Metaphors matter: The effect of biological dehumanizing language on indirect aggression

Biologization – a form of dehumanization in which others are considered as disease carriers rather than humans – is common in the political debate; however, its effects have been understudied. To fill this gap, we conducted three pre-registered experimental studies in which biological language was manipulated through vignettes. We found that using disease metaphors (vs. negative but non-dehumanizing language) to describe others increased biologization, indirect (vs. direct) aggression, and exclusionary intentions. Study 1 (N = 201) provided initial evidence of these associations. Study 2 (N = 204) and Study 3 (N = 248) deepened these results, indicating that the effect of biological language on indirect aggression via biologization (Study 2) and accessibility of aggressive thoughts (Study 3) was bigger and significant for participants with high and medium (vs. low) levels of disgust sensitivity. This research highlights how framing groups as biological threats can intensify aggression and exclusion, shedding light on this dehumanizing rhetoric.

Authors

Publication Details

Journal
Current Psychology
Published
2026-04-30
DOI
https://doi.org/10.1007/s12144-026-09290-4
Primary Topic
Psychology of Moral and Emotional Judgment
Type
article
Field-Weighted Citation Impact
0.00

Funders

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

Metaphors matter: The effect of biological dehumanizing language on indirect aggression

Cristina Baldissarri, Roberta Rosa Valtorta, Chiara Volpato
Current Psychology
Psychology of Moral and Emotional Judgment
article

Metaphors matter: The effect of biological dehumanizing language on indirect aggression

Cristina Baldissarri, Roberta Rosa Valtorta, Chiara Volpato
article en

Abstract

Biologization – a form of dehumanization in which others are considered as disease carriers rather than humans – is common in the political debate; however, its effects have been understudied. To fill this gap, we conducted three pre-registered experimental studies in which biological language was manipulated through vignettes. We found that using disease metaphors (vs. negative but non-dehumanizing language) to describe others increased biologization, indirect (vs. direct) aggression, and exclusionary intentions. Study 1 (N = 201) provided initial evidence of these associations. Study 2 (N = 204) and Study 3 (N = 248) deepened these results, indicating that the effect of biological language on indirect aggression via biologization (Study 2) and accessibility of aggressive thoughts (Study 3) was bigger and significant for participants with high and medium (vs. low) levels of disgust sensitivity. This research highlights how framing groups as biological threats can intensify aggression and exclusion, shedding light on this dehumanizing rhetoric.

Current PsychologyVol. 45(9)
Università degli Studi di Milano-Bicocca
Reduced inequalities
Openalex Percentile: Top 8%
Psychology of Moral and Emotional Judgment
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.

Metaphors matter: The effect of biological dehumanizing language on indirect aggression — Cristina Baldissarri, Roberta Rosa Valtorta, et al. · Current Psychology (2026) | TGRS Research Map | TGRS