System justification moderates the relation between hostile (but not benevolent) sexism in the workplace and state anxiety: An experimental study

System-justifying beliefs buffer against psychological distress during the COVID-19 pandemic

The coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) pandemic has had a detrimental effect on people's mental health. Drawing on the palliative function of ideologies, we suggest that people rely on system-justifying beliefs to mitigate psychological distress during the pandemic. We conducted three studies with correlational and experimental designs to examine whether and how system-justifying beliefs can buffer against psychological distress during COVID-19, and whether this effect may vary across social classes. The results indicated that (a) system-justifying beliefs alleviated psychological distress during the pandemic, (b) personal control mediated this relationship and (c) this effect was consistent across all social classes. This study provides robust evidence for the palliative function of system-justifying beliefs during a massive global health crisis (i.e. COVID-19).

System justification theory as a foundation for understanding relations among toxic health care workplaces, bullying, and psychological safety

BACKGROUND

Toxic work environments and bullying are rampant in health care organizations. The Joint Commission asserted that bullying is a threat to patient safety, and furthermore, it implied that bullying affects clinician psychological safety. However, after decades of trying to reduce bullying, it persists.

PURPOSE

The purpose of this study was to determine if system justification (SJ) theory can help explain the persistence of bullying in health care organizations. SJ theory posits that people are motivated to justify the systems with which they are embedded, even if those systems are dysfunctional or unfair.

METHOD

A cross-sectional survey of health care workers ( n = 302) was used to test a moderated mediation model to examine relations between instrumental work climate perceptions and psychological safety, as mediated by SJ and moderated by experiences of workplace bullying.

RESULTS

Analysis revealed that SJ fully mediated negative relations between instrumental climate and psychological safety; because of SJ the instrumental climate no longer had a direct negative association with psychological safety. Furthermore, bullying was found to play a moderating role in the instrumental climate-SJ relationship.

CONCLUSION

This study found some support for the role of SJ in perpetuating instrumental workplaces and workplace bullying in health care.

PRACTICE IMPLICATIONS

Some scholars have proposed that a focus on disrupting workplace contexts that trigger SJ in workers could help break patterns of behavior that enable toxic work environments and bullying to persist.

Benevolent and hostile sexism in a shifting global context

The theory of and research on ambivalent sexism - which encompasses both attitudes that are overtly negative (hostile sexism) and those that seem subjectively positive but are actually harmful (benevolent sexism) - have made substantial contributions to understanding how sexism operates and the consequences it has for women. It is now clear that sexism takes different forms, some of which can be disguised as protection and flattery. However, all forms of sexism have negative effects on how women are perceived and treated by others as well as on women themselves. Some of these findings have implications for understanding other social inequalities, such as ableism, ageism, racism and classism. In this Review, we summarize what is known about the predictors of ambivalent sexism and its effects. Although we focus on women, we also consider some effects on men, in particular those that indirectly influence women. Throughout the Review we point to societal shifts that are likely to influence how sexism is manifested, experienced and understood. We conclude by discussing the broader implications of these changes and specifying areas of enquiry that need to be addressed to continue making progress in understanding the mechanisms that underlie social inequalities.

Initial Validation of the Ambivalent Sexism Inventory in a Military Setting

The military is a work environment in which the underrepresentation of women and the presence of gender prejudices continue to exist. The present study validated the Ambivalent Sexism Inventory (ASI) for the Croatian military population. To determine the ASI scale’s basic metric characteristics, data were collected from a sample of 895 active-duty military personnel (445 men and 450 women). The study results determined satisfactory measurement characteristics for the ASI scale and confirmed the ambivalent sexism construct with its basic dimensions. Sexism in the military environment was found to a moderately high degree, and gender differences were observed. Three types of sexism endorsement were identified in both subsamples (egalitarian, moderate egalitarian and traditional for women, and moderate egalitarian, traditional and hostile for men), with additional differences detected in their socio–demographic and professional characteristics. The findings support the apparent exposure of women to sexism in the military environment, and suggest the need to raise awareness of the negative impact of gender prejudice on gender relations in the military.

Do higher-class individuals feel more entitled? The role of system-justifying belief

Sense of entitlement can be defined as a pervasive sense that one deserves more and is entitled to more than others. Two studies examined the relationship between social class and sense of entitlement and how this relationship is moderated by system-justifying belief (SJB) in China. In Study 1, we conducted a survey among adults (N = 669) with results showing that social class was positively correlated with sense of entitlement for those endorsing SJB, but negatively correlated with sense of entitlement for those opposing SJB. In Study 2, we conducted an experiment among undergraduates (N = 128) with both social class and SJB being primed and the results replicated the pattern: the positive effect of primed higher social class on pay entitlement existed only for those primed with high SJB, and was dampened for those primed with low SJB. Therefore, higher-class individuals do not necessarily feel more entitled, and SJB may play an important role in shaping their sense of entitlement.