Do the disadvantaged legitimize the social system? A large-scale test of the status-legitimacy hypothesis

Journal of Personality and Social Psychology

Volumn 104, Issue 5, 2013, Pages 765-785

  Brandt, Mark J ^a  

^a TILBURG UNIVERSITY   (Netherlands)

Author keywords

Inequality; Legitimacy; Social status; System justification theory

Indexed keywords

ARTICLE; CIVIL RIGHTS; FEMALE; HUMAN; MALE; PSYCHOLOGICAL ASPECT; SOCIAL CLASS; SOCIAL JUSTICE; SOCIAL PSYCHOLOGY; SOCIOECONOMICS; THEORETICAL MODEL; UNITED STATES; VULNERABLE POPULATION;

CIVIL RIGHTS; FEMALE; HUMANS; MALE; MODELS, THEORETICAL; SOCIAL CLASS; SOCIAL JUSTICE; SOCIAL VALUES; SOCIOECONOMIC FACTORS; UNITED STATES; VULNERABLE POPULATIONS;

EID: 84879561366     PISSN: 00223514     EISSN: None     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1037/a0031751     Document Type: Article

References (97)

1. Andreychik, M. R., & Gill, M. J. (2012). Do negative implicit associations indicate negative attitudes? Social explanations moderate whether ostensible "negative" associations are prejudice-based or empathy-based. Journal of Experimental Social Psychology, 48, 1082-1093. doi: 10.1016/j.jesp.2012.05.006
2. Arab world uprisings: A country-by-country look. (2011, December 10). The New York Times. Retrieved from http://www.nytimes.com/interactive/world/middleeast/middle-east-hub.html
3. Aronson, E., & Mills, J. (1959). The effects of severity of initiation on liking for a group. Journal of Abnormal and Social Psychology, 59, 177-181. doi:10.1037/h0047195
4. Ashburn-Nardo, L., & Johnson, N. J. (2008). Implicit outgroup favoritism and intergroup judgment: The moderating role of stereotypic context. Social Justice Research, 21, 490-508. doi:10.1007/s11211-008-0078-8
5. Ashburn-Nardo, L., Knowles, M. L., & Monteith, M. J. (2003). Black Americans' implicit racial associations and their implications for intergroup judgment. Social Cognition, 21, 61-87. doi:10.1521/soco.21.1.61.21192
6. Bakker, M., van Dijk, A., & Wicherts, J. M. (2012). The rules of the game called psychological science. Perspectives on Psychological Science, 7, 543-554. doi:10.1177/1745691612459060
7. Banfield, J. C., Kay, A. C., Cutright, K. M., Wu, E. C., & Fitzsimons, G. J. (2011). A person by situation account of motivated system defense. Social Psychological and Personality Science, 2, 212-219. doi:10.1177/1948550610386809
8. Bartels, L. M. (2006). What's the matter with What's the matter with Kansas? Quarterly Journal of Political Science, 1, 201-226. doi: 10.1561/100.00000010
9. Blasi, G., & Jost, J. T. (2006). System justification theory and research: Implications for law, legal advocacy, and social justice. California Law Review, 94, 1119-1168. doi:10.2307/20439060
10. Bornstein, R. F. (1989). Exposure and affect: Overview and meta-analysis of research, 1968-1987. Psychological Bulletin, 106, 265-289. doi: 10.1037/0033-2909.106.2.265
11. Brandt, M. J., & Henry, P. J. (2012). Gender inequality and gender differences in authoritarianism. Personality and Social Psychology Bulletin, 38, 1301-1315. doi:10.1177/0146167212449871
12. Brandt, M. J., & Reyna, C. (2012). Social dominance or system justification? The acceptance of inequality and resistance to social change as unique system-relevant motivations. Retrived http://dx.doi.org/10.2139/ssrn.2165690
13. Brandt, M. J., & Reyna, C. (in press). To love or hate thy neighbor: The role of core motives in explaining the link between fundamentalism and racial prejudice. Political Psychology.
14. CIA World Factbook. (2009). Country comparison: Distribution of family income-Gini index. Retrieved January 14, 2009, from https://www.cia. gov/library/publications/the-world-factbook/rankorder/2172rank.html
15. Citrin, J., & Green, D. P. (1986). Presidential leadership and the resurgence of trust in government. British Journal of Political Science, 16, 431-453. doi:10.1017/S0007123400004518
16. Cooper, J., & Fazio, R. H. (1984). A new look at dissonance theory. In L. Berkowitz (Ed.), Advances in experimental social psychology (Vol. 17, pp. 229-266). New York, NY: Academic Press.
