Thursday, February 25, 2010

“Does the devil really wear Prada? The psychology of anthropomorphism and dehumanization (EurekAlert!)” plus 3 more

“Does the devil really wear Prada? The psychology of anthropomorphism and dehumanization (EurekAlert!)” plus 3 more

Does the devil really wear Prada? The psychology of anthropomorphism and dehumanization (EurekAlert!)

Posted: 25 Feb 2010 11:13 AM PST

Message from fivefilters.org: If you can, please donate to the full-text RSS service so we can continue developing it.

[ Back to EurekAlert! ] Public release date: 25-Feb-2010
[ | E-mail | Share Share ]

Contact: Barbara Isanski
bisanski@psychologicalscience.org
Association for Psychological Science

People talk to their plants, pray to humanlike gods, name their cars, and even dress their pets up in clothing. We have a strong tendency to give nonhuman entities human characteristics (known as anthropomorphism), but why? In a new report in Current Directions in Psychological Science, a journal of the Association for Psychological Science, psychological scientists Adam Waytz from Harvard University and Nicholas Epley and John T. Cacioppo from University of Chicago, examine the psychology of anthropomorphism.

The term anthropomorphism was coined by the Greek philosopher Xenophanes when describing the similarity between religious believers and their gods that is, Greek gods were depicted having light skin and blue eyes while African gods had dark skin and brown eyes. Neuroscience research has shown that similar brain regions are involved when we think about the behavior of both humans and of nonhuman entities, suggesting that anthropomorphism may be using similar processes as those used for thinking about other people.

Anthropomorphism carries many important implications. For example, thinking of a nonhuman entity in human ways renders it worthy of moral care and consideration. In addition, anthropomorphized entities become responsible for their own actions that is, they become deserving of punishment and reward.

Although we like to anthropomorphize, we do not assign human qualities to each and every single object we encounter. What accounts for this selectivity? One factor is similarity. An entity is more likely to be anthropomorphized the more similar it appears to humans (for example, through humanlike movements or physical features like a face). Various motivations may also influence anthropomorphism. For example, lacking social connections with other people might motivate lonely individuals to seek out connections from nonhuman items. Anthropomorphism helps us to simplify and make more sense of complicated entities. The authors observe that, according to the World Meteorological Organization, "the naming of hurricanes and storms a practice that originated with the names of saints, sailors' girlfriends, and disliked political figures simplifies and facilitates effective communication to enhance public preparedness, media reporting, and the efficient exchange of information."

Anthropomorphism in reverse is known as dehumanization when humans are represented as nonhuman objects or animals. There are numerous historical examples of dehumanization including the Nazis' persecution of Jews during the Holocaust and torture at the Abu-Ghraib prison in Iraq. These examples also suggest that those engaging in dehumanization are usually part of a cohesive group acting against outsiders that is, individuals who feel socially connected may have an increased tendency towards dehumanization. The authors note, "Social connection may have benefits for a person's own health and well-being but may have unfortunate consequences for intergroup relations by enabling dehumanization."

The authors conclude that few of us "have difficulty identifying other humans in a biological sense, but it is much more complicated to identify them in a psychological sense."

For more information about this research, please contact: Adam Waytz (waytz@wjh.harvard.edu)

Current Directions in Psychological Science, a journal of the Association for Psychological Science, publishes concise reviews spanning all of scientific psychology and its applications. For a copy of the article "Social Cognition Unbound: Insights into Anthropomorphism and Dehumanization" and access to other Current Directions in Psychological Science research findings, please contact Barbara Isanski at 202-293-9300 or bisanski@psychologicalscience.org


[ Back to EurekAlert! ] [ | E-mail | Share Share ]

 

Five Filters featured article: Chilcot Inquiry. Available tools: PDF Newspaper, Full Text RSS, Term Extraction.

Busting Big Myths in Popular Psychology (preview) (Scientific American)

Posted: 25 Feb 2010 06:03 AM PST

Message from fivefilters.org: If you can, please donate to the full-text RSS service so we can continue developing it.

Key Concepts

  • Scores of popular psychology books and articles are rife with what we term "psychomythology," the collected body of misinformation about human nature.
  • The authors' new book busts 50 widespread psychology myths, along with about 250 "mini myths," including "Most people use only 10 percent of their brainpower" and "People tend to behave oddly during a full moon."
  • In this article, the authors debunk six fallacies. They deflate enthusiasm for expressing anger, different learning styles and a positive attitude as a salve for cancer. They also discredit the belief that all alcoholics must aim for abstinence, that older people are unhappy and that grief emerges in five set stages.

Parts of this article are adapted from 50 Great Myths of Popular Psychology: Shattering Widespread Misconceptions about Human Behavior, by Scott O. Lilienfeld, Steven Jay Lynn, John Ruscio and Barry L. Beyerstein. Copyright © Wiley-Blackwell, 2010.

Popular psychology has become a fixture in our society, and its aphorisms, truths and half-truths permeate our everyday existence. A casual stroll through our neighborhood bookstore reveals dozens of self-help, relationship, recovery and addiction books that serve up heaping portions of advice for steering us along life's rocky road. About 3,500 self-help books are published every year, and numerous new Internet sites on mental health sprout up every month.


