Difficulty: Intermediate | Prerequisites: Familiarity with Parts 1 to 3 of the Social Psychology study guide, particularly intergroup relations, emotion, and close relationships.
This set of terms rounds out the final exam material for NYU's Social Psychology course. It pulls together threads from several earlier units: how we perceive and categorise other people (dehumanisation, face perception, thin-slice judgements), how emotions are expressed and read across cultures, how close relationships shape the self, and how moral content spreads online. If you are comfortable with the basics of intergroup bias, impression formation, and relationship theories from Parts 1 to 3, these terms will slot in naturally. If not, revisit those sections first.
Part 4 covers additional exam terms spanning dehumanisation (infrahumanisation and blatant), honour-based aggression, universal emotion recognition, holistic face processing, three relationship effects (Michelangelo, Pygmalion, self-expansion), thin-slice judgements, and the MAD model of moral contagion on social media. These are discrete concepts rather than a single narrative, so learn each on its own terms and watch for how examiners contrast them (especially Michelangelo vs. Pygmalion).
Infrahumanisation
A subtle form of dehumanisation in which people attribute complex, uniquely human emotions (such as guilt, hope, or contempt) to ingroup members more readily than to outgroup members. It operates implicitly and contributes to intergroup conflict.
In simple terms, this means people unconsciously see their own group as "more human" than outsiders, not by denying outgroup members all feeling, but by reserving the deeper, more nuanced emotions for the ingroup.
Blatant dehumanisation
An explicit denial of full humanity to an outgroup, often measured by asking participants to rate groups on an "ascent of man" scale (animalistic comparisons). It increases after intergroup conflict and predicts support for hostile policies and behaviours.
Think of it as the loud, overt version of dehumanisation: openly likening another group to animals or rating them as less evolved.
Honour-restorative aggression
Aggression motivated by a perceived insult or act of disrespect, particularly prevalent in cultures of honour. The behaviour is aimed at restoring personal or group reputation rather than achieving a material goal.
In simple terms, this is aggression that says "you disrespected me, so I have to respond" rather than aggression driven by resources or self-defence.
Universal emotion recognition
The hypothesis, originating with Ekman et al. (1969), that all humans express and recognise six basic emotions (happiness, surprise, fear, disgust, anger, sadness) through similar facial expressions, regardless of culture.
Think of it as the claim that a smile or a scowl means roughly the same thing whether you are in Tokyo or Tucson.
Gestalt perception of faces
The idea that faces are processed as whole configurations rather than as a collection of individual features. Facial symmetry and the consistency of features play roles in how quickly and accurately we form impressions.
In simple terms, your brain reads a face the way you read a word: as one unit, not letter by letter.
Michelangelo effect
A phenomenon in close relationships where partners help "sculpt" each other towards their respective ideal selves through support, encouragement, and affirmation. The name alludes to Michelangelo releasing a figure from a block of marble.
Think of it as your partner helping you become the person you already want to be.
Pygmalion effect (in relationships)
Occurs when one partner attempts to mould the other into a version of their own ideal, rather than supporting the partner's self-defined goals. It contrasts directly with the Michelangelo effect.
In simple terms, this is "I want you to become my vision of the perfect partner" rather than "I want to help you become your vision of yourself."
Self-expansion
A positive change in self-concept that arises from close relationships, where individuals grow by incorporating aspects of their partner (interests, perspectives, resources) into their own identity.
Think of it as the reason people in new relationships suddenly develop an interest in their partner's hobbies.
Thin-slice judgements
Accurate or consensus-based impressions of others formed from very brief exposures (sometimes just seconds). Used extensively in person perception research to study first impressions.
In simple terms, these are snap judgements that turn out to be surprisingly consistent across observers.
MAD model (Brady et al., 2020)
A theory of moral contagion on social media. Moral-emotional content (outrage, group threats) spreads virally through three mechanisms: Motivation (people are driven to share morally charged content), Attention (such content captures more attention in feeds), and Design (platform algorithms amplify emotionally engaging posts).
Think of it as an explanation for why outrage travels faster than nuance online: motivation, attention, and design all push in the same direction.
