Dehumanization

In his report on the suppression of the Warsaw Ghetto uprising, Jürgen Stroop described Jews resisting deportation to Nazi camps as "bandits".

Lynndie England pulling a leash attached to the neck of a prisoner in Abu Ghraib prison, who is forced to crawl on the floor, while Megan Ambuhl watches, 2003.

Dehumanization is the process, practice, or act of denying full humanity in others,<ref name=":0233">Template:Cite book</ref> along with the cruelty and suffering that accompany it.<ref>Template:Cite journal</ref><ref name="Haslam20142">Template:Cite journal</ref><ref>Template:Cite journal</ref> It involves perceiving individuals or groups as lacking essential human qualities, such as secondary emotions and mental capacities, thereby placing them outside the bounds of moral concern.<ref name=":0233"/> In this definition, any act or thought that regards a person as either "other than" and "less than" human constitutes dehumanization.<ref>Template:Cite book</ref><ref>Template:Cite book</ref>

Dehumanization can be overt or subtle,<ref>Template:Cite journal</ref> and typically manifests in two primary forms: animalistic dehumanization, which denies uniquely human traits like civility, culture, or rationality and likens others to animals;<ref name="Haslam20142" /> and mechanistic dehumanization, which denies traits of human nature such as warmth, emotion, and individuality, portraying others as objects or machines.<ref name="Haslam20142" />

It has historically facilitated a broad range of harms, from discrimination and social exclusion to slavery,<ref name=":0233"/> colonization,<ref>Template:Cite journal</ref> as well as other crimes against humanity,<ref name=":0233"/> and is recognized as a significant form of incitement to genocide.<ref>Template:Cite book</ref>

Conceptualizations

Slain Armenians in Erzurum as part of Hamidian massacre

Behaviorally, dehumanization describes a disposition towards others that debases the others' individuality by either portraying it as an "individual" species or by portraying it as an "individual" object (e.g., someone who acts inhumanely towards humans). As a process, dehumanization may be understood as the opposite of personification, a figure of speech in which inanimate objects or abstractions are endowed with human qualities; dehumanization then is the disendowment of these same qualities or a reduction to abstraction.<ref>Template:Cite web</ref>

Dehumanization can occur in both absolute and relative forms.<ref name="Haslam2014245">Template:Cite journal</ref> Absolute dehumanization involves perceiving a group as entirely devoid of human qualities, while relative dehumanization entails attributing fewer human characteristics to one group in comparison to another.<ref name="Haslam2014245"/> Historically, dehumanization has involved the outright denial of someone's humanity, such as in claims that certain groups, like enslaved people, were not fully human.<ref name=":0233"/> It can also portray others as less human, such as through the objectification of women or the demonization of migrants.<ref name=":0233"/> Both forms are understood as expressions of dehumanization, differing primarily in the extent to which human attributes are denied.<ref name="Haslam2014245"/>

This distinction relates to the difference between blatant and subtle forms of dehumanization.<ref name="Haslam2014245"/> Blatant dehumanization typically involves overt and explicit comparisons to animals or other non-human entities, often verbalized through direct language.<ref name=":12">Template:Cite journal</ref> In contrast, subtle dehumanization, often referred to as infrahumanization, manifests in the implicit belief that members of out-groups possess fewer uniquely human emotions or traits.<ref name="Haslam2014245"/> These processes may occur unconsciously.<ref name=":12" /> Early studies on dehumanization focused primarily on its blatant forms, particularly in the context of intergroup conflicts.<ref name="Haslam2014245"/> However, subsequent research has indicated that dehumanization could also occur in more subtle ways, even in the absence of overt hostility.<ref name="Haslam2014245"/> Moreover, although traditionally associated with dominant or oppressive groups within hierarchical structures, research indicates that dehumanization can occur reciprocally, including amongst oppressed or disadvantaged groups.<ref name=":44"/>

Two Imperial Japanese Army officers in occupied China who competed to see who could kill one hundred Chinese people with a sword first during the Nanjing Massacre

