They say you are what you eat: Cognitive dissonance as a predictor of dehumanization

The present study will expand the literature on dehumanization by highlighting its relationship with cognitive dissonance. Smith (2011) refers to dehumanization as conceiving of people as subhuman creatures rather than as human beings. Viki and others (2006) conducted a study looking at the possibility of people assigning stimulus words, specifically animalistic and humanistic descriptors, differently between individuals in their ingroups and outgroups. They found that people seemed to associate humanness more with individuals within their ingroup than with individuals belonging to their outgroup. When a person violates a belief that we hold, we can feel the need to dehumanize them, to separate them from ourselves. People may then justify their behavior by modifying existing or adding new cognitive elements of their behavior to keep it consistent (Panagiotou & Kadianaki, 2017). For example, while we can justify the eating of animals quite easily, we become rather squeamish about the idea of eating another human. The present study will examine cognitive dissonance as a predictor of dehumanization of ones’ ingroup and outgroup. Specifically, we will be using cannibalism as our dehumanization factor.

Authors

Institutions

Publication Details

Journal
Murray State's Digital Commons (Murray State University)
Published
2026-10-28
Primary Topic
Social and Intergroup Psychology
Type
article
Field-Weighted Citation Impact
0.00
Controls
|||
ALL TIME
JAN
FEB
MAR
APR
MAY
JUN
JUL
AUG
SEP
OCT
article

They say you are what you eat: Cognitive dissonance as a predictor of dehumanization

Jasmine Shafer
Murray State's Digital Commons (Murray State University)
Social and Intergroup Psychology
article

They say you are what you eat: Cognitive dissonance as a predictor of dehumanization

Jasmine Shafer
article en

Abstract

The present study will expand the literature on dehumanization by highlighting its relationship with cognitive dissonance. Smith (2011) refers to dehumanization as conceiving of people as subhuman creatures rather than as human beings. Viki and others (2006) conducted a study looking at the possibility of people assigning stimulus words, specifically animalistic and humanistic descriptors, differently between individuals in their ingroups and outgroups. They found that people seemed to associate humanness more with individuals within their ingroup than with individuals belonging to their outgroup. When a person violates a belief that we hold, we can feel the need to dehumanize them, to separate them from ourselves. People may then justify their behavior by modifying existing or adding new cognitive elements of their behavior to keep it consistent (Panagiotou & Kadianaki, 2017). For example, while we can justify the eating of animals quite easily, we become rather squeamish about the idea of eating another human. The present study will examine cognitive dissonance as a predictor of dehumanization of ones’ ingroup and outgroup. Specifically, we will be using cannibalism as our dehumanization factor.

Murray State's Digital Commons (Murray State University)
Murray State University (US)
Openalex Percentile: Top 5%
Social and Intergroup Psychology
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.

Laika access coming soon
They say you are what you eat: Cognitive dissonance as a predictor of dehumanization — Jasmine Shafer · Murray State's Digital Commons (Murray State University) (2026) | TGRS Research Map | TGRS