Victim Derogation and Victim Enhancement as Alternate Routes to System Justification

2005 ◽  
Vol 16 (3) ◽  
pp. 240-246 ◽  
Author(s):  
Aaron C. Kay ◽  
John T. Jost ◽  
Sean Young
Keyword(s):  
Physical Attractiveness ◽  
Causal Link ◽  
Status Quo ◽  
System Justification ◽  
Victim Blaming ◽  
Stereotype Activation ◽  
Victim Derogation ◽  
The Status ◽  
Alternate Routes ◽  
System Threat

Numerous studies have documented the potential for victim-blaming attributions to justify the status quo. Recent work suggests that complementary, victim-enhancing stereotypes may also increase support for existing social arrangements. We seek to reconcile these seemingly contradictory findings by proposing that victim derogation and victim enhancement are alternate routes to system justification, with the preferred route depending on the perception of a causal link between trait and outcome. Derogating “losers” (and lionizing “winners”) on traits (e.g., intelligence) that are causally related to outcomes (e.g., wealth vs. poverty) serves to increase system justification, as does compensating “losers” (and down-grading “winners”) on traits (e.g., physical attractiveness) that are causally unrelated to those outcomes. We provide converging evidence using system-threat and stereotype-activation paradigms.

On Social Stability and Social Change

2011 ◽  
Vol 20 (6) ◽  
pp. 360-364 ◽  
Author(s):  
Aaron C. Kay ◽  
Justin Friesen
Keyword(s):  
Social Change ◽  
Social Systems ◽  
Personal Control ◽  
Status Quo ◽  
System Justification ◽  
Social Stability ◽  
System Justification Theory ◽  
The Status ◽  
System Threat ◽  
Do So

More than a decade of research from the perspective of system-justification theory (Jost & Banaji, 1994) has demonstrated that people engage in motivated psychological processes that bolster and support the status quo. We propose that this motive is highly contextual: People do not justify their social systems at all times but are more likely to do so under certain circumstances. We describe four contexts in which people are prone to engage in system-justifying processes: (a) system threat, (b) system dependence, (c) system inescapability, and (d) low personal control. We describe how and why, in these contexts, people who wish to promote social change might expect resistance.

Antecedents and Consequences of System-Justifying Ideologies

2005 ◽  
Vol 14 (5) ◽  
pp. 260-265 ◽  
Author(s):  
John T. Jost ◽  
Orsolya Hunyady
Keyword(s):  
Well Being ◽  
Self Esteem ◽  
Status Quo ◽  
System Justification ◽  
Need For Closure ◽  
System Justification Theory ◽  
Disadvantaged Groups ◽  
The Status ◽  
Antecedents And Consequences ◽  
System Threat

According to system justification theory, there is a psychological motive to defend and justify the status quo. There are both dispositional antecedents (e.g., need for closure, openness to experience) and situational antecedents (e.g., system threat, mortality salience) of the tendency to embrace system-justifying ideologies. Consequences of system justification sometimes differ for members of advantaged versus disadvantaged groups, with the former experiencing increased and the latter decreased self-esteem, well-being, and in-group favoritism. In accordance with the palliative function of system justification, endorsement of such ideologies is associated with reduced negative affect for everyone, as well as weakened support for social change and redistribution of resources.

scholarly journals A Decade of System Justification Theory: Accumulated Evidence of Conscious and Unconscious Bolstering of the Status Quo

2016 ◽  
Author(s):  
John Jost ◽  
Mahzarin R. Banaji ◽  
Brian A. Nosek
Keyword(s):  
Social Order ◽  
Political Ideology ◽  
The Elderly ◽  
Status Quo ◽  
System Justification ◽  
Ingroup Bias ◽  
System Justification Theory ◽  
Disadvantaged Groups ◽  
The Status ◽  
Outgroup Favoritism

