The language of devaluation : how linguistic markers communicate and perpetuate social inequities

Systemic social inequities can be formed and maintained through explicitly degrading language such as hate speech and slurs but how might humans accomplish this implicitly? Previous research has pointed to language as a potential vehicle for implicit bias, but it is not yet known what specific set of linguistic markers might underlie devaluing language regardless of context. In two studies using large, real-world data, the current project explored the ways that grammatical, structural and contextual features of language communicate the relative worth of social groups. Using varied methods in natural language processing including dictionary-based approaches, topic modeling, named entity recognition, and parts of speech tagger, the current work gives promising candidates for devaluing language. In Study 1, text analyses were conducted on 18,264 missing persons reports from a large national database. Results indicated that non-White missing persons reports contained fewer words, less detail, less affect and were more likely to feature active (i.e., implying personal fault) rather than passive language. Similarly, non-White missing persons reports were more likely to feature words like “runaway” rather than “disappeared” or “missing,” again implying that the victim played an active role in their disappearance. Black missing persons reports in particular also feature less personal pronoun use. In Study 2, 199,941 tweets discussing 30 mass shootings in the US were analyzed to investigate if the language candidates found in Study 1 could be replicated in a different context. Specifically, the study examined the ways that language may be differentially impacted depending on the race of the victims under discussion. Effects for word count, detail and passivity were replicated while contrary findings in affect and personal pronoun use point to the potential impact of context and individual differences (e.g., political affiliation) in buffering or augmenting devaluing language. The implications for systemic disparities in multiple domains are discussed using language as a lens.Psycholog