Infrahumanization and Mental Travel: Effects of Temporal Orientation on Perceived Humanness
Bibliographic record
Abstract
According to the self-centric future hypothesis, mental simulations of future events, future-oriented mental time-travel may incorporate mental representations of the self. This experiment tests the self-centric future hypothesis in the context of infrahumanization. Mental simulations with current self-knowledge are constructed when people think of the future, which may influence the level of humanness they would attribute to strangers. It was predicted that participants in a future-oriented mindset, given their self-centric mental representation of the future, would be less likely than participants in a past-oriented mindset to infrahumanize strangers. There was not a significant direct effect of temporal focus on perceived humanness found. Effects of temporal focus on level of rated humanness were moderated by valence of emotional experiences attributed to others, such that the hypothesis was supported for negatively valenced emotional experiences only. Perceived humanness ratings were significantly higher in the future-oriented than in the past-oriented condition for negatively valenced indicators.
Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.
How this classification was reachedexpand
Full frame distilled prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
Machine scores (provisional)
The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.
Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one teacher head, not a consensus.
How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".