1
|
Bo Y, Lihua Z. The Influence of Group Favoritism on Moral Judgment -- Evidence From Event-Related Potential. Psychol Rep 2024:332941241227397. [PMID: 38212972 DOI: 10.1177/00332941241227397] [Citation(s) in RCA: 0] [Impact Index Per Article: 0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Indexed: 01/13/2024]
Abstract
When judging the morality of an action, individuals may exhibit a bias stemming from group favoritism. It leads to the expression of different moral evaluations of the same behaviors performed by different social groups. The current study used event-related potentials (ERPs) to investigate the influence of in-group favoritism (in-group vs. homogeneous out-group) and out-group favoritism (in-group vs. high-quality out-group) on moral judgments. Two experiments were conducted, showing a higher moral score of the in-group compared to the homogeneous out-group by participants. ERP data indicated that in-group stimulation triggered larger P2 amplitudes than homogeneous out-group. Additionally, a larger N400-like amplitude, localized to the right hemisphere, was observed during the evaluation of the homogeneous out-group. Significantly, when comparing the in-group to the high-quality out-group, there was no discernible difference in moral scores or ERP amplitudes. Overall, the results indicate that in-group favoritism can affect moral judgments, especially when assessing homogeneous out-groups, but it can be reduced by the characteristics of groups.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Yang Bo
- College of psychology, Liaoning Normal University, Dalian, China
| | - Zhang Lihua
- College of psychology, Liaoning Normal University, Dalian, China
| |
Collapse
|
2
|
Wong RMM, Owuamalam CK, Stewart-Williams S. Right-leaning egalitarians are just as susceptible to social justice-induced product patronage! Evidence from the US and Malaysia. Acta Psychol (Amst) 2023; 237:103935. [PMID: 37267880 DOI: 10.1016/j.actpsy.2023.103935] [Citation(s) in RCA: 0] [Impact Index Per Article: 0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 06/07/2022] [Revised: 05/02/2023] [Accepted: 05/05/2023] [Indexed: 06/04/2023] Open
Abstract
We investigated the impact of egalitarianism on consumers' inclination to support fair-trade products and examined whether this effect was observed among individuals with different political affiliations. In four experiments featuring a fictional chocolate brand presented in either a social-justice (fair trade) or quality-focused (control) manner, we examined the product purchase intentions of both left- and right-leaning consumers in the United States and Malaysia (Studies 1a, N = 200; 1b, N = 269; & 2, N = 410). Results revealed that participants expressed a greater willingness to support the product when it was framed as contributing to a social justice cause, but this effect was limited to left- and right-leaning consumers who strongly endorsed egalitarian principles. Study 3 (N = 354) employed a mediated-moderation approach and confirmed that an elevated sensitivity to injustice was the underlying mechanism driving increased intentions to support the product among egalitarians exposed to social justice framing. These results demonstrate that right-leaning consumers can be influenced by social justice framing when their commitment to equity is strong.