17. Cutright, K. M., Wu, E. C., Banfield, J. C., Kay, A. C., & Fitzsimons, G. J. (2011). When your world must be defended: Choosing products to justify the system. Journal of Consumer Research, 38, 62-77. doi: 10.1086/658469
18. Duckitt, J. (1989). Authoritarianism and group identification: A new view of an old construct. Political Psychology, 10, 63-84. doi:10.2307/3791588
19. Ferguson, C. J., & Heene, M. (2012). A vast graveyard of undead theories: Publication bias and psychological science's aversion to the null. Perspectives on Psychological Science, 7, 555-561. doi:10.1177/1745691612459059
20. Festinger, L. (1957). A theory of cognitive dissonance. Evanston, IL: Row, Peterson.
21. Frank, T. (2004). What's the matter with Kansas? New York, NY: Metropolitan Books.
22. Gelman, A., Shor, B., Bafumi, J., & Park, D. (2007). Rich state, poor state, red state, blue state: What's the matter with Connecticut. Quarterly Journal of Political Science, 2, 345-367. doi:10.1561/100.00006026
23. Gerard, H. B., & Mathewson, G. C. (1966). The effect of severity of initiation on liking for a group: A replication. Journal of Experimental Social Psychology, 2, 278-287. doi:10.1016/0022-1031(66)90084-9
24. Glick, P., & Fiske, S. T. (2001). An ambivalent alliance: Hostile and benevolent sexism as complementary justifications for gender inequality. American Psychologist, 56, 109-118. doi:10.1037/0003-066X.56.2.109
25. Graham, J., Nosek, B. A., Haidt, J., Iyer, R., Koleva, S., & Ditto, P. H. (2011). Mapping the moral domain. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 101, 366-385. doi:10.1037/a0021847
26. Greenwald, A. G. (1975). Consequences of prejudice against the null hypothesis. Psychological Bulletin, 82, 1-20. doi:10.1037/h0076157
27. Greenwald, A. G., Pratkanis, A. R., Leippe, M. R., & Baumgardner, M. H. (1986). Under what conditions does theory obstruct research progress? Psychological Review, 93, 216-229. doi:10.1037/0033-295X.93.2.216
28. Guimond, S., Dambrun, M., Michinov, N., & Duarte, S. (2003). Does social dominance generate prejudice? Integrating individual and contextual determinants of intergroup cognitions. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 84, 697-721. doi:10.1037/0022-3514.84.4.697
29. Harmon-Jones, E., & Mills, J. (Eds.). (1999). Cognitive dissonance theory: Progress on a pivotal theory in social psychology. Washington, DC: American Psychological Association. doi:10.1037/10318-000
30. Henrich, J., Heine, S. J., & Norenzayan, A. (2010). The weirdest people in the world. Behavioral and Brain Sciences, 33, 61-83. doi:10.1017/S0140525X0999152X
31. Henry, P. J. (2008). College sophomores in the laboratory redux: Influences of a narrow data base on social psychology's view of the nature of prejudice. Psychological Inquiry, 19, 49-71. doi:10.1080/10478400802049936
32. Henry, P. J. (2009). Low-status compensation: A theory for understanding the role of status in cultures of honor. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 97, 451-466. doi:10.1037/a0015476
33. Henry, P. J. (2011). The role of stigma in understanding ethnicity differences in authoritarianism. Political Psychology, 32, 419-438. doi: 10.1111/j.1467-9221.2010.00816.x
34. Henry, P. J., & Hardin, C. D. (2006). The contact hypothesis revisited status bias in the reduction of implicit prejudice in the United States and Lebanon. Psychological Science, 17, 862-868. doi:10.1111/j.1467-9280.2006.01795.x
35. Henry, P. J., & Saul, A. (2006). The development of system justification in the developing world. Social Justice Research, 19, 365-378. doi: 10.1007/s11211-006-0012-x
36. Hetherington, M. J. (1998). The political relevance of political trust. American Political Science Review, 92, 791-808. doi:10.2307/2586304
37. Hout, M. (2004). Getting the most out of the GSS income measures (GSS Methodological Report 101). Retrieved from http://publicdata.norc.org:41000/gss/DOCUMENTS/REPORTS/Methodological_Reports/MR101.pdf
38. Huang, L. L., & Liu, J. H. (2005). Personality and social structural implications of the situational priming of social dominance orientation. Personality and Individual Differences, 38, 267-276. doi:10.1016/j.paid.2004.04.006
39. Huddy, L. (2004). Contrasting theoretical approaches to intergroup relations. Political Psychology, 25, 947-967. doi:10.1111/j.1467-9221.2004.00404.x