Most theories in social and political psychology stress self-interest, intergroup conflict, ethnocentrism, homophily, ingroup bias, outgroup antipathy, dominance, and resistance. System justification theory is influenced by these perspectives—including social identity and social dominance theories—but it departs from them in several respects. Specifically, we argue that (a) there is a general ideological motive to justify the existing social order, (b) this motive is at least partially responsible for the internalization of inferiority among members of disadvantaged groups, and (c) paradoxically, it is sometimes strongest among those who are most harmed by the status quo. In this article, we review and integrate 10 years of research on 20 hypotheses derived from a system justification perspective, focusing especially on the phenomenon of implicit outgroup favoritism among members of disadvantaged groups (including African Americans, the elderly, and gays/lesbians) and its relation to political ideology (especially liberalism-conservatism).

A new, established approach to managing misbehavior: system justification theory

2021 ◽  
Vol ahead-of-print (ahead-of-print) ◽  
Author(s):  
Benjamin J. Thomas ◽  
Spencer Harris
Keyword(s):  
Status Quo ◽  
System Justification ◽  
Workplace Behavior ◽  
Content Type ◽  
Cultural Elements ◽  
System Justification Theory ◽  
The Status ◽  
Management Approaches ◽  
Organizational Scholarship ◽  
Deviant Workplace Behavior

PurposeThe status quo for managing deviant workplace behavior is underperforming. The current research offers a new approach for scholars and managers in approaching these misbehaviors. Namely, we outline how system justification theory, which holds that people are motivated to rationalize and justify the systems—including workplaces—to which they belong even when those systems disadvantage them or others, offers value in explaining and addressing the prevalence of such misbehaviors and contemporary failures in managing them.Design/methodology/approachThis conceptual research explores the situated role of onlookers to patterns of workplace misbehavior, like harassment. We explore existing scholarship on why and how onlookers respond to such actions, including cultural elements, and draw parallels between those accounts and the foundational concepts of system justification theory to demonstrate an unrealized theoretical overlap valuable for its immediate applications in research.FindingsThe current paper establishes clear links between system justification theory and efforts to manage misbehavior, establishing system justifications as freezing forces in the culture of a workplace that must be unfrozen to successfully implement strategies for managing misbehavior. Further, we describe how organizational onlookers to misbehavior are subject to system justifications, which limit prescribed means of stopping these patterns of wrongdoing.Originality/valueVery limited organizational scholarship has utilized system justification theory, despite calls for such applications. Given the existing shortcomings in scholarship and management approaches to workplace misbehavior, the current research breaks from the status quo and offers an established theory as a new way to approach these misbehaviors.

scholarly journals Missing in (Collective) Action

2017 ◽  
Vol 26 (2) ◽  
pp. 99-108 ◽  
Author(s):  
John T. Jost ◽  
Julia Becker ◽  
Danny Osborne ◽  
Vivienne Badaan
Keyword(s):  
Collective Action ◽  
Status Quo ◽  
System Justification ◽  
Social Identification ◽  
Moral Outrage ◽  
Perceived Injustice ◽  
Social Psychological ◽  
Group Efficacy ◽  
The Status ◽  
Psychological Models

Social-psychological models of collective action emphasize three antecedents of protest: (a) anger at perceived injustice, (b) social identification, and (c) beliefs about group efficacy. These models are extremely useful but have rarely incorporated ideological factors—despite the fact that protests occur in societal contexts in which some people are motivated to defend and bolster the status quo whereas others are motivated to challenge and oppose it. We adopt a system-justification perspective to specify when individuals and groups will—and will not—experience moral outrage and whether such outrage will be directed at defenders versus critics of the status quo. We describe evidence that epistemic, existential, and relational needs for certainty, security, and affiliation undermine support for system-challenging protests by increasing system-defensive motivation. We also discuss system-based emotions and backlash against protestors and propose an integrated model of collective action that paves the way for more comprehensive research on the psychological antecedents of social change.

scholarly journals Movin’ on Up? How Perceptions of Social Mobility Affect Our Willingness to Defend the System

