Social targets' eyes are a rich source of information: partners with dilated and constricted pupils are perceived positively and negatively, respectively. Here, we tested whether observed pupil size influences the ascription of humanity. In Study 1 (n = 198) participants were asked to attribute positive uniquely human and non-uniquely human traits to ingroup (i.e., university students), derogated (i.e., homeless people) and non-derogated (i.e., Dutch) targets whose pupils varied in size. Results showed higher attribution of uniquely human traits to targets with dilated (vs. constricted) pupils, whereas no difference based on pupil size emerged on the attribution of non-uniquely human traits. The effect was stronger for non-derogated (vs. derogated and ingroup) targets. In Study 2 (n = 117) participants were asked to attribute positive uniquely human and non-uniquely human traits and emotions. Results replicated the effect of pupil size on trait attribution, especially for outgroup (vs. ingroup) members. The effect of pupil size was not qualified by emotions type (uniquely human vs. non uniquely human). Taken together, our findings show that pupil size is interpreted as a cue to attribute humanity to social targets.

Introduction:Humans are similar but behave differently, and one main reason is the culture in which they are born and raised. The purpose of this research is to examine how the perception and reaction to those who transgress social norms may vary based on the individualism/collectivism of their culture. Methods:A study (N = 398) conducted in the United Kingdom, Spain, and China showed differences in the perception and reaction to incivilities based on individualism/collectivism. Results:People from highly collective countries (China) perceive uncivil transgressors as immoral and enact more social control over them than people from highly individualistic countries (U.K.). They also experience more discomfort when facing uncivil transgressors, and this discomfort mediates the increasing immorality perceived on the agents of incivilities in contrast with people from less collective countries. Discussion:Our findings provide insights into how cultural factors shape individuals' perceptions of social norm violations and emphasize the importance of considering cultural differences when addressing incivility.

Previous research shows that civility norms, such as morality norms, are necessary navigational charts to orient an individual in social life. However, there are no studies that establish the extent to which people consider civility norms as objective facts in a similar way to how many moral norms are considered. This research examines the perceived objectivity of civility norms in contrast to morality norms. The results show, firstly, that immoral norms are perceived to be significantly more objective than moral norms, but the opposite occurs with civility norms. Second, there is a high correlation between what participants consider objective and what they believe the rest of their community considers objective. However, this correlation was greater for immoral behaviors than for moral behaviors, and the opposite occurred for civility behaviors. Finally, participants estimated that the percentage of people in their group who engage in uncivil behaviors is higher than those who engage in immoral behaviors.

Theoretical approaches to dehumanization consider civility to be an attribute of human uniqueness (HU). However, studies that explore the links between civility and humanness are scarce. More precisely, the present research tests whether there is a consistent relationship between civility and HU. Method and results: The first study (N = 192; Mage = 19.91; SD = 2.70; 69% women) shows that individuals infer more HU traits in the agents of civil behaviors compared to agents of other positive behaviors that are not related to civility. The second study (N = 328; Mage = 19.69; SD = 3.65; 77% women) reveals that uncivil and immoral behaviors displayed a similar pattern of inference of HU traits; however, moral behaviors were more associated with human nature than civil behaviors. Conclusions: Overall, results confirmed that civil behaviors facilitate the inference of humanness, specifically of HU traits, and that civil and moral behaviors are not equivalent in terms of the human inferences to which they lead.

The environment determines the way in which people interpret social life. In fact, depending on the context, multiple potential attitudes can be evoked by an attitude object. The purpose of this research is to test whether the perception of uncivil behavior and its perpetrators is affected by the physical environment in which this behavior is framed. Specifically, we explore the role of two environmental dimensions - naturalness and openness - in the way we evaluate behaviors that transgress social norms and their agents. In a pilot study, participants (N = 124) considered counter-normative behaviors to be more uncivil and their perpetrators to be less human in natural contexts. In the main study, participants (N = 199) evaluated the naturalness and openness dimensions separately and it was found that naturalness is the one that most influences the negative perception of uncivil behavior and the only one that has an effect on the dehumanization process. The results of this research support the idea that the physical environment plays an important role in the perception of uncivil behavior and the dehumanized view of its agent. The importance of the results within the fields of deviant behavior, social psychology, and environmental psychology are discussed.

Abstract. Across two studies, we tested the relationship between the stereotype dimensions of sociability, morality, and competence and the two dimensions of humanness (human nature and human uniqueness). Study 1 considered real groups and revealed that sociability had greater power than morality in predicting human nature. For some groups, sociability also trumped competence in predicting human nature. By contrast, the attribution of human uniqueness was predicted by competence and morality. In Study 2, participants read a scenario depicting an unfamiliar group in stereotypical terms. Results showed that competence and sociability were the strongest predictors of human uniqueness and human nature, respectively. Although with nuances, both studies revealed that sociability, morality, and competence relate differently to the two dimensions of humanness.

Uncivil behavior involves an attack on social norms related to the protection of public property and respect for community life. However, at the same time, the low-frequency and relatively low-intensity damage caused by most of these behaviors could lead to incivilities being considered a typically human action. The purpose of this set of studies is to examine the automatic associations that people establish between humanness and both civic and uncivil behaviors. Across three studies, uncivil behaviors were more strongly associated with human pictures than animal pictures (study 1) and with human-related words than animal-related words (study 2). We replicated study 2 with uncivil behaviors that do not prime graphically human beings (study 3). Overall, our results showed that uncivil behaviors and civic behaviors were clearly associated with human concepts. Our findings have direct implications for the conceptualization of humanness and its denial.