Collapse
|
3
|
Rubin M, Kevin Owuamalam C, Spears R, Caricati L. A social identity model of system attitudes (SIMSA): Multiple explanations of system justification by the disadvantaged that do not depend on a separate system justification motive. EUROPEAN REVIEW OF SOCIAL PSYCHOLOGY 2023. [DOI: 10.1080/10463283.2022.2046422] [Citation(s) in RCA: 2] [Impact Index Per Article: 2.0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Indexed: 03/12/2023]
Affiliation(s)
- Mark Rubin
- Durham University and the University of Newcastle, Australia
| | | | | | | |
Collapse
|
4
|
Rubin M, Owuamalam CK, Spears R, Caricati L. Social identity explanations of system justification: Misconceptions, criticisms, and clarifications. EUROPEAN REVIEW OF SOCIAL PSYCHOLOGY 2023. [DOI: 10.1080/10463283.2023.2184578] [Citation(s) in RCA: 0] [Impact Index Per Article: 0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Indexed: 03/17/2023]
Affiliation(s)
- Mark Rubin
- Department of Psychology, Durham University, Durham, UK
| | | | - Russell Spears
- Faculty of Behavioural and Social Science, University of Groningen, Groningen, The Netherlands
| | - Luca Caricati
- Dipartimento di Discipline Umanistiche, Socali e delle Impresse Culturali, Università di Parma, Parma, Italy
| |
Collapse
|
5
|
Owuamalam CK, Tan CM, Caricati L, Rubin M, Spears R. Cultural group norms for harmony explain the puzzling negative association between objective status and system justification in Asia. EUROPEAN JOURNAL OF SOCIAL PSYCHOLOGY 2022. [DOI: 10.1002/ejsp.2901] [Citation(s) in RCA: 0] [Impact Index Per Article: 0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Indexed: 11/24/2022]
Affiliation(s)
| | - Chee Meng Tan
- Nottingham Business School University of Nottingham Malaysia Semenyih Selangor Malaysia
| | - Luca Caricati
- Department of Humanities Social Sciences and Cultural Industries, University of Parma Italy
| | - Mark Rubin
- Department of Psychology Durham University Durham UK
| | - Russell Spears
- Department of Social Psychology University of Groningen Netherlands
| |
Collapse
|
6
|
Sotola LK, Credé M. On the predicted replicability of two decades of experimental research on system justification: A Z‐curve analysis. EUROPEAN JOURNAL OF SOCIAL PSYCHOLOGY 2022. [DOI: 10.1002/ejsp.2858] [Citation(s) in RCA: 0] [Impact Index Per Article: 0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Indexed: 11/12/2022]
Affiliation(s)
- Lukas K. Sotola
- Department of Psychology Iowa State University Ames Iowa USA
| | - Marcus Credé
- Department of Psychology Iowa State University Ames Iowa USA
| |
Collapse
|
7
|
Interplay between different forms of power and meritocratic considerations shapes fairness perceptions. Sci Rep 2022; 12:11428. [PMID: 35794178 PMCID: PMC9259606 DOI: 10.1038/s41598-022-15613-9] [Citation(s) in RCA: 1] [Impact Index Per Article: 0.5] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [Track Full Text] [Download PDF] [Figures] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 03/20/2022] [Accepted: 06/27/2022] [Indexed: 02/04/2023] Open
Abstract
Power imbalance often leads to unequal allocations. However, it remains largely unknown how different forms of power and meritocratic considerations interact to shape fairness perceptions. Using modified Ultimatum Games, we examined how two power forms-decision power and availability of attractive outside option-affect bargaining behavior and fairness perceptions, and how meritocratic considerations are incorporated into the fairness perceptions of powerful and powerless individuals. We identified an asymmetric power effect: having increased decision power or attractive outside options independently increased self-advantageous allocations and self-serving fairness perceptions, whereas the combined lack of both power forms led to self-disadvantageous allocations but had no influence on fairness perceptions. The power effect on fairness perceptions became symmetric when power was obtained through a meritocratic process (procedural justice). In contrast, relative contributions to resource production (distributive justice) did not moderate power effects. We provide causal evidence that the powerful, but not the powerless, strive to minimize cognitive dissonance between behavior and fairness perceptions by interpreting fairness in self-serving ways. This study contributes novel insights into the interplay between different power forms, the asymmetry of power effects, the moderating role of procedural justice, and the mediating role of behavior in the power-driven adjustment of fairness perceptions.