2016 ◽  
Vol 8 (3) ◽  
pp. 267-274 ◽  
Author(s):  
Martin V. Day ◽  
Susan T. Fiske
Keyword(s):  
Social Mobility ◽  
Status Quo ◽  
System Justification ◽  
Societal Change ◽  
Just World Beliefs ◽  
Just World ◽  
Major Barrier ◽  
The Status ◽  
Baseline Conditions ◽  
Legitimizing Ideologies

People’s motivation to rationalize and defend the status quo is a major barrier to societal change. Three studies tested whether perceived social mobility—beliefs about the likelihood to move up and down the socioeconomic ladder—can condition people’s tendency to engage in system justification. Compared to information suggesting moderate social mobility, exposure to low social mobility frames consistently reduced defense of the overarching societal system. Two studies examined how this effect occurs. Compared to moderate or baseline conditions, a low social mobility frame reduced people’s endorsement of (typically strong) meritocratic and just-world beliefs, which in turn explained lower system defense. These effects occurred for political liberals, moderates, and conservatives and could not be explained by other system-legitimizing ideologies or people’s beliefs about their own social mobility. Implications for societal change programs are discussed.

scholarly journals A Critical Review of the (Un)conscious Basis for System Supporting Attitudes of the Disadvantaged

2018 ◽  
Author(s):  
Chuma Kevin Owuamalam ◽  
Mark Rubin ◽  
Russell Spears
Keyword(s):  
Present Article ◽  
Critical Review ◽  
Affirmative Answer ◽  
Status Quo ◽  
System Justification ◽  
System Justification Theory ◽  
Disadvantaged Groups ◽  
The Status ◽  
Group Interests

Is support for societal systems amongst the disadvantaged driven by an (un)conscious system justification motive that is independent from self-interests? System justification theory (SJT; Jost & Banaji, 1994) is unique in its affirmative answer to this question. SJT proposes (a) that support for societal systems operates in the service of maintaining the status quo, (b) that the evidence for this system justification motive lies with the fact that members of disadvantaged groups (un)consciously support societal systems that are detrimental to their interests, and (c) that these processes are most apparent when group interests are weak. The present article reviews emerging evidence for these propositions and concludes that: (a) an unconscious manifestation of system justification is unlikely based on SJT’s “strong” dissonance-based predictions, which assumes that competing group and system motives are cognitively salient, and (b) a conscious system justification motive is also unlikely amongst the disadvantaged when group interests are weak. In addition, we suggest ways in which to explain system justification effects amongst the disadvantaged without recourse to an (un)conscious system justification motive.

At whose expense? System justification and the appreciation of stereotypical humor targeting high- versus low-status groups

2021 ◽  
Vol 0 (0) ◽  
Author(s):  
Dean Baltiansky ◽  
Maureen A. Craig ◽  
John T. Jost
Keyword(s):  
Status Quo ◽  
System Justification ◽  
Poor People ◽  
High Status ◽  
Women Poor ◽  
European Americans ◽  
Humor Appreciation ◽  
The Status ◽  
Rich People ◽  
High System

Abstract Many popular comedians tell complicated jokes that involve multiple levels of interpretation. The same joke may be perceived as criticizing or reinforcing the societal status quo, depending on perceivers’ assumptions about the target of the punchline (e.g., whether the joke is at the expense of high- or low-status groups). We focused on how such jokes are experienced by listeners who are psychologically prone to justifying (vs. challenging) the status quo. In a sample of Mechanical Turk workers (N = 179), we explored whether individual differences in system justification would be associated with the appreciation of group-based (stereotypical) humor, depending on the perceived target of the joke. As hypothesized, 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. In some cases, low system-justifiers found jokes targeting high-status groups (rich people, European Americans) to be funnier than high system-justifiers did. These results expand upon previous demonstrations that humor appreciation is linked to relatively stable ideological dispositions and suggest that different individuals may perceive complex group-based humor in divergent ways.

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document