System Justification Theory

Author(s):  
John T. Jost ◽  
Jojanekke van der Toorn
2016 ◽  
Author(s):  
John Jost ◽  
Mahzarin R. Banaji ◽  
Brian A. Nosek

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).


2020 ◽  
Vol 8 (18) ◽  

The purpose of the present study was to develop, from the perspective of system justification theory (Jost & Banaji, 1994), an honor system justification (HSJ) scale aimed at evaluating individuals’ tendency to justify the honor system in the society. Initially, a 28-item pool was generated based on honor literature and the phrases expressed in the reports and news. An adult sample consisting of 433 participants (275 women, 158 men; Mage = 31.77, SDage = 7.61) was employed in the study. The exploratory and confirmatory factor analyses suggested a one-factor 10-item solution, explaining 52.34% of the variance. Factor loadings ranged from .67 to .79 and item-total correlations ranged between .58 and .72. The Cronbach’s alpha coefficient for HSJ scale was .90. The significant correlation of HSJ with other honor-related variables (honor endorsement, attitudes toward violence against women for protecting honor) as well as other system justification ideologies (gender system justification, benevolent and hostile sexism) demonstrates the scale’s validity. In conclusion, the results of the psychometric analyses showed that HSJ is a reliable and valid self-report measure that can be used in honor-related research. Keywords System justification, honor, gender, scale development


2018 ◽  
Author(s):  
Chuma Kevin Owuamalam ◽  
Mark Rubin ◽  
Russell Spears

Do the disadvantaged have an autonomous system justification motivation that operates against their personal and group interests? System justification theory (SJT; Jost & Banaji, 1994) proposes that they do, and that this motivation helps to (a) reduce cognitive dissonance and associated uncertainties and (b) 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). 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 (a) in order to acknowledge social reality, (b) when they perceive the wider social system to constitute a superordinate ingroup, and (c) 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.


2017 ◽  
Vol 59 (3) ◽  
pp. 201-214 ◽  
Author(s):  
Tiffany Shin Legendre ◽  
Rodney Warnick ◽  
Melissa Baker

Despite the copious anecdotal evidence available, research only recently examines the multidimensional dynamics associated with underdog brands and their essential, complex place in the business world. This research seeks to better conceptualize, operationalize, and refine the theories and constructs surrounding underdogs. The study conducts two 2 × 2 × 2 quasi-experimental between-subjects design studies to fulfill these objectives. Study 1 is designed to confirm that brand localness needs to be separated from underdog concepts as both brand cues distinctively prompt customers’ purchase activism depending on their political orientations. Study 2 extends the system justification theory by replicating Study 1 using a different context and refining control variables to better understand other potential explanations of customer behavior toward underdog/localness brand cues. The results indicate that brand positioning status and brand localness both have main effects on intent to purchase and willingness to pay a price premium. Furthermore, results find political orientation is an important moderator in determining whether customers purchase underdog brands.


2021 ◽  
Vol ahead-of-print (ahead-of-print) ◽  
Author(s):  
Benjamin J. Thomas ◽  
Spencer Harris

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.


2019 ◽  
Vol 22 (6) ◽  
pp. 858-878 ◽  
Author(s):  
Mark R. Hoffarth ◽  
Flávio Azevedo ◽  
John T. Jost

Many people in Western societies tolerate the mistreatment of nonhuman animals, despite obvious ethical concerns about the injustice of animal suffering and exploitation. In three studies, we applied system justification theory to examine the ideological basis of human–animal relations. In Studies 1a and 1b, we showed in both a large convenience sample ( N = 2,119) and a nationally representative sample in the US ( N = 1,500) that economic system justification uniquely explained the relationship between political conservatism and animal welfare attitudes even after adjusting for social dominance orientation. In Study 2, we replicated and extended these findings using more elaborate measures of animal welfare attitudes in the context of an MTurk sample of U.S. respondents ( N = 395). Specifically, we found that conservatism was associated with less support for animal welfare and greater endorsement of speciesism (the belief that humans are morally superior to nonhuman animals) and that individual differences in economic system justification mediated these associations. We discuss several ways in which system justification theory may inform interventions designed to promote support for animal welfare in society at large.


2019 ◽  
Vol 44 (1) ◽  
pp. 50-66
Author(s):  
Cara C. MacInnis ◽  
Elena Buliga

We examined perceptions of cross-class heterosexual couples, that is, couples where couple members differ in social class. Informed by social dominance theory, system justification theory, and equity theory, we predicted that (a) cross- (vs. same-) class couples would be perceived more negatively, (b) cross-class couples with the woman (vs. the man) in the higher class position would be evaluated more negatively, and (c) same-class low-low (vs. high-high) couples would be evaluated more negatively. We examined perceptions of cross-income, cross-education, and cross-occupation status relationships. We found support for our predicted patterns, with some exceptions. In general, high-high class couples were preferred. In three of four studies, a higher-class woman paired with a lower-class man was evaluated most negatively of all couples. Recognition of this prejudice may explain challenges faced by certain couples and couple members; as such, implications for clinicians and counselors are discussed. Further, our research generates directions for future research. Additional online materials for this article are available on PWQ’s website at http://journals.sagepub.com/doi/suppl/10.1177/0361684319878459


Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document