Animalistic and mechanistic dehumanization are further distinguished based on their distinct psychological underpinnings, which influence the contexts in which dehumanization occurs and the forms of harm it may motivate.<ref>Template:Cite journal</ref> Also, the distinction between animalistic and mechanistic dehumanization lies not only in their content but also in the typical contexts of application.<ref name="Haslam, N, 200622">Template:Cite journal</ref> Animalistic dehumanization is primarily observed on intergroup dynamics,<ref name="Haslam, N, 200622" /> where individuals or groups are seen as lacking culture, civility, or rationality, traits thought to separate humans from animals.<ref>Template:Cite book</ref> In contrast, mechanistic dehumanization tends to occur in interpersonal settings,<ref name="Haslam, N, 200622" /> where people are perceived as lacking emotionality, warmth, and other qualities associated with lived beings,<ref name="Haslam2014245"/> akin to robots and machines.<ref name=":0233"/> Although animalistic and mechanistic dehumanization are often presented as distinct dimensions, they are not mutually exclusive; in some cases, individuals or groups may be denied traits associated with both.<ref name="Haslam2014245"/>

Dehumanization is widely understood as a psychological mechanism that facilitates violence and inhumane treatment.<ref name=":0233"/> It plays a central role in justifying harm by removing the moral consideration typically granted to human beings, thereby weakening psychological restraints such as compassion and empathy.<ref name="Haslam2014245"/> One component of this process is the denial of others' mental states, known as "dementalization," which contributes to their moral exclusion and increases the likelihood of mistreatment.<ref name="Haslam2014245" /> Scholars distinguish dehumanization from related psychological phenomena such as dislike, as it entails the denial of a person's moral and mental worth, adding a particularly harmful layer by diminishing the relevance of their suffering.<ref name=":22">Template:Cite journal</ref> Unlike people who are stigmatized or marginalized but still recognized as normatively human, individuals who are dehumanized are perceived as fundamentally lacking in essential human qualities and moral worth.<ref name=":04">Template:Cite book</ref> This distinction is significant because moral inclusion often imposes limits on how individuals may be treated, whereas dehumanization removes such constraints, enabling more extreme forms of violence and exclusion.<ref name=":04"/>

Although dehumanization is a significant factor in enabling violent behaviour, scholars emphasize that it is not sufficient on its own to explain all instances of violence.<ref name=":0233"/> Research indicates a strong association between dehumanization and increased levels of aggression, and it can be used to justify or sustain acts of violence and long-term animosity.<ref name=":23">Template:Cite journal</ref> It may also intensify intergroup conflict by sharpening distinctions between in-groups and out-groups.<ref>Template:Cite journal</ref> Beyond its role in facilitating violence, dehumanization can serve several social and psychological functions. These include legitimizing harm such as exploitation, submission, or killing by reducing moral restraint, managing existential anxieties through the projection of one's fears and vulnerabilities, and reinforcing social stratification or defending the status quo.<ref name=":0233"/>

According to Adrienne De Ruiter, dehumanization occurs in three manifestations: through the failure to perceive individuals as human, the portrayal of them in ways that disregard their humanity, or the treatment of them in ways that diminish their human qualities.<ref name=":04"/> These manifestations can occur discursively (e.g., idiomatic language that likens individual human beings to non-human animals, verbal abuse, erasing one's voice from discourse), symbolically (e.g., imagery), or physically (e.g., chattel slavery, physical abuse, refusing eye contact). Dehumanization often ignores the target's individuality (i.e., the creative and exciting aspects of their personality) and can hinder one from feeling empathy or correctly understanding a stigmatized group.<ref>Template:Cite journal</ref>

Dehumanization has been examined across various disciplines as a mechanism that reinforces social hierarchies and exclusion.<ref name=":22" /> Dehumanization may be carried out by a social institution (such as a state, school, or family), interpersonally, or even within oneself. Dehumanization can be unintentional, especially upon individuals, as with some types of de facto racism. State-organized dehumanization has historically been directed against certain political, racial, ethnic, national, or religious minority groups. Other minoritized and marginalized individuals and groups (based on sexual orientation, gender, disability, class, or some other organizing principle) are also susceptible to various forms of dehumanization. The concept of dehumanization has received empirical attention in the psychological literature.<ref>Moller, A. C., & Deci, E. L. (2010). "Interpersonal control, dehumanization, and violence: A self-determination theory perspective". Group Processes & Intergroup Relations, 13, 41-53. (open access) Template:Webarchive</ref><ref>Template:Cite journal</ref> Besides infrahumanization,<ref name="Leyens, JPh, 2000">Template:Cite journal</ref> it is conceptually related to delegitimization,<ref name="Bar-Tal, D, 1989">Bar-Tal, D. (1989). "Delegitimization: The extreme case of stereotyping and prejudice". In D. Bar-Tal, C. Graumann, A. Kruglanski, & W. Stroebe (Eds.), Stereotyping and prejudice: Changing conceptions. New York, NY: Springer.</ref> moral exclusion,<ref name="Opotow, S., 1990">Template:Cite journal</ref> and objectification.<ref name="Nussbaum, M (1999)">Nussbaum, M. C. (1999). Sex and Social Justice. Oxford, England: Oxford University Press. Template:ISBN</ref>