Collapse
|
8
|
Owuamalam CK, Rubin M, Spears R. Brexit and Trump: Which Theory of Social Stasis and Social Change Copes Best With the New Populism? Front Psychol 2022; 13:797139. [PMID: 35719587 PMCID: PMC9204266 DOI: 10.3389/fpsyg.2022.797139] [Citation(s) in RCA: 1] [Impact Index Per Article: 0.5] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [Track Full Text] [Download PDF] [Figures] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 10/18/2021] [Accepted: 04/26/2022] [Indexed: 11/13/2022] Open
Abstract
Why do voters seek to change the political landscape or to retain it? System justification theory (SJT) proposes that a separate system motive to preserve the existing order drives support for the status-quo, and that this motivation operates independently from personal and collective interests. But how does this explanation apply to recent populist shifts in the political order such as Brexit and the emergence of Donald Trump? While the system motive may seem useful in understanding why the usual progressives (Remain/Clinton voters) may want to stick with an established order, it seems insufficient to explain why the more conservative voters (Brexit/Trump voters) would want to upend the establishment. Thus, we compared SJT’s system motive explanation for the system attitudes of voters on both sides of the political divide to an alternative explanation drawn from the newer social identity model of system attitudes (SIMSA). According to SIMSA, the difficulty in explaining the system attitudes of Brexit/Trump and Remain/Clinton voters from SJT’s system motive standpoint can be resolved by focusing instead on the collective interests that both camps seek to satisfy with their votes. We examined these explanations in two studies conducted soon after Brexit (N = 313) and Trump’s election (N = 289) in 2016, with results providing more support for SIMSA than for SJT.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Chuma Kevin Owuamalam
- Division of Organizational and Applied Psychology, University of Nottingham Malaysia, Semenyih, Malaysia
| | - Mark Rubin
- Department of Psychology, Durham University, Durham, United Kingdom
| | - Russell Spears
- Department of Social Psychology, University of Groningen, Groningen, Netherlands
| |
Collapse
|
9
|
Szabó ZP, Lönnqvist JE. Who's in power matters: System justification and system derogation in Hungary between 2002 and 2018. INTERNATIONAL JOURNAL OF PSYCHOLOGY 2021; 56:679-687. [PMID: 33588518 DOI: 10.1002/ijop.12747] [Citation(s) in RCA: 2] [Impact Index Per Article: 0.7] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 05/22/2020] [Accepted: 01/26/2021] [Indexed: 12/19/2022]
Abstract
The present study employed European Social Survey (ESS) data collected between 2002 and 2018 to investigate system justification versus derogation in Hungary. In all nine ESS rounds, system derogation was stronger than system justification. System justification was consistently at its strongest among those who had voted for the ruling party, be it left-wing MSZP (until 2008) or right-wing Fidesz (2010 onward). This pattern can be explained by ego and group justification motives alone, with no need to posit an autonomous system justification motive. Voters of Jobbik, who were as right-wing as Fidesz voters, but whose party was not in power, did not believe the system to be any more just than did left-wing voters. Much of the research supporting system justification theory has been conducted in stable Western democracies. Our results highlight the need for research in more politically volatile contexts.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Zsolt Péter Szabó
- Department of Ergonomics and Psychology, Budapest University of Technology and Economics, Budapest, Hungary
| | - Jan-Erik Lönnqvist
- Swedish School of Social Science, University of Helsinki, Helsinki, Finland
| |
Collapse
|
10
|
Revisiting the status-legitimacy hypothesis: Concepts, boundary conditions, and psychological mechanisms. JOURNAL OF PACIFIC RIM PSYCHOLOGY 2021. [DOI: 10.1017/prp.2019.15] [Citation(s) in RCA: 6] [Impact Index Per Article: 2.0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Indexed: 11/07/2022] Open
Abstract
The status-legitimacy hypothesis proposes that low-status groups are more inclined to justify the status quo as fair and legitimate than high-status groups. Although there are some research evidences for this hypothesis, many studies have found the opposite result, that disadvantaged groups are more dissatisfied with the social system. To resolve this disagreement, this article integrates relevant ideas and empirical research in three aspects. First, the conceptual approach emphasises that the controversy is a result of different operational definitions of social status and system justification in previous studies. The second approach, focusing on moderator variables, proposes that the disputes over past studies are probably due to moderator variables, which can influence the relationship between status and system justification. The third approach, based on psychological mechanisms, proposes that system justification theory cannot completely explain the psychological underpinnings of status differences in system justification, and in order to clarify this, it is necessary to explore other psychological processes. Future studies should continue to examine the mediation mechanisms and boundary conditions of the status-legitimacy hypothesis and may try to establish a nonlinear hypothesis. Moreover, researchers should also pay attention to the application of experimental methods and big-data methods.
