Perspective Getting vs Taking Dehumanization

ISEF Category: Behavioral and Social Sciences

Subcategory: Social Psychology  ·  Difficulty: Intermediate  ·  Setup: School Lab  ·  Time: 1 to 2 Months

The Hook

A short story can change how you see another group. So can trying to imagine their life. This project asks which one works better. You will compare a real first-person voice with a mental guess and measure the shift in dehumanization.

What Is It?

Perspective taking means you imagine what someone else feels or thinks. Perspective getting means you read or hear the person's own first-person account. Both can change how you judge an out-group, but they work in different ways. One asks you to build a mental model. The other gives you a direct voice.

Dehumanization means seeing a group as less fully human, often by rating them as less warm, less thoughtful, or more animal-like. In this project, you test whether a real statement from an out-group member reduces those scores more than an imagined point of view. Think of it like comparing a guess from the outside with a message from inside the experience.

Why This Is a Good Topic

This is a strong science fair topic because you can test it with a clear comparison, simple survey measures, and a preregistered plan. It connects to real problems like prejudice, stereotyping, and how people talk across group lines. You can learn how to design a fair experiment, score responses, and compare two social-psychology interventions without needing a professional lab.

Research Questions

• How does perspective getting versus perspective taking change dehumanization scores immediately after the activity? ?
• What is the effect of perspective getting versus perspective taking on warmth and competence ratings separately? ?
• Does the effect of the two interventions differ when the out-group is a school-based group versus a more distant social group? ?
• To what extent does prior contact with the out-group predict a bigger change after either intervention? ?
• Which condition produces a stronger change in empathy ratings after the task? ?
• How does the effect of the two interventions change after a short delayed follow-up survey? ?

Basic Materials

• Laptop or Chromebook for the survey and data entry.
• Google Forms or printed survey packets for collecting responses.
• A short first-person statement for the perspective-getting condition.
• A matched perspective-taking prompt for the imagining condition.
• Random assignment slips or a randomizer app.
• Spreadsheet software for scoring and basic charts.
• Secure folder or envelope for de-identified responses.

Advanced Materials

• Qualtrics survey license for cleaner branching and random assignment.
• University participant pool access for a larger and more varied sample.
• R or JASP for analysis, effect sizes, and model checks.
• Open Science Framework project page for preregistration and materials storage.
• Audio headset or quiet testing room if you compare text and audio versions.
• Codebook with participant IDs, condition labels, and scoring rules.

Software & Tools

• Google Forms: Collects anonymous survey responses and keeps the workflow simple.
• Google Sheets: Cleans data, checks scores, and makes quick charts.
• jamovi: Runs t tests, ANOVA, and effect size checks without coding.
• RStudio: Lets you analyze data in R and build publication-style graphs.
• Open Science Framework: Stores your preregistration, materials, and analysis plan.

Experiment Steps

1. Define the exact out-group and dehumanization measure you will use.
2. Match the perspective-getting text and the perspective-taking prompt so they differ in one main idea, not in length or tone.
3. Decide how you will randomize participants and keep the conditions comparable.
4. Build your scoring plan before collecting data, including the main comparison and any covariates.
5. Write a preregistration that locks your hypothesis, exclusions, and analysis choices.
6. Pilot the survey with a few students to catch confusing wording or a weak manipulation.

Common Pitfalls

• Using a perspective-taking prompt that feels more emotional than the perspective-getting text, which confounds the intervention with intensity.
• Measuring dehumanization with only one vague item, which makes the score too noisy to compare conditions.
• Letting participants guess the study goal, which can shift their answers toward what they think you want.
• Mixing up the out-group target across sessions, which breaks comparability between responses.
• Skipping a manipulation check, which leaves you unsure whether students actually read the first-person statement or imagined the prompt.

What Makes This Competitive

A strong version of this project uses a clean preregistration, a sharp manipulation check, and a dehumanization scale with clear scoring rules. It gets better if you compare the two conditions across more than one out-group or test whether the effect survives after a delay. Strong analysis, like checking whether prior contact changes the size of the effect, can turn a simple class project into a deeper study of social judgment.

Project Variations

• Test the same comparison with a different out-group, such as another grade level or school club, to see whether the effect generalizes.
• Compare written perspective getting with an audio recording of the same first-person account to see whether voice changes the response.
• Add a delayed follow-up survey to see whether any drop in dehumanization lasts after the first session.

Learn More

• PubMed: Search review articles on perspective taking, empathy, dehumanization, and intergroup bias.
• NIH Office of Behavioral and Social Sciences Research: Find plain-language material on behavioral study design and measures.
• OpenStax Psychology 2e: Read the social psychology chapters for core terms and experiment basics.
• MIT OpenCourseWare: Search introductory psychology course materials for free lecture notes and readings.
• Open Science Framework: Find preregistration templates and organize your study materials.
• Frontiers in Psychology: Search open-access articles on perspective taking and intergroup relations.