scholarly journals Do humans possess an autonomous system justification motivation? A Pupillometric test of the strong system justification thesis

2020 ◽  
Vol 86 ◽  
pp. 103897 ◽  
Author(s):  
Chuma Kevin Owuamalam ◽  
Russell Spears
2019 ◽  
Author(s):  
Chuma Kevin Owuamalam ◽  
Russell Spears

To investigate the existence of an autonomous system justification motive that guides human behavior, we tested the dissonance-inspired strong system-justification thesis: that the cognitive effort expended to justify societal systems on which people depend, is greater amongst the disadvantaged than amongst the advantaged when their group identities are weak in salience/strength. Using a novel pupil dilation paradigm to tap cognitive effort, we exposed an ethnic minority group (Ntotal = 263) to depictions of their ingroup as disadvantaged or advantaged after they had stated four things they liked about their ethnic group (strong group identity salience) or grandmother (weak group identity salience). We then measured fluctuations in their pupil diameter as they contemplated support for societal systems that were either relevant (high dependency) or irrelevant (low dependency) to their ethnic group. Results revealed that pupil sizes were larger in the group disadvantage condition than in the group advantage condition—indicating greater cognitive effort—but only when group identity was salient (Experiment 1) or when group identification was strong (Experiment 2). These effects occurred only for high dependency systems. Combined, this evidence contradicts the system-justification thesis, and questions the existence of an autonomous system justification motivation in humans.


2012 ◽  
Author(s):  
Dominic Abrams ◽  
Vagelis Chaikalis-Petritsis ◽  
John T. Jost ◽  
Jim Sidanius ◽  
Jojanneke van der Toorn ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  

2020 ◽  
Author(s):  
Harry Robert McSweeney Purser ◽  
Craig A. Harper

A recent study by Baltiansky, Craig, & Jost (2020) tested two hypotheses related to system justification and the perception of stereotypical humor. They reported to have found evidence for a cross-over interaction, with judgments of jokes being contingent on a combination of the social status of the targets of jokes and raters’ system justification motivations. Here, we discuss the original analysis, presentation, and interpretation of the data in Baltiansky et al. (2020), before presenting a re-analysis of the authors’ shared data file. We show that the framing of claims such as “high system-justifiers found jokes targeting low-status groups (e.g., women, poor people, racial/ethnic minorities) to be funnier than low system-justifiers did” (p. 1) are misleading in their framing. Instead, our re-analyses suggest that ideological differences in joke perception are driven primarily by those scoring low on the system justification motivation rating jokes about ostensibly low-status groups as less funny than jokes about other social groups.


Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document