Collapse
|
11
|
Brandt MJ, Kuppens T, Spears R, Andrighetto L, Autin F, Babincak P, Badea C, Bae J, Batruch A, Becker JC, Bocian K, Bodroža B, Bourguignon D, Bukowski M, Butera F, Butler SE, Chryssochoou X, Conway P, Crawford JT, Croizet J, de Lemus S, Degner J, Dragon P, Durante F, Easterbrook MJ, Essien I, Forgas JP, González R, Graf S, Halama P, Han G, Hong RY, Houdek P, Igou ER, Inbar Y, Jetten J, Jimenez Leal W, Jiménez‐Moya G, Karunagharan JK, Kende A, Korzh M, Laham SM, Lammers J, Lim L, Manstead ASR, Međedović J, Melton ZJ, Motyl M, Ntani S, Owuamalam CK, Peker M, Platow MJ, Prims JP, Reyna C, Rubin M, Saab R, Sankaran S, Shepherd L, Sibley CG, Sobkow A, Spruyt B, Stroebaek P, Sümer N, Sweetman J, Teixeira CP, Toma C, Ujhelyi A, van der Toorn J, van Hiel A, Vásquez‐Echeverría A, Vazquez A, Vianello M, Vranka M, Yzerbyt V, Zimmerman JL. Subjective status and perceived legitimacy across countries. EUROPEAN JOURNAL OF SOCIAL PSYCHOLOGY 2020; 50:921-942. [PMID: 32999511 PMCID: PMC7507836 DOI: 10.1002/ejsp.2694] [Citation(s) in RCA: 21] [Impact Index Per Article: 5.3] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [Grants] [Track Full Text] [Download PDF] [Figures] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 07/10/2019] [Revised: 02/14/2020] [Accepted: 05/21/2020] [Indexed: 11/28/2022]
Abstract
The relationships between subjective status and perceived legitimacy are important for understanding the extent to which people with low status are complicit in their oppression. We use novel data from 66 samples and 30 countries (N = 12,788) and find that people with higher status see the social system as more legitimate than those with lower status, but there is variation across people and countries. The association between subjective status and perceived legitimacy was never negative at any levels of eight moderator variables, although the positive association was sometimes reduced. Although not always consistent with hypotheses, group identification, self-esteem, and beliefs in social mobility were all associated with perceived legitimacy among people who have low subjective status. These findings enrich our understanding of the relationship between social status and legitimacy.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
| | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | - Konrad Bocian
- Sopot Faculty of PsychologySWPS University of Social Sciences and Humanities
| | - Bojana Bodroža
- Department of PsychologyFaculty of PhilosophyUniversity of Novi SadNovi SadSerbia
| | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | - Anna Kende
- ELTE Eötvös Loránd UniversityBudapestHungary
| | | | | | | | | | | | - Janko Međedović
- Institute of Criminological and Sociological ResearchBelgradeSerbia
| | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | - Agata Sobkow
- Wroclaw Faculty of PsychologySWPS University of Social Sciences and Humanities
| | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | |
Collapse
|
12
|
Owuamalam CK, Spears R. Do humans possess an autonomous system justification motivation? A Pupillometric test of the strong system justification thesis. JOURNAL OF EXPERIMENTAL SOCIAL PSYCHOLOGY 2020. [DOI: 10.1016/j.jesp.2019.103897] [Citation(s) in RCA: 7] [Impact Index Per Article: 1.8] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Indexed: 11/26/2022]
|
13
|
Owuamalam CK, Rubin M, Spears R. Is a system motive really necessary to explain the system justification effect? A response to Jost (2019) and Jost, Badaan, Goudarzi, Hoffarth, and Mogami (2019). BRITISH JOURNAL OF SOCIAL PSYCHOLOGY 2019; 58:393-409. [PMID: 30919987 DOI: 10.1111/bjso.12323] [Citation(s) in RCA: 12] [Impact Index Per Article: 2.4] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 01/25/2019] [Revised: 03/01/2019] [Indexed: 11/30/2022]
Abstract