Humanness

In Herbert Kelman's work on dehumanization, humanness has two features: "identity" (i.e., a perception of the person "as an individual, independent and distinguishable from others, capable of making choices") and "community" (i.e., a perception of the person as "part of an interconnected network of individuals who care for each other"). When a target's agency and embeddedness in a community are denied, they no longer elicit compassion or other moral responses and may suffer violence.<ref>Kelman, H. C. (1976). "Violence without restraint: Reflections on the dehumanization of victims and victimizers". pp. 282-314 in G. M. Kren & L. H. Rappoport (Eds.), Varieties of Psychohistory. New York: Springer. Template:ISBN</ref>

Objectification

Psychologist Barbara Fredrickson and Tomi-Ann Roberts argued that the sexual objectification of women extends beyond pornography (which emphasizes women's bodies over their uniquely human mental and emotional characteristics) to society generally. There is a normative emphasis on female appearance that causes women to take a third-person perspective on their bodies.<ref>Template:Cite journal</ref> The psychological distance women may feel from their bodies might cause them to dehumanize themselves. Some research has indicated that women and men exhibit a "sexual body part recognition bias", in which women's sexual body parts are better recognized when presented in isolation than in their entire bodies. In contrast, men's sexual body parts are better recognized in the context of their entire bodies than in isolation.<ref>Template:Cite journal</ref> Men who dehumanize women as either animals or objects are more liable to rape and sexually harass women and display more negative attitudes toward female rape victims.<ref>Template:Cite journal</ref>

Philosopher Martha Nussbaum identified seven components of sexual objectification: instrumentality, denial of autonomy, inertness, fungibility, violability, ownership, and denial of subjectivity.<ref name="Nussbaum1999">Template:Cite book</ref>Template:Explain

In this context, instrumentality refers to when the objectified is used as an instrument to the objectifier's benefit. Denial of autonomy occurs in the form of the objectifier underestimating the objectified and denies their capabilities. In the case of inertness, the objectified is treated as if they are lazy and indolent. Fungibility brands the objectified to be easily replaceable. Volability is when the objectifier does not respect the objectified person's personal space or boundaries. Ownership is when the objectified is seen as another person's property. Lastly, the denial of subjectivity is a lack of sympathy for the objectified, or the dismissal of the notion that the objectified has feelings. These seven components cause the objectifier to view the objectified in a disrespectful way, therefore treating them so.<ref>Template:Citation</ref>

History

Template:Expand section The term dehumanization first appeared in English in the early 19th century, initially referring to changes in physical appearance, but it soon broadened to describe forms of social and moral degradation.<ref name=":0233"/> While the term itself is modern, critiques of practices that would now be recognized as dehumanizing, such as slavery, can be traced back to classical antiquity. In ancient Greece, for instance, Aristotle's defense of natural slavery responded to contemporary philosophical debates about the moral status of slaves.<ref name=":53">Siep Stuurman, "Dehumanization Before The Columbian Exchange." In The Routledge Handbook of Dehumanization, 1st ed., 1:39–51. Routledge, 2021. doi:10.4324/9780429492464-chapter2.</ref> His arguments were later invoked to justify the dehumanization of Native Americans during the Spanish conquest and colonization.<ref name=":53"/>

The idea of universal human worth gradually gained prominence through what scholars call the invention of humanity, a historical process that gained momentum during the Enlightenment and promoted the belief in a shared human essence.<ref name=":0233"/> However, as awareness of common humanity grew, so too did the ideological efforts to exclude certain groups from its scope, often through pseudo-scientific racial theories.<ref>Template:Citation</ref> Dehumanization became a powerful tool during the age of colonialism, enabling imperial powers to justify the colonization, enslavement, and extermination of subjugated peoples.<ref name=":33">Template:Cite journal</ref>

