Labeling effects for the poor: the role of labels on dehumanization of the poor and opposition to welfare policies

Numerous terms are frequently used to refer to poor people (i.e. “needy,” “impoverished”). Despite ostensibly used to refer to the same social category, little research has investigated how different labels impact perceptions of the poor. Three studies investigated how different labels for poor people differentially predicted dehumanization of the poor and, in turn, opposition to welfare. Study 1 identified (from 20) labels that participants indicated similar familiarity and referred to the same social category but differed in valence. Studies 2 and 3 had participants indicate their dehumanizing perceptions of poor people varying in label and indicate their support for welfare programs. Results indicated that “Broke” people were dehumanized more than “In Need” people despite referring to the same social category. In turn, greater dehumanization predicted less support for welfare policies designed to benefit the poor. Discussion surrounds the importance of understanding the language surrounding discussions of the poor and welfare.

Publication Details

Journal
Figshare
Published
2025-01-01
DOI
https://doi.org/10.6084/m9.figshare.28777690
Primary Topic
Legal and Regulatory Analysis
Type
article
Field-Weighted Citation Impact
0.00
Controls
|||
ALL TIME
JAN
FEB
MAR
APR
MAY
JUN
JUL
AUG
SEP
OCT
article

Labeling effects for the poor: the role of labels on dehumanization of the poor and opposition to welfare policies

Figshare
Legal and Regulatory Analysis
article

Labeling effects for the poor: the role of labels on dehumanization of the poor and opposition to welfare policies

article en

Abstract

Numerous terms are frequently used to refer to poor people (i.e. “needy,” “impoverished”). Despite ostensibly used to refer to the same social category, little research has investigated how different labels impact perceptions of the poor. Three studies investigated how different labels for poor people differentially predicted dehumanization of the poor and, in turn, opposition to welfare. Study 1 identified (from 20) labels that participants indicated similar familiarity and referred to the same social category but differed in valence. Studies 2 and 3 had participants indicate their dehumanizing perceptions of poor people varying in label and indicate their support for welfare programs. Results indicated that “Broke” people were dehumanized more than “In Need” people despite referring to the same social category. In turn, greater dehumanization predicted less support for welfare policies designed to benefit the poor. Discussion surrounds the importance of understanding the language surrounding discussions of the poor and welfare.

Figshare
No poverty
Openalex Percentile: Top 51%
Legal and Regulatory Analysis
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.

Labeling effects for the poor: the role of labels on dehumanization of the poor and opposition to welfare policies · Figshare (2025) | TGRS Research Map | TGRS