The debate between the proponents of SIMSA and SJT does not pivot on whether system justification occurs - we all agree that system justification does occur. The issue is why it occurs? System justification theory (SJT; Jost & Banaji, 1994, British Journal of Social Psychology, 33, 1) assumes that system justification is motivated by a special system justification motive. In contrast, the social identity model of system attitudes (SIMSA; Owuamalam, Rubin, & Spears, , Current Directions in Psychological Science, 27, 2) argues that there is insufficient conclusive evidence for this special system motive, and that system justification can be explained in terms of social identity motives, including the motivation to accurately reflect social reality and the search for a positive social identity. Here, we respond to criticisms of SIMSA, including criticisms of its social reality, ingroup bias, and hope for future ingroup status explanations of system justification. We conclude that SJT theorists should decide whether system justification is oppositional to, or compatible with social identity motives, and that this dilemma could be resolved by relinquishing the theoretically problematic notion of a system justification motivation.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Chuma Kevin Owuamalam
- Division of Organisational and Applied Psychology, University of Nottingham Malaysia Campus, Semenyih, Malaysia
| | - Mark Rubin
- The University of Newcastle, Canberra, New South Wales, Australia
| | | |
Collapse
|
14
|
Jost JT. A quarter century of system justification theory: Questions, answers, criticisms, and societal applications. BRITISH JOURNAL OF SOCIAL PSYCHOLOGY 2018. [DOI: 10.1111/bjso.12297] [Citation(s) in RCA: 163] [Impact Index Per Article: 27.2] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Indexed: 11/30/2022]
|
15
|
Vargas-Salfate S. The role of personal control in the palliative function of system justification among indigenous and non-indigenous Peruvian students / El rol del control personal en la función paliativa de la justificación del sistema entre la población indígena y no indígena de estudiantes peruanos. INTERNATIONAL JOURNAL OF SOCIAL PSYCHOLOGY 2018. [DOI: 10.1080/02134748.2018.1537650] [Citation(s) in RCA: 3] [Impact Index Per Article: 0.5] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Indexed: 10/27/2022]
|
16
|
Owuamalam CK, Rubin M, Spears R. Revisiting 25 years of system motivation explanation for system justification from the perspective of social identity model of system attitudes. BRITISH JOURNAL OF SOCIAL PSYCHOLOGY 2018; 58:362-381. [PMID: 30328122 DOI: 10.1111/bjso.12285] [Citation(s) in RCA: 32] [Impact Index Per Article: 5.3] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 05/03/2018] [Revised: 09/13/2018] [Indexed: 02/28/2024]
Abstract
Do the disadvantaged have an autonomous system justification motivation that operates against their personal and group interests? System justification theory (SJT; Jost & Banaji, 1994, Br. J. Soc. Psychol, 33, 1) proposes that they do and that this motivation helps to (1) reduce cognitive dissonance and associated uncertainties and (2) soothe the pain that is associated with knowing that one's group is subject to social inequality. However, 25 years of research on this system justification motivation has given rise to several theoretical and empirical inconsistencies. The present article argues that these inconsistencies can be resolved by a social identity model of system attitudes (SIMSA; Owuamalam, Rubin, & Spears, 2018, Curr. Dir. Psychol. Sci, 27, 91). SIMSA assumes that instances of system justification are often in alignment with (rather than opposed to) the interests of the disadvantaged. According to SIMSA, the disadvantaged may support social systems (1) in order to acknowledge social reality, (2) when they perceive the wider social system to constitute a superordinate ingroup, and (3) because they hope to improve their ingroup's status through existing channels in the long run. These propositions are corroborated by existing and emerging evidence. We conclude that SIMSA offers a more coherent and parsimonious explanation for system justification than does SJT.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
| | - Mark Rubin
- The University of Newcastle, New South Wales, Australia
| | | |
Collapse
|
17
|
Owuamalam CK, Rubin M, Spears R. A critical review of the (un)conscious basis for system-supporting attitudes of the disadvantaged. SOCIAL AND PERSONALITY PSYCHOLOGY COMPASS 2018. [DOI: 10.1111/spc3.12419] [Citation(s) in RCA: 6] [Impact Index Per Article: 1.0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Indexed: 10/28/2022]