Throughout history, societies have engaged in and institutionalized this denial of humanity to enable mass oppression, exploitation, and killing.<ref name=":64"/> By portraying colonized groups as less than fully human, dominant groups were able to morally disengage from the suffering they inflicted, facilitating acts of exploitation, violence, and oppression.<ref name=":44">Template:Cite journal</ref> David Livingstone Smith, director and founder of The Human Nature Project at the University of New England, argues that historically, human beings have been dehumanizing one another for thousands of years.<ref>Template:Cite book</ref> In his work "The Paradoxes of Dehumanization", Smith proposes that dehumanization simultaneously regards people as human and subhuman. This paradox comes to light, as Smith identifies, because the reason people are dehumanized is so their human attributes can be taken advantage of.<ref>Template:Cite journal</ref>

Modern scholarly interest in dehumanization intensified after World War II, especially in response to the Holocaust, with influential contributions from thinkers such as Hannah Arendt.<ref name=":0233"/> During the Cold War and especially the Vietnam War, the concept became central to interdisciplinary research, spanning psychology, sociology, philosophy, genocide studies, and conflict analysis, as an important mechanism underlying social exclusion, violence, and moral disengagement.<ref name=":0233"/>

Transatlantic slave trade

Dehumanization played a central role in justifying and sustaining the transatlantic slave trade.<ref name=":64">Luigi Corrias, "Dehumanization by Law 1." In The Routledge Handbook of Dehumanization, 1st ed., 1:201–13. Routledge, 2021. doi:10.4324/9780429492464-chapter13.</ref> Africans were portrayed as biologically suited for enslavement and were denied the qualities considered essential to full humanity.<ref>Maria Rosário Pimentel, "The Justification of Slavery in Modern Natural Law," 33–51. CRC Press | Taylor & Francis, 2022. doi: 10.1201/9780429299070</ref> This logic was grounded in binary oppositions, especially the division between the "civilized" and the "savage", in which enslaved peoples were depicted as savages lacking rationality, culture, and moral agency.<ref name=":53"/> Such portrayals served to legitimize their exploitation and subjugation.<ref name=":53" /> These beliefs were later reinforced by ideologies that framed imperial powers as bearers of civilization to "less developed" peoples, a view often encapsulated in the phrase "the White Man's Burden".<ref name=":44"/>

Native Americans

The Discovery of America (1844) sculpture, depicting a triumphant Columbus and a "female savage" (Indian woman)

Mass grave for the dead Lakota following the Wounded Knee massacre. Up to 300 Natives were killed, mostly old men, women, and children.<ref>Template:Cite web</ref>

Native Americans were dehumanized as "merciless Indian savages" in the United States Declaration of Independence.<ref>Template:Cite news</ref> Two sculptures reflecting this view of the Natives were commissioned by the U.S. government and stood outside the U.S. Capitol from 1844 to 1958: The Discovery of America which depicted a triumphant Columbus and a "female savage", according to the Pennsylvania senator James Buchanan who proposed the sculpture,<ref>Congressional Globe, April 28, 1836, p. 1316.</ref> and The Rescue whose sculptor Horatio Greenough wrote that it was "to convey the idea of the triumph of the whites over the savage tribes".<ref>Boime, Albert (2004), A Social History of Modern Art, Volume 2: Art in an Age of Counterrevolution, 1815–1848, (Series: Social History of Modern Art); University of Chicago Press, p. 527.</ref> Following the Wounded Knee massacre in December 1890, author L. Frank Baum wrote:<ref>Template:Cite web Full text of both, with commentary by professor A. Waller Hastings</ref>

The Pioneer has before declared that our only safety depends upon the total extermination [sic] of the Indians. Having wronged them for centuries we had better, in order to protect our civilization, follow it up by one more wrong and wipe these untamed and untamable creatures from the face of the earth. In this lies safety for our settlers and the soldiers who are under incompetent commands. Otherwise, we may expect future years to be as full of trouble with the redskins as those have been in the past.

In Martin Luther King Jr.'s book on civil rights, Why We Can't Wait, he wrote:<ref name="kingnatspeech">Template:Cite web</ref><ref>Template:Cite news</ref><ref name="kingcreek">Template:Cite web</ref>

Our nation was born in genocide when it embraced the doctrine that the original American, the Indian, was an inferior race. Even before there were large numbers of Negroes on our shores, the scar of racial hatred had already disfigured colonial society. From the sixteenth century forward, blood flowed in battles over racial supremacy. We are perhaps the only nation which tried as a matter of national policy to wipe out its indigenous population. Moreover, we elevated that tragic experience into a noble crusade. Indeed, even today we have not permitted ourselves to reject or to feel remorse for this shameful episode. Our literature, our films, our drama, our folklore all exalt it.

