IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/p/hal/journl/hal-00982467.html
   My bibliography  Save this paper

The effects of system-justifying motives on endorsement of essentialist explanations for gender differences

Author

Listed:
  • Victoria Brescoll

    (Department of Psychology - Yale University [New Haven], School of Management - Yale University [New Haven])

  • Eric Luis Uhlmann

    (GREGH - Groupement de Recherche et d'Etudes en Gestion à HEC - HEC Paris - Ecole des Hautes Etudes Commerciales - CNRS - Centre National de la Recherche Scientifique)

  • George E. Newman

    (Yale School of Management - Yale University [New Haven])

Abstract

People have a fundamental motive to view their social system as just, fair, and good and will engage in a number of strategies to rationalize the status quo (Jost & Banaji, 1994). We propose that one way in which individuals may "justify the system" is through endorsement of essentialist explanations, which attribute group differences to deep, essential causes. We suggest that system-justifying motives lead to greater endorsement of essentialist explanations because those explanations portray group differences as immutable. Study 1 employed an established system threat manipulation. We found that activating system-justifying motives increases both male and female participants' endorsement of essentialist explanations for gender differences and that this effect is mediated by beliefs in immutability. In Study 2, we used a goal contagion manipulation and found that both male and female participants primed with a system-justifying goal are significantly more likely to agree with essentialist explanations for gender differences. Study 3 demonstrated that providing an opportunity to explicitly reject a system threat (an alternative means of satisfying the goal to defend the system) attenuates system threat effects on endorsement of essentialist explanations, further suggesting that this process is motivated. Finally, Studies 4a and 4b dissociated the type of cause (biological vs. social) from whether group differences are portrayed as mutable versus immutable and found that system threat increases endorsement of immutable explanations, independent of the type of cause.

Suggested Citation

  • Victoria Brescoll & Eric Luis Uhlmann & George E. Newman, 2013. "The effects of system-justifying motives on endorsement of essentialist explanations for gender differences," Post-Print hal-00982467, HAL.
  • Handle: RePEc:hal:journl:hal-00982467
    DOI: 10.1037/a0034701
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    To our knowledge, this item is not available for download. To find whether it is available, there are three options:
    1. Check below whether another version of this item is available online.
    2. Check on the provider's web page whether it is in fact available.
    3. Perform a search for a similarly titled item that would be available.

    Citations

    Citations are extracted by the CitEc Project, subscribe to its RSS feed for this item.
    as


    Cited by:

    1. Martin, Ashley E., 2023. "The divergent effects of diversity ideologies for race and gender relations," Organizational Behavior and Human Decision Processes, Elsevier, vol. 175(C).
    2. Chatman, Jennifer A. & Sharps, Daron & Mishra, Sonya & Kray, Laura J. & North, Michael S., 2022. "Agentic but not warm: Age-gender interactions and the consequences of stereotype incongruity perceptions for middle-aged professional women," Organizational Behavior and Human Decision Processes, Elsevier, vol. 173(C).
    3. Ponce de Leon, Rebecca & Kay, Aaron C., 2021. "Ironic Egalitarianism: When hierarchy-attenuating motives increase hierarchy-enhancing beliefs," Organizational Behavior and Human Decision Processes, Elsevier, vol. 164(C), pages 86-101.
    4. Salil Benegal & Mirya R. Holman, 2021. "Understanding the importance of sexism in shaping climate denial and policy opposition," Climatic Change, Springer, vol. 167(3), pages 1-19, August.
    5. Schaerer, Michael & du Plessis, Christilene & Nguyen, My Hoang Bao & van Aert, Robbie C.M. & Tiokhin, Leo & Lakens, Daniël & Giulia Clemente, Elena & Pfeiffer, Thomas & Dreber, Anna & Johannesson, Mag, 2023. "On the trajectory of discrimination: A meta-analysis and forecasting survey capturing 44 years of field experiments on gender and hiring decisions," Organizational Behavior and Human Decision Processes, Elsