Measuring the felt sense of dehumanization: A <scp>COSMIN</scp> systematic review of the psychometric properties of self‐ and meta‐dehumanization measures

There is increasing awareness of the clinical relevance of self- and meta-dehumanization. With various measures available for use, evidence of robust reliability and validity is essential before implementation. This review aimed to evaluate the psychometric strength and methodological quality of self- and meta-dehumanization measures and make recommendations for practice using Consensus-based Standards for the selection of health Measurement Instruments (COSMIN) guidance. A systematic search of Web of Science, PubMed, PsycINFO and Scopus was conducted to identify studies reporting on the development or validation of a measure of self- or meta-dehumanization. Of 5190 records, 26 studies containing 29 distinct outcome measures were identified (14 self-dehumanization and 15 meta-dehumanization). In general, there was a lack of involvement from people with lived experience in measure development, leading to very low quality of evidence for content validity. Strength and quality of other psychometric properties varied, with only some measures demonstrating sufficient high-quality ratings. Based on COSMIN guidance, only one measure, the Experience of Dehumanization Measure (Golossenko et al., Br. J. Soc. Psychol., 62, 2023, 1285), can be currently recommended for use. It is recommended that future research looks to: (1) improve efforts to validate existing measures and (2) develop gold standard measures in collaboration with people with lived experience.

Authors

Institutions

Publication Details

Journal
British Journal of Psychology
Published
2025-08-08
DOI
https://doi.org/10.1111/bjop.70017
Citations
2
Primary Topic
Cultural Differences and Values
Type
article
Field-Weighted Citation Impact
4.88

Funders

Controls
|||
ALL TIME
JAN
FEB
MAR
APR
MAY
JUN
JUL
AUG
SEP
OCT
article

Measuring the felt sense of dehumanization: A COSMIN systematic review of the psychometric properties of self‐ and meta‐dehumanization measures

Spencer L. Smith, Tom A. Jenkins, Hannah Pendlebury
2 citations
British Journal of Psychology
Cultural Differences and Values
4.88
article

Measuring the felt sense of dehumanization: A COSMIN systematic review of the psychometric properties of self‐ and meta‐dehumanization measures

Spencer L. Smith, Tom A. Jenkins, Hannah Pendlebury
article en
2 citations

Abstract

There is increasing awareness of the clinical relevance of self- and meta-dehumanization. With various measures available for use, evidence of robust reliability and validity is essential before implementation. This review aimed to evaluate the psychometric strength and methodological quality of self- and meta-dehumanization measures and make recommendations for practice using Consensus-based Standards for the selection of health Measurement Instruments (COSMIN) guidance. A systematic search of Web of Science, PubMed, PsycINFO and Scopus was conducted to identify studies reporting on the development or validation of a measure of self- or meta-dehumanization. Of 5190 records, 26 studies containing 29 distinct outcome measures were identified (14 self-dehumanization and 15 meta-dehumanization). In general, there was a lack of involvement from people with lived experience in measure development, leading to very low quality of evidence for content validity. Strength and quality of other psychometric properties varied, with only some measures demonstrating sufficient high-quality ratings. Based on COSMIN guidance, only one measure, the Experience of Dehumanization Measure (Golossenko et al., Br. J. Soc. Psychol., 62, 2023, 1285), can be currently recommended for use. It is recommended that future research looks to: (1) improve efforts to validate existing measures and (2) develop gold standard measures in collaboration with people with lived experience.

British Journal of PsychologyVol. 117(1)
University Hospitals Bristol NHS Foundation Trust (GB), At Bristol (GB), University Hospitals Bristol and Weston NHS Foundation Trust (GB), University of Bath (GB)
Mental Health Research UK, Schizophrenia Research Fund
Openalex Percentile: Top 5%
Cultural Differences and Values
4.88
AI Navigator

Ask Laika to Summarize, Analyze, and Connect papers live on the map.

Summarize Papers & Methodologies

Extract key findings, datasets, and comparative methods across publications.

Benchmark Rankings & Visual Analytics

Rank top research institutions, authors, funders, topics, and journals by Field-Weighted Citation Impact (FWCI) and paper volume with instant charts.

Connect Distant Disciplines

Bridge topological clusters on the map to find hidden collaborative intersections.