King was an active supporter of the Native American rights movement, which he drew parallels with his own leadership of the civil rights movement.<ref name="kingcreek"/> Both movements aimed to overturn dehumanizing attitudes held by members of the public at large against them.<ref>Template:Citation</ref>

Nazi Germany

Dehumanization reached one of its most extreme expressions under Nazi Germany, where it was systematically employed to justify and implement the persecution and extermination of various groups, including Jews, Romani and Sinti people, people with disabilities, political dissidents, and LGBTQ+ individuals.<ref name=":44"/> The Holocaust is regarded as one of the most systematic and historically significant examples of atrocities carried out through sustained processes of dehumanization.<ref name=":0233"/>

Nazi Germany institutionalized dehumanization through the construction of legal and bureaucratic structures that explicitly denied the full humanity of targeted populations.<ref name=":0233" /> Legal frameworks played a central role in this process, with laws such as the Nuremberg Laws, codifying discriminatory categories and racial hierarchies that legitimized exclusion, persecution, and ultimately extermination.<ref name=":64"/> The Nazi regime also employed mass media and state propaganda to disseminate dehumanizing imagery and rhetoric that depicted these groups as subhuman threats to the German nation.<ref name=":73">Robert Wilson, "Dehumanization, Disability, and Eugenics." In The Routledge Handbook of Dehumanization, 1st ed., 1:173–86. Routledge, 2021. doi:10.4324/9780429492464-chapter11.</ref>

Jews were frequently portrayed through animalistic metaphors, including comparisons to vermin, and framed as biologically impure threats to racial purity.<ref name=":73" /> The term Untermensch (subhuman) was used to deny Jews and others moral standing and membership to the human community.<ref name=":73" /> In an October 1943 speech, Heinrich Himmler framed the extermination of the Jewish people as a historical mission, specifically comparing the Jews to a bacillus, reinforcing the portrayal of Jews as a dangerous disease that needs to be eradicated.<ref>Template:Cite web</ref> These dehumanizing narratives facilitated the systematic extermination of 6,000,000 Jews during the Holocaust at the hands of the Nazis.<ref name=":73" /> In addition, a state-sponsored eugenics program, most notably through Aktion T4, targeted individuals with disabilities or others deemed possessing a life unworthy of life.<ref name=":73" /> These individuals were deemed inferior and a threat to the purity of the Aryan race, and were also systematically exterminated.<ref name=":73" />

Israelis and Palestinians

Dehumanization has been a persistent and influential factor in the Israeli–Palestinian conflict, contributing to intergroup hostility and serving as a strong predictor of support for violence across both societies.<ref>Alexander Landry, Isaias Ghezae, Ramzi Abou-Ismail, Sarah Spooner, River J August, Charlotte Mair, Anya Ragnhildstveit, Wim Van den Noortgate, Michele J Gelfand, and Paul Seli. "The Uniquely Powerful Impact of Explicit, Blatant Dehumanization on Support for Intergroup Violence." Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 2025. doi:10.1037/pspi0000492.</ref> In protracted conflicts characterised by high levels of insecurity and entrenched group identities, boundaries between in-groups and out-groups often become more rigid, which reinforces psychological separation and facilitates dehumanizing attitudes.<ref name=":82">Template:Cite journal</ref> Dehumanization has been identified as a central mechanism in sustaining violence in protracted conflicts, which reinforces collective victimhood identities, legitimizes hostility and perpetuates cycles of violence and retaliation.<ref name=":9">Joana Ricarte, "Historical Memory, Cultural Violence, and Conflict: The Genealogy of Dehumanization in Israel and Palestine." In Memory, Trauma and Narratives of the Self. United Kingdom: Edward Elgar Publishing Limited, 2024. doi:10.4337/9781035337972.00017.</ref>