Infrahumanisation and blatant dehumanisation sit on a spectrum. Infrahumanisation is implicit and concerns the attribution of secondary (uniquely human) emotions; blatant dehumanisation is explicit and uses animalistic comparisons.
Both predict hostile intergroup attitudes, but blatant dehumanisation is a stronger predictor of support for aggressive policies.
Honour-restorative aggression is culturally situated. In cultures of honour (parts of the American South, many Mediterranean and Middle Eastern societies), reputation is a critical social resource, and perceived disrespect triggers a specific aggressive response aimed at restoration rather than material gain.
Ekman's six basic emotions (happiness, surprise, fear, disgust, anger, sadness) form the backbone of the universal emotion recognition hypothesis. Cross-cultural studies show above-chance recognition of these expressions, though accuracy varies and critics note methodological limitations (forced-choice paradigms, posed expressions).
Gestalt perception of faces means we process faces holistically. The classic demonstration: inverting a face disrupts recognition far more than inverting other objects, because inversion breaks the configural processing we rely on.
Thin-slice judgements demonstrate that brief exposures (as short as a few seconds of video) can yield impressions that converge with longer acquaintance. This is relevant to research on first impressions, hiring, and teaching evaluations.
The Michelangelo effect is the healthy version: Partner A supports Partner B's own ideal self. The Pygmalion effect is the problematic version: Partner A tries to reshape Partner B according to Partner A's ideal. Exam questions often ask you to distinguish these two.
Self-expansion theory (Aron & Aron) holds that people seek relationships partly to grow their own self-concept. Novel, exciting activities with a partner fuel self-expansion; routine and boredom reduce it.
The MAD model (Brady et al., 2020) explains why moral-emotional content goes viral. "M" is for motivation (people share content that signals group membership), "A" is for attention (moral-emotional content is more attention-grabbing in a noisy feed), and "D" is for design (algorithms reward engagement, and outrage is engaging).
The model integrates individual psychology with platform architecture, which makes it a useful framework for exam essays on social media effects.
Students often confuse infrahumanisation with blatant dehumanisation. Infrahumanisation is subtle and concerns secondary emotions specifically; blatant dehumanisation is overt and uses animalistic scales. They are related but distinct.
The Michelangelo effect and the Pygmalion effect are frequently mixed up. The key distinction: Michelangelo supports the partner's own ideal self; Pygmalion imposes the other partner's ideal. If you remember only one thing, remember whose ideal is being pursued.
Universal emotion recognition does not mean all emotional expression is identical across cultures. It means basic recognition is above chance cross-culturally. Display rules (cultural norms about when and how to show emotion) still vary substantially.
Thin-slice judgements are not the same as stereotyping. Thin slices involve rapid but often accurate assessments based on behavioural cues, not group membership.
Distinguish infrahumanisation from blatant dehumanisation: know the mechanism (secondary emotions vs. animalistic scales) and the level of awareness (implicit vs. explicit).
Be ready to compare the Michelangelo effect and the Pygmalion effect in a short-answer or essay format. The contrast is a classic exam question.
Know the six basic emotions and the researcher (Ekman). Expect a question on criticisms of the universality thesis (display rules, forced-choice methodology).
The MAD model is relatively recent (2020). Exam questions may ask you to apply it to a real-world example of viral moral outrage, so practise mapping M, A, and D onto a concrete scenario.
Self-expansion theory often appears in questions about relationship satisfaction and novelty. Be able to explain why exciting shared activities strengthen bonds.
True or false: Infrahumanisation involves explicitly comparing outgroups to animals. Answer: False. That describes blatant dehumanisation. Infrahumanisation is implicit and concerns secondary emotions.
Fill in the blank: The ______ effect describes partners supporting each other's ideal selves, while the ______ effect describes one partner imposing their own ideal on the other. Answer: Michelangelo; Pygmalion.
True or false: Thin-slice judgements are typically inaccurate because they are too brief. Answer: False. Research shows thin-slice judgements are often surprisingly accurate and consistent across observers.
What does MAD stand for in Brady et al.'s model? Answer: Motivation, Attention, Design.