40. Jetten, J., Haslam, S. A., & Barlow, F. K. (2013). Bringing back the system: One reason why conservatives are happier than liberals is that higher socioeconomic status gives them access to more group memberships. Social Psychological and Personality Science, 4, 6-13. doi: 10.1177/1948550612439721
41. Jost, J. T. (2011). System justification theory as compliment, complement, and corrective to theories of social identification and social dominance. In D. Dunning (Ed.), Social motivation (pp. 223-263). New York, NY: Psychology Press.
42. Jost, J. T., & Banaji, M. R. (1994). The role of stereotyping in systemjustification and the production of false consciousness. British Journal of Social Psychology, 33, 1-27. doi:10.1111/j.2044-8309.1994.tb01008.x
43. Jost, J. T., Banaji, M. R., & Nosek, B. A. (2004). A decade of system justification theory: Accumulated evidence of conscious and unconscious bolstering of the status quo. Political Psychology, 25, 881-919. doi:10.1111/j.1467-9221.2004.00402.x
44. Jost, J. T., & Burgess, D. (2000). Attitudinal ambivalence and the conflict between group and system justification motives in low status groups. Personality and Social Psychology Bulletin, 26, 293-305. doi:10.1177/0146167200265003
45. Jost, J. T., & Hunyady, O. (2003). The psychology of system justification and the palliative function of ideology. European Review of Social Psychology, 13, 111-153. doi:10.1080/10463280240000046
46. Jost, J. T., & Hunyady, O. (2005). Antecedents and consequences of system-justifying ideologies. Current Directions in Psychological Science, 14, 260-265. doi:10.1111/j.0963-7214.2005.00377.x
47. Jost, J. T., Liviatan, I., van der Toorn, J., Ledgerwood, A., Mandisodza, A., & Nosek, B. A. (2010). System justification: How do we know it's motivated? In D. R. Bobocel, A. C. Kay, M. P. Zanna, & J. M. Olson (Eds.), The psychology of justice and legitimacy: The Ontario symposium (Vol. 11, pp. 173-204). New York, NY: Psychology Press.
48. Jost, J. T., & Major, B. (Eds.). (2001). The psychology of legitimacy: Emerging perspectives on ideology, justice, and intergroup relations. New York, NY: Cambridge University Press.
49. Jost, J. T., Pelham, B. W., & Carvallo, M. (2002). Non-conscious forms of system justification: Cognitive, affective, and behavioral preferences for higher status groups. Journal of Experimental Social Psychology, 38, 586-602. doi:10.1016/S0022-1031(02)00505-X
50. Jost, J. T., Pelham, B. W., Sheldon, O., & Sullivan, B. N. (2003). Social inequality and the reduction of ideological dissonance on behalf of the system: Evidence of enhanced system justification among the disadvantaged. European Journal of Social Psychology, 33, 13-36. doi:10.1002/ejsp.127
51. Kay, A. C., Gaucher, D., Napier, J. L., Callan, M. J., & Laurin, K. (2008). God and government: Testing a compensatory control explanation for the support of external systems. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 95, 18-35. doi:10.1037/0022-3514.95.1.18
52. Kay, A. C., Gaucher, D., Peach, J. M., Laurin, K., Friesen, J., Zanna, M. P., & Spencer, S. J. (2009). Inequality, discrimination, and the power of the status quo: Direct evidence for a motivation to see the way things are as the way they should be. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 97, 421-434. doi:10.1037/a0015997
53. Kay, A. C., Shepherd, S., Blatz, C. W., Chua, S. N., & Galinsky, A. D. (2010). For God (or) country: The hydraulic relation between government instability and belief in religious sources of control. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 99, 725-739. doi:10.1037/a0021140
54. Kekic, L. (2007). The Economist Intelligence Unit's index of democracy. Retrieved from http://www.economist.com/media/pdf/DEMOCRACY_INDEX_2007_v3.pdf
55. Kraus, M. W., Piff, P. K., & Keltner, D. (2011). Social class as culture: The convergence of resources and rank in the social realm. Current Directions in Psychological Science, 20, 246-250. doi:10.1177/0963721411414654
56. Kreindler, S. A. (2005). A dual group processes model of individual differences in prejudice. Personality and Social Psychology Review, 9, 90-107. doi:10.1207/s15327957pspr0902_1