Empirical research has found that both Palestinian and Jewish Israeli participants who expressed dehumanizing views of the other group were more likely to support retributive forms of justice and violent measures, as opposed to restorative or conciliatory approaches.<ref name="Haslam2014245"/> Historical examples of dehumanization in Israeli society include comparing Palestinians to the biblical "sons of Amalek", a tribal group portrayed as inherently evil.<ref>Jay Martin, "The Vicissitudes of Empathy: Reflections on the Israel-Palestine Conflict." Journal of Genocide Research, 2025, 1–17. doi:10.1080/14623528.2025.2458400.</ref> Dehumanization contributes to the justification of exclusionary and violent policies, with studies linking dehumanizing attitudes to public support for measures such as population transfers amongst segments of the Israeli population.<ref name="Haslam2014245"/> Dehumanizing narratives have also historically appeared in nationalist slogans, such as the early Zionist phrase "a land without a people for a people without a land", which is interpreted as a symbolic erasure of Palestinian peoplehood.<ref name=":33"/> Dehumanization has been used not only to deny the humanity of Palestinians but also to undermine their historical presence on the lands.<ref name=":10">Zouheir Maalej and Aseel Zibin. "Metaphors They Kill by: Dehumanization of Palestinians by Israeli Officials and Sympathizers." International Journal of Arabic-English Studies 25, no. 1 (2025): 201–22. doi:10.33806/ijaes.v25i1.693.</ref>

During the 2014 Gaza War, studies found high and comparable levels of blatant dehumanization among both Israeli and Palestinian participants.<ref name=":44"/> A survey using the "ascent of man scale",<ref>Template:Cite journal</ref> a common measure of dehumanizing attitudes, found that, on average, both sides rated each other closer to an animal than a fully evolved human when shown a March of Progress image.<ref name="Bruneau 2017">Template:Cite journal</ref> On the scale with "0 corresponding to the left side of the image (i.e., quadrupedal human ancestor), and 100 corresponding to the right side of the image ('full' modern-day human)"<ref>Template:Cite web</ref> Israelis on average rated Palestinians 39.81 points lower than their own group and Palestinians on average rated Israelis 37.03 points lower than their own group.<ref name="Bruneau 2017" />

Following the Hamas attacks on October 7, 2023, dehumanizing language intensified in Israeli political discourse.<ref name=":44" /> Senior officials used animalistic dehumanization through metaphors, such as "rats" and "cockroaches", to describe Palestinians in Gaza, which served to legitimize acts of violence.<ref name=":10" /> These statements have drawn international scrutiny and were cited in legal proceedings at the International Court of Justice (ICJ) concerning allegations of incitement to genocide.<ref name=":33" /> Dehumanizing content also circulates widely on social media. In Israel, such rhetoric targets not only Palestinians but also left-wing Jewish Israelis, who have been depicted in demonizing and animalistic terms, including "dogs", "microbes", and "vermin".<ref>Template:Cite journal</ref> Political orientation has also been shown to influence levels of dehumanization, with research indicating that right-wing Israelis are more likely to dehumanize Palestinians than left-wing Israelis.<ref name="Haslam2014245"/>

Dehumanizing zoomorphisms are found in both Israeli discourse and Palestinian discourse. During South Africa's submission to the ICJ that Israel was committing genocide against the Palestinians, the president of the ICJ cited Yoav Gallant for using the phrase "human animals" in reference to Palestinians.<ref>Template:Cite web</ref> On the Palestinian side, dehumanization has also been linked to support for violence.<ref name=":9" /> According to Joana Ricarte, dehumanizing perceptions of Israelis have contributed to moral frameworks that legitimized violence, including the October 7 attacks.<ref name=":9" />

Causes and facilitating factors

Reproduction of a handbill advertising a slave auction, in Charleston, South Carolina, in 1769

Several lines of psychological research relate to the concept of dehumanization. Infrahumanization suggests that individuals think of and treat out-group members as "less human" and more like animals;<ref name="Leyens, JPh, 2000" /> while Austrian ethnologist Irenäus Eibl-Eibesfeldt uses the term pseudo-speciation, a term that he borrowed from the psychoanalyst Erik Erikson, to imply that the dehumanized person or persons are regarded as not members of the human species.<ref name="eibl">Template:Cite book</ref> Specifically, individuals associate secondary emotions (which are seen as uniquely human) more with the in-group than with the out-group. Primary emotions (those experienced by all sentient beings, whether human or other animals) are found to be more associated with the out-group.<ref name="Leyens, JPh, 2000" /> Dehumanization is intrinsically connected with violence.<ref>Template:Cite web</ref><ref>Template:Cite web</ref><ref>{{cite journal |last1=Rai |first1=Tage S. |last2=Valdesolo |first2=Piercarlo |last3=Graham |first3=Jesse |title=Dehumanization increases instrumental violence, but not moral violence |journal=Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences |date=8 August 2017 |volume=114 |issue=32 |pages=8511–8516 |doi=10.1073/pnas.1705238114