True or false: Gestalt perception of faces means we process each facial feature independently before combining them. Answer: False. Gestalt perception means we process faces as whole configurations, not feature by feature.
Q: Explain the difference between infrahumanisation and blatant dehumanisation, giving one example of how each might be measured.
A: Infrahumanisation is a subtle, implicit bias where people attribute uniquely human (secondary) emotions like guilt or nostalgia to ingroup members more than outgroup members. It is typically measured by asking participants to assign primary vs. secondary emotions to different groups. Blatant dehumanisation is an explicit denial of humanity, often measured using the "ascent of man" scale where participants rate groups on a perceived evolutionary continuum. The key difference is awareness: infrahumanisation operates below conscious awareness, while blatant dehumanisation is overt.
Q: A couple, Alex and Jordan, are in a relationship. Alex encourages Jordan to pursue Jordan's long-held ambition to become a painter, even though Alex personally finds painting boring. Which relationship effect does this illustrate, and why?
A: This illustrates the Michelangelo effect. Alex is supporting Jordan's own ideal self (becoming a painter) rather than imposing Alex's preferences. The critical feature is that the ideal being pursued belongs to Jordan, not Alex. If Alex were instead pushing Jordan to become an accountant because Alex values financial security, that would be closer to the Pygmalion effect.
Q: What are the three components of the MAD model, and how do they interact to spread moral-emotional content on social media?
A: M (Motivation) refers to people's psychological drive to share morally charged content, often to signal group identity or moral standing. A (Attention) refers to the fact that moral-emotional content captures more attention in a crowded social media feed. D (Design) refers to platform features and algorithms that amplify high-engagement content. The three components reinforce one another: motivated sharing produces engagement signals, attention-grabbing content receives algorithmic boosts, and design features reward the content that people are already motivated to share.
Q: How does self-expansion theory explain why novel activities with a partner increase relationship satisfaction?
A: Self-expansion theory (Aron and Aron) proposes that people are motivated to grow their self-concept by incorporating aspects of close others. Novel, exciting activities provide opportunities for partners to learn new things about each other, acquire new perspectives, and experience a sense of growth. This expansion of the self is inherently rewarding and becomes associated with the relationship, increasing satisfaction. When activities become routine, the expansion slows, and satisfaction may decline.
Q: A researcher shows participants photographs of faces for just five seconds, then asks them to rate the person's competence. The ratings show strong agreement across participants. What concept from person perception research does this illustrate?
A: This illustrates thin-slice judgements, which are accurate or consensus-based impressions formed from brief exposures to others. The strong inter-rater agreement is a hallmark of thin-slice research and suggests that even very brief exposures carry meaningful social information.
Infrahumanisation and blatant dehumanisation connect to earlier material on prejudice, stereotyping, and intergroup conflict (social identity theory, realistic conflict theory). If the exam asks about dehumanisation, expect to link it back to ingroup/outgroup dynamics from earlier units.
The Michelangelo effect, Pygmalion effect, and self-expansion all build on attachment theory and interdependence theory covered in the relationships unit. They give you specific mechanisms for how relationships shape identity, which is a step beyond the general frameworks.
The MAD model connects to persuasion and attitude change (earlier units on the elaboration likelihood model and heuristic processing), because moral-emotional content often bypasses careful deliberation and spreads through peripheral or heuristic routes.
Infrahumanisation, infrahumanization, subtle dehumanisation, secondary emotions bias, blatant dehumanisation, animalistic dehumanisation, ascent of man scale, honour culture, culture of honor, honour-restorative aggression, reputation aggression, Ekman basic emotions, six basic emotions, universal facial expressions, display rules, gestalt face perception, holistic face processing, configural processing, face inversion effect, Michelangelo effect, Pygmalion effect in relationships, ideal self, partner sculpting, self-expansion theory, Aron and Aron, inclusion of other in self, thin slicing, thin-slice judgements, snap judgements, first impressions, person perception, MAD model, moral contagion, Brady 2020, moral-emotional content, social media outrage, algorithmic amplification, viral moral content, NYU social psychology, social psych final exam.