|
18
|
Manstead ASR. The psychology of social class: How socioeconomic status impacts thought, feelings, and behaviour. BRITISH JOURNAL OF SOCIAL PSYCHOLOGY 2018; 57:267-291. [PMID: 29492984 PMCID: PMC5901394 DOI: 10.1111/bjso.12251] [Citation(s) in RCA: 150] [Impact Index Per Article: 25.0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [MESH Headings] [Track Full Text] [Download PDF] [Figures] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 10/02/2017] [Revised: 02/05/2018] [Indexed: 11/30/2022]
Abstract
Drawing on recent research on the psychology of social class, I argue that the material conditions in which people grow up and live have a lasting impact on their personal and social identities and that this influences both the way they think and feel about their social environment and key aspects of their social behaviour. Relative to middle-class counterparts, lower/working-class individuals are less likely to define themselves in terms of their socioeconomic status and are more likely to have interdependent self-concepts; they are also more inclined to explain social events in situational terms, as a result of having a lower sense of personal control. Working-class people score higher on measures of empathy and are more likely to help others in distress. The widely held view that working-class individuals are more prejudiced towards immigrants and ethnic minorities is shown to be a function of economic threat, in that highly educated people also express prejudice towards these groups when the latter are described as highly educated and therefore pose an economic threat. The fact that middle-class norms of independence prevail in universities and prestigious workplaces makes working-class people less likely to apply for positions in such institutions, less likely to be selected and less likely to stay if selected. In other words, social class differences in identity, cognition, feelings, and behaviour make it less likely that working-class individuals can benefit from educational and occupational opportunities to improve their material circumstances. This means that redistributive policies are needed to break the cycle of deprivation that limits opportunities and threatens social cohesion.
Collapse
|
19
|
Vargas-Salfate S, Paez D, Khan SS, Liu JH, Gil de Zúñiga H. System justification enhances well-being: A longitudinal analysis of the palliative function of system justification in 18 countries. BRITISH JOURNAL OF SOCIAL PSYCHOLOGY 2018; 57:567-590. [DOI: 10.1111/bjso.12254] [Citation(s) in RCA: 31] [Impact Index Per Article: 5.2] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 08/03/2017] [Revised: 02/11/2018] [Indexed: 11/30/2022]
Affiliation(s)
- Salvador Vargas-Salfate
- Faculty of Education and Social Sciences; Andres Bello University; Santiago Chile
- Department of Social Psychology and Methodology; University of the Basque Country; San Sebastián Spain
| | - Dario Paez
- Department of Social Psychology and Methodology; University of the Basque Country; San Sebastián Spain
| | | | - James H. Liu
- School of Psychology; Massey University; North Shore Auckland New Zealand
| | - Homero Gil de Zúñiga
- Media Innovation Lab; Department of Communication; University of Vienna; Austria
- Faculty of Communication and Literature; Diego Portales University; Santiago Chile
| |
Collapse
|
20
|
Vargas-Salfate S, Paez D, Liu JH, Pratto F, Gil de Zúñiga H. A Comparison of Social Dominance Theory and System Justification: The Role of Social Status in 19 Nations. PERSONALITY AND SOCIAL PSYCHOLOGY BULLETIN 2018; 44:1060-1076. [DOI: 10.1177/0146167218757455] [Citation(s) in RCA: 52] [Impact Index Per Article: 8.7] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Indexed: 11/15/2022]
Abstract