57. Kruschke, J. K. (2011). Bayesian assessment of null values via parameter estimation and model comparison. Perspectives on Psychological Science, 6, 299-312. doi:10.1177/1745691611406925
58. Lane, K. A., Mitchell, J. P., & Banaji, M. R. (2005). Me and my group: Cultural status can disrupt cognitive consistency. Social Cognition, 23, 353-386. doi:10.1521/soco.2005.23.4.353
59. Lee, I., Pratto, F., & Johnson, B. T. (2011). Intergroup consensus/disagreement in support of group-based hierarchy: An examination of socio-structural and psycho-cultural factors. Psychological Bulletin, 137, 1029-1064. doi:10.1037/a0025410
60. Marszalek, J. M., Barber, C., Kohlhart, J., & Holmes, C. B. (2011). Sample size in psychological research over the past 30 years. Perceptual and Motor Skills, 112, 331-348. doi:10.2466/03.11.PMS.112.2.331-348
61. Morrison, K. R., Fast, N. J., & Ybarra, O. (2009). Group status, perceptions of threat, and support for social inequality. Journal of Experimental Social Psychology, 45, 204-210. doi:10.1016/j.jesp.2008.09.004
62. Napier, J. L., & Jost, J. T. (2008a). The "antidemocratic personality" revisited: A cross-national investigation of working-class authoritarianism. Journal of Social Issues, 64, 595-617. doi:10.1111/j.1540-4560.2008.00579.x
63. Napier, J. L., & Jost, J. T. (2008b). Why are conservatives happier than liberals? Psychological Science, 19, 565-572. doi:10.1111/j.1467-9280.2008.02124.x
64. Napier, J. L., Thorisdottir, H., & Jost, J. T. (2010). The joy of sexism? A multinational investigation of hostile and benevolent justifications for gender inequality and their relations to subjective well-being. Sex Roles, 62, 405-419. doi:10.1007/s11199-009-9712-7
65. Nosek, B. A., Graham, J., Lindner, N. M., Kesebir, S., Hawkins, C. B., Hahn, C., Tenney, E. R. (2010). Cumulative and career-stage impact of social-personality psychology programs and their members. Personality and Social Psychology Bulletin, 36, 1283-1300. doi:10.1177/0146167210378111
66. Olson, M. A., Crawford, M. T., & Devlin, W. (2009). Evidence for the underestimation of implicit in-group favoritism among low-status groups. Journal of Experimental Social Psychology, 45, 1111-1116. doi:10.1016/j.jesp.2009.06.021
67. Open Science Collaboration. (2012). An open, large-scale, collaborative effort to estimate the reproducibility of psychological science. Perspectives on Psychological Science, 7, 657-660. doi:10.1177/1745691612462588
68. President exit polls. (2012). Retrieved from http://elections.nytimes.com/2012/results/president/exit-polls
69. Proulx, T., Inzlicht, M., and Harmon-Jones, E. (2012). Understanding all inconsistency compensation as a palliative response to violated expectations. Trends in Cognitive Sciences, 16, 285-291. doi:10.1016/j.tics.2012.04.002
70. Raudenbush, S. W., & Bryk, A. S. (2002). Hierarchical linear models: Applications and data analysis methods. Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.
71. Raudenbush, S. W., Bryk, A. S., & Congdon, R. (2010). HLM 7: Hierarchical Linear and Nonlinear Modeling [Computer software]. Lincolnwood, IL: Scientific Software Interaction.
72. Rubin, M., & Hewstone, M. (2004). Social identity, system justification, and social dominance: Commentary on Reicher, Jost et al., and Sidanius et al. Political Psychology, 25, 823-844. doi:10.1111/j.1467-9221.2004.00400.x
73. Rudman, L. A., Feinberg, J., & Fairchild, K. (2002). Minority members' implicit attitudes: Automatic ingroup bias as a function of group status. Social Cognition, 20, 294-320. doi:10.1521/soco.20.4.294.19908
74. Scherbaum, C. A., & Ferreter, J. M. (2009). Estimating statistical power and sample size requirement for organizational research using hierarchical linear models. Organizational Research Methods, 12, 347-367.
75. Schimmack, U. (2012). The ironic effect of significant results on the credibility of multiple study articles. Psychological Methods. Advance online publication. doi:10.1037/a0029487
76. Schmitt, M. J. (1998). Methodological strategies in research to validate measures of belief in a just world. In L. Montada & M. J. Lerner (Eds.), Responses to victimizations and belief in a just world (pp. 187-215). New York, NY: Plenum Press.
