IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/p/ecl/stabus/1672.html
   My bibliography  Save this paper

System Justification Theory as Compliment, Complement, and Corrective to Theories of Social Identification and Social Dominance

Author

Listed:
  • Jost, John T.

    (Stanford U)

Abstract

System justification theory seeks to understand how and why people provide cognitive and ideological support for the status quo and what the social and psychological consequences of supporting the status quo are, especially for members of disadvantaged groups (e.g., Jost & Banaji, 1994; Jost & Burgess, 2000). Although system justification theorists have been influenced tremendously by theories of social identification and social dominance, these other theories underestimate the strength of system justification motives and the power of false consciousness to lead people to endorse system-serving beliefs that are contrary to their own social and political interests. In support of a strong, dissonance-based form of the system justification hypothesis but contrary to the other two theoretical accounts, evidence is presented that lower income respondents are more likely than high income respondents to support the social order and its authorities. Several additional limitations of social identity theory are reviewed, including the fact that it overemphasizes ingroup favoritism and neglects outgroup favoritism, it has been used to make inconsistent, contradictory predictions regarding the effects of status on intergroup behavior, it provides no theoretically satisfying account of why low status group members would perceive the system to be legitimate and stable or why they would accept the constraints of "social reality", and it has contributed little to our empirical understanding of ideology and the systemic level of analysis. Social dominance theory is also criticized from a system justification standpoint, largely on the grounds that its sociobiological assumptions serve as a "legitimizing myth" for inequality and that the conceptualization of social dominance orientation conflates the distinction between group justification and system justification.

Suggested Citation

  • Jost, John T., 2001. "System Justification Theory as Compliment, Complement, and Corrective to Theories of Social Identification and Social Dominance," Research Papers 1672, Stanford University, Graduate School of Business.
  • Handle: RePEc:ecl:stabus:1672
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://gsbapps.stanford.edu/researchpapers/library/RP1672.pdf
    Download Restriction: no
    ---><---

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Jost, John T. & Haines, Elizabeth L., 2000. "Placating the Powerless: Effects of Legitimate and Illegitimate Explanation on Affect, Memory and Stereotyping," Research Papers 1606, Stanford University, Graduate School of Business.
    2. Jost, John T. & Carvallo, Mauricio R. & Pelham, Brett W., 2000. "Non-conscious Forms of System Justification: Cognitive, Affective, and Behavioral Preferences for Higher Status Groups," Research Papers 1626, Stanford University, Graduate School of Business.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    Most related items

    These are the items that most often cite the same works as this one and are cited by the same works as this one.
    1. Jost, John T. & Pelham, Brett W. & Sullivan, Bilian Ni & Sheldon, Oliver, 2001. "Social Inequality and the Reduction of Ideological Dissonance on Behalf of the System: Evidence of Enhanced System Justification among the Disadvantaged," Research Papers 1671, Stanford University, Graduate School of Business.
    2. Jost, John T. & Blount, Sally & Pfeffer, Jeffrey & Hunyady, Gyorgy, 2003. "Fair Market Ideology: Its Cognitive-Motivational Underpinnings," Research Papers 1816, Stanford University, Graduate School of Business.
    3. Jon Wisman, 2013. "Government Is Whose Problem?," Journal of Economic Issues, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 47(4), pages 911-938.
    4. Mats Alvesson & Dan Kärreman, 2007. "Unraveling HRM: Identity, Ceremony, and Control in a Management Consulting Firm," Organization Science, INFORMS, vol. 18(4), pages 711-723, August.
    5. El Hazzouri, Mohammed & Main, Kelley J. & Carvalho, Sergio W., 2017. "Ethnic minority consumers reactions to advertisements featuring members of other minority groups," International Journal of Research in Marketing, Elsevier, vol. 34(3), pages 717-733.
    6. Jon D. Wisman & Michael Cauvel, 2021. "Why Has Labor Not Demanded Guaranteed Employment?," Journal of Economic Issues, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 55(3), pages 677-696, July.
    7. Lewis, Amy C. & Sherman, Steven J., 2003. "Hiring you makes me look bad: Social-identity based reversals of the ingroup favoritism effect," Organizational Behavior and Human Decision Processes, Elsevier, vol. 90(2), pages 262-276, March.
    8. Jost, John T. & Hunyady, Orsolya, 2002. "The Psychology of System Justification and the Palliative Function of Ideology," Research Papers 1754, Stanford University, Graduate School of Business.
    9. Paul Dunn & Jonathan Farrar & Cass Hausserman, 2018. "The Influence of Guilt Cognitions on Taxpayers’ Voluntary Disclosures," Journal of Business Ethics, Springer, vol. 148(3), pages 689-701, March.
    10. Jeffrey R. Cohen & Derek W. Dalton & Lori L. Holder-Webb & Jeffrey J. McMillan, 2020. "An Analysis of Glass Ceiling Perceptions in the Accounting Profession," Journal of Business Ethics, Springer, vol. 164(1), pages 17-38, June.
    11. Daron Acemoglu, 2022. "Obedience in the Labour Market and Social Mobility: A Socioeconomic Approach," Economica, London School of Economics and Political Science, vol. 89(S1), pages 2-37, June.

    More about this item

    Statistics

    Access and download statistics

    Corrections

    All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:ecl:stabus:1672. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.

    If CitEc recognized a bibliographic reference but did not link an item in RePEc to it, you can help with this form .

    If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: the person in charge (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://edirc.repec.org/data/gsstaus.html .

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service. RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.