Read Comments (3) | Post a comment

Five Filters featured article: Chilcot Inquiry. Available tools: PDF Newspaper, Full Text RSS, Term Extraction.

Does the Devil Really Wear Prada? The Psychology of Anthropomorphism and Dehumanization (Newswise)

Posted: 25 Feb 2010 12:24 PM PST

Message from fivefilters.org: If you can, please donate to the full-text RSS service so we can continue developing it.

Newswise — People talk to their plants, pray to humanlike gods, name their cars, and even dress their pets up in clothing. We have a strong tendency to give nonhuman entities human characteristics (known as anthropomorphism), but why? In a new report in Current Directions in Psychological Science, a journal of the Association for Psychological Science, psychological scientists Adam Waytz from Harvard University and Nicholas Epley and John T. Cacioppo from University of Chicago, examine the psychology of anthropomorphism.

The term anthropomorphism was coined by the Greek philosopher Xenophanes when describing the similarity between religious believers and their gods — that is, Greek gods were depicted having light skin and blue eyes while African gods had dark skin and brown eyes. Neuroscience research has shown that similar brain regions are involved when we think about the behavior of both humans and of nonhuman entities, suggesting that anthropomorphism may be using similar processes as those used for thinking about other people.

Anthropomorphism carries many important implications. For example, thinking of a nonhuman entity in human ways renders it worthy of moral care and consideration. In addition, anthropomorphized entities become responsible for their own actions — in other words, they become deserving of punishment and reward.

Although we like to anthropomorphize, we do not assign human qualities to each and every single object we encounter. What accounts for this selectivity? One factor is similarity. An entity is more likely to be anthropomorphized the more similar it appears to humans (for example, through humanlike movements or physical features like a face). Various motivations may also influence anthropomorphism. For example, lacking social connections with other people might motivate lonely individuals to seek out connections from nonhuman items. Anthropomorphism helps us to simplify and make more sense of complicated entities. The authors observe that, according to the World Meteorological Organization, "the naming of hurricanes and storms — a practice that originated with the names of saints, sailors' girlfriends, and disliked political figures — simplifies and facilitates effective communication to enhance public preparedness, media reporting, and the efficient exchange of information."

Anthropomorphism in reverse is known as dehumanization — when humans are represented as nonhuman objects or animals. There are numerous historical examples of dehumanization including the Nazis' persecution of Jews during the Holocaust and torture at the Abu-Ghraib prison in Iraq. These examples also suggest that those engaging in dehumanization are usually part of a cohesive group acting against outsiders — that is, individuals who feel socially connected may have an increased tendency towards dehumanization. The authors note, "Social connection may have benefits for a person's own health and well-being but may have unfortunate consequences for intergroup relations by enabling dehumanization."

The authors conclude that few of us "have difficulty identifying other humans in a biological sense, but it is much more complicated to identify them in a psychological sense."

Current Directions in Psychological Science, a journal of the Association for Psychological Science, publishes concise reviews spanning all of scientific psychology and its applications. For a copy of the article "Social Cognition Unbound: Insights into Anthropomorphism and Dehumanization" and access to other Current Directions in Psychological Science research findings, please contact Barbara Isanski at 202-293-9300 or bisanski@psychologicalscience.org.


Five Filters featured article: Chilcot Inquiry. Available tools: PDF Newspaper, Full Text RSS, Term Extraction.

Educator wants AP Psychology class to instill confidence in students (Asbury Park Press)

Posted: 25 Feb 2010 01:16 AM PST

Message from fivefilters.org: If you can, please donate to the full-text RSS service so we can continue developing it.

When at first walking into Jill McCracken's AP Psychology class, someone might notice the bright array of collages made from magazine cut-outs. They cover two of the four classroom walls and have titles such as "Psychodynamic," "Behavioral" and "Neuroscience" — various aspects of psychology.

Although few people would know what these terms mean without taking the course, 88 students could explain them to you this year.

Room 402 has a relaxed, yet productive atmosphere as McCracken, 45, of Marlboro casually jokes with the students entering the classroom. However, everyone still has their mind set on the task at hand because the dedication and course work required are no joke. Students make detailed outlines for every chapter covered in the class' college-level textbook and regularly write comprehensive essays.

McCracken has been teaching at Holmdel for four years.

"I just always wanted to understand why people behaved the way they do," she says when asked why she became a psychology teacher. "This is one of those classes that has direct life application. It is relevant to friendships and relationships. You see the world differently once you've taken this class."

Many of her students would agree.

Junior Yuwen Memon, 16, says he took the class "because I'm interested in the science and I thought it could provide me with some insights on the way humans behave and interact."

Junior Jennifer Wiedemann, 16, wants to major in psychology.

"I feel like (AP Psychology is) very informative and allows students to actually have a grasp on how a human is born, formed and developed," she says.

McCracken says she wants students to take away one thing from her class: "Confidence in themselves to make good choices, and to know that a bad choice doesn't mean the end of the world."

Five Filters featured article: Chilcot Inquiry. Available tools: PDF Newspaper, Full Text RSS, Term Extraction.
Posted by at

No comments:

Post a Comment

Subscribe to: Post Comments (Atom)