap sampling distribution were calculated for each parameter or statistics. If the values of the estimated effect within the confidence interval include zero, this indicates a non-significant effect. In mediational analysis all the coefficients represented by continuous arrows in the graphs are statistically significant, while the dashed lines indicate effects that are not statistically significant for p < 0.05.

First of all, different levels of implication were found among the conditions (table 1); namely, both UHC and NUHC participants showed higher levels of participation (F _{(2, 79)} = 7.99; p < 0.001; η² = 0.17), positive emotions (F _{(2, 79)} = 6.22; p = 0.003 η² = 0.14), PES (F _{(2, 79)} = 4.76; p = 0.011; η² = 0.11), and shared flow (F _{(2, 79)} = 3.76; p = 0.028; η² = 0.09) than the UC, being UHC the one which showed the highest means.

TABLE 1 TABLE 1 In-participation psychological variables among the conditions Source: own work.

Notes: Mean (Standard Desviation). PES (Perceived Emotional Synchrony).

Following the criteria proposed by Hayes and Preacher (2014), different meditational analyses were performed in order to check the indirect effect in the infrahumanization measures and the prejudice measures, mediated by the perceived gain in economic terms (i.e., utilitarian beliefs; Figure 1 and 2, respectively). When infrahumanization measures were used as the dependent variable (Figure 1), the results showed significant indirect effects in the attribution of competence-related stereotypes (B = -0.143, SE = 0.090 [-.370, -0.008], and B = -0.171, SE = 0.110 [-.451, -0.008], for D1 and D2, respectively), and in the attribution of uniquely-human traits (B = -0.117, SE = 0.056 [-0.269, -0.034], and B = -0.138, SE = 0.067 [-0.316, -0.039], for D1 and D2, respectively). Furthermore, in the last mediation analysis, Omnibus test showed that the indirect effect was significantly bigger in D2 than D1 (B = 0.012, SE = 0.009 [0.001, 0.038]).

Figure 1

In each model, pre-evaluation scores where controlled for the mediator and dependent variables.

D1: dummy coded variable (UH = 0; NUHC = 1; UC = 0)

D2: dummy coded variable (UH = 1; NUHC = 0; UC = 0)

*p < 0.05; **p < 0.01

Total effects in parenthesis.

In the case of prejudice measures (Figure 2), meditation analyses showed a significant indirect effect of the experimental condition on subtle prejudice, mediated by utilitarian beliefs (B = -0.055, SE = 0.032 [-0.145, -0.009], and B = -0.068, SE = 0.042 [-0.187, -0.010], for D1 and D2, respectively), but no effects on intergroup anxiety, neither positive, nor negative (confidence intervals included the value 0).

Figure 2.

D1: dummy coded variable (UH = 0; NUHC = 1; UC = 0)

D2: dummy coded variable (UH = 1; NUHC = 0; UC = 0)

*p < 0.05; **p < 0.01

Total effects in parenthesis.