77. Schmitt, M. T., Branscombe, N. R., & Kappen, D. M. (2003). Attitudes toward group-based inequality: Social dominance or social identity? British Journal of Social Psychology, 42, 161-186. doi:10.1348/014466603322127166
78. Sidanius, J., & Pratto, F. (1999). Social dominance: An integrative theory of social hierarchy and oppression. Cambridge, England: Cambridge University Press. doi:10.1017/CBO9781139175043
79. Sidanius, J., Pratto, F., & Rabinowitz, J. L. (1994). Gender, ethnic status, and ideological asymmetry: A social dominance interpretation. Journal of Cross-Cultural Psychology, 25, 194-216. doi:10.1177/0022022194252003
80. Sidanius, J., Pratto, F., van Laar, C., & Levin, S. (2004). Social dominance theory: Its agenda and method. Political Psychology, 25, 845-880. doi:10.1111/j.1467-9221.2004.00401.x
81. Steele, C. M. (1988). The psychology of self-affirmation: Sustaining the integrity of the self. In L. Berkowitz (Ed.), Advances in experimental social psychology (Vol. 21, pp. 261-302). New York, NY: Elsevier. doi:10.1016/S0065-2601(08)60229-4
82. Stellmacher, J., & Petzel, T. (2005). Authoritarianism as a group phenomenon. Political Psychology, 26, 245-274. doi:10.1111/j.1467-9221.2005.00417.x
83. Stenner, K. (2005). The authoritarian dynamic. New York, NY: Cambridge University Press. doi:10.1017/CBO9780511614712
84. Stenner, K. (2009). Three kinds of "conservatism". Psychological Inquiry, 20, 142-159. doi:10.1080/10478400903028615
85. Stephens, N. M., Markus, H. R., & Townsend, S. S. (2007). Choice as an act of meaning: The case of social class. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 93, 814-830. doi:10.1037/0022-3514.93.5.814
86. Sutton, R. M., Douglas, K. M., Wilkin, K., Elder, T. J., Cole, J. M., & Stathi, S. (2008). Justice for whom, exactly? Beliefs in justice for the self and various others. Personality and Social Psychology Bulletin, 34, 528-541. doi:10.1177/0146167207312526
87. Sutton, R. M., & Winnard, E. J. (2007). Looking ahead through lenses of justice: The relevance of just-world beliefs to intentions and confidence in the future. British Journal of Social Psychology, 46, 649-666. doi: 10.1348/014466606X166220
88. Tajfel, H., & Turner, J. C. (1986). The social identity theory of intergroup behavior. In S. Worchel & W. G. Austin (Eds.), The psychology of intergroup relations (pp. 7-24). Chicago, IL: Nelson-Hall.
89. Tyler, T. R., & Huo, Y. J. (2002). Trust in the law: Encouraging public cooperation with the police and courts. New York, NY: Russell Sage Foundation.
90. Uhlmann, E. L., Brescoll, V. L., & Paluck, E. L. (2006). Are members of low status groups perceived as bad, or badly off? Egalitarian negative associations and automatic prejudice. Journal of Experimental Social Psychology, 42, 491-499.. doi:10.1016/j.jesp.2004.10.003
91. Uhlmann, E., Dasgupta, N., Elgueta, A., Greenwald, A. G., & Swanson, J. (2002). Subgroup prejudice based on skin color among Hispanics in the United States and Latin America. Social Cognition, 20, 198-226. doi:10.1521/soco.20.3.198.21104
92. United Nations. (2009). Human Development Report 2009: HDR 2009 statistical tables [Data file]. Retrieved from http://hdr.undp.org/en/reports/global/hdr2009
93. U.S. Census Bureau. (2009). Historical income tables: Income inequality. Retrieved from http://www.census.gov/hhes/www/income/data/historical/inequality/index.html
94. Wagenmakers, E.-J., Wetzels, R., Borsboom, D., & van der Maas, H. L. J. (2011). Why psychologists must change the way they analyze their data: The case of psi: Comment on Bem (2011). Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 100, 426-432. doi:10.1037/a0022790
95. Weatherford, M. S. (1992). Measuring political legitimacy. American Political Science Review, 86, 149-166. doi:10.2307/1964021
96. Zelditch, M. (2001). Theories of legitimacy. In J. T. Jost & B. Major (Eds.), The psychology of legitimacy: Emerging perspectives on ideology, justice, and intergroup relations (pp. 33-53). New York, NY: Cambridge University Press.
97. Zimmerman, J., & Reyna, C. (in press). The meaning and role of ideology in system justification and resistance for high and low status people. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology.