Abstract
The present studies aim to expand research on dehumanization in the work domain by exploring the biologization – an unexplored form of dehumanization that involves the perception of others as infected and contagious – of physically tainted workers. By integrating the literature on biologization with that of disgust and physically dirty work, we expected that the biologization of workers would be explained by their dirty work environment and by increased feelings of disgust towards them. In Study 1, we showed that focusing on a dirty work environment (vs. on the person performing the work) increased feelings of disgust towards workers and, in turn, their biologization. Coherently, in Study 2, we found that a physically tainted occupation (vs. baseline condition) increased participants’ feelings of disgust and biological dehumanization towards the worker. In contrast, a non-physically tainted occupation (vs. baseline condition) had no effects on disgust and biologization. The theoretical and practical implications are considered.
Highlights
The present studies aim to expand research on dehumanization in the work domain by exploring the biologization – an unexplored form of dehumanization that involves the perception of others as infected and contagious – of physically tainted workers
As we will discuss below, we expected that the relationship between the dirty work environments and the biologization of workers would be explained by increased feelings of disgust towards them
As in the previous study, to provide evidence that the relationship among a dirty work environment, feelings of disgust and biologization is a peculiar process of this specific form of dehumanization, we considered in this study animalization and objectification
Summary
The present studies aim to expand research on dehumanization in the work domain by exploring the biologization – an unexplored form of dehumanization that involves the perception of others as infected and contagious – of physically tainted workers. Drawing from the theoretical concept of ‘dirty work’ (Hughes, 1951, 1958), the present research aims to show that metaphors conveying biologization may be used within the work domain and shape laypeople’s perceptions of certain occupational groups. The sociologist Hughes introduced the concept of ‘dirty work’ to refer to occupations that are perceived as disgusting and immoral In this respect, Ashforth and Kreiner (1999) argued that these activities are connected with three different types of taint: social, moral and physical. A large amount of social psychological literature (see, e.g., Buckels & Trapnell, 2013; Hodson & Costello, 2007) has shown that disgust is a rel-
Sign-in/Register to view highlights & summary Sign-in/Register to access full text options 
Talk to us
Join us for a 30 min session where you can share your feedback and ask us any queries you have
Schedule a callDisclaimer: All third-party content on this website/platform is and will remain the property of their respective owners and is provided on "as is" basis without any warranties, express or implied. Use of third-party content does not indicate any affiliation, sponsorship with or endorsement by them. Any references to third-party content is to identify the corresponding services and shall be considered fair use under The CopyrightLaw.