This study tests specific competing hypotheses from social dominance theory/realistic conflict theory (RCT) versus system justification theory about the role of social status. In particular, it examines whether system justification belief and effects are stronger among people with low socioeconomic status, and in less socially developed and unequal nations than among better-off people and countries. A cross-national survey was carried out in 19 nations from the Americas, Western and Eastern Europe, Asia, and Oceania using representative online samples ( N = 14,936, 50.15% women, Mage = 41.61 years). At the individual level, system justification beliefs, right-wing authoritarianism, social dominance orientation, national identification, sociopolitical conservatism, sex, age, and social status were measured. At the national level, the human development index and the Gini index were used. Multilevel analyses performed indicated that results fit better with the social dominance/RCT approach, as system justification was higher in high-status and developed nations; further, associations between legitimizing ideologies and system justification were stronger among high-status people.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
| | - Dario Paez
- University of the Basque Country, San Sebastián, Spain
| | | | | | | |
Collapse
|
21
|
Owuamalam CK, Rubin M, Spears R. Addressing Evidential and Theoretical Inconsistencies in System-Justification Theory with a Social Identity Model of System Attitudes. CURRENT DIRECTIONS IN PSYCHOLOGICAL SCIENCE 2018. [DOI: 10.1177/0963721417737136] [Citation(s) in RCA: 27] [Impact Index Per Article: 4.5] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Indexed: 11/17/2022]
Affiliation(s)
- Chuma Kevin Owuamalam
- Division of Organizational and Applied Psychology, University of Nottingham, Malaysia Campus
| | - Mark Rubin
- School of Psychology, The University of Newcastle, Australia
| | - Russell Spears
- Department of Psychology, Faculty of Behavioural and Social Sciences, University of Groningen
| |
Collapse
|
22
|
Caricati L, Sollami A. Contrasting explanations for status-legitimacy effects based on system justification theory and social identity theory. JOURNAL OF THEORETICAL SOCIAL PSYCHOLOGY 2017. [DOI: 10.1002/jts5.15] [Citation(s) in RCA: 10] [Impact Index Per Article: 1.4] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Indexed: 11/09/2022]
Affiliation(s)
- Luca Caricati
- Department of Humanities, Social Sciences and Cultural Industries; University of Parma
| | - Alfonso Sollami
- Department of Medicine and Surgery; Azienda Ospedaliero-Universitaria of Parma
| |
Collapse
|
23
|
Ma-Kellams C, Zhang EMF. Is There Such a Thing as “Ultimate” Meaning? A Review of Fluid versus Fixed Models of Different Forms of Human Striving. BASIC AND APPLIED SOCIAL PSYCHOLOGY 2017. [DOI: 10.1080/01973533.2017.1361325] [Citation(s) in RCA: 1] [Impact Index Per Article: 0.1] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Indexed: 10/18/2022]
|
24
|
Jost JT. Working class conservatism: a system justification perspective. Curr Opin Psychol 2017; 18:73-78. [PMID: 28843724 DOI: 10.1016/j.copsyc.2017.08.020] [Citation(s) in RCA: 43] [Impact Index Per Article: 6.1] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 08/01/2017] [Revised: 08/06/2017] [Accepted: 08/06/2017] [Indexed: 11/30/2022]
Abstract
Working class conservatism is a perennial issue in social science, but researchers have struggled to provide an adequate characterization. In social psychology, the question has too often been framed in 'either/or' terms of whether the disadvantaged are more or less likely to support the status quo than the advantaged. This is a crude rendering of the issue obscuring the fact that even if most working class voters are not conservative, millions are-and conservatives could not win elections without their support. System justification theory highlights epistemic, existential, and relational needs to reduce uncertainty, threat, and social discord that are shared by everyone-and that promote conservative attitudes. I summarize qualitative and quantitative evidence of system justification among the disadvantaged and consider prospects for more constructive political activity.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- John T Jost
- Department of Psychology, New York University, Meyer Building, 6 Washington Place, 5th Floor, New York, NY 10003, USA.
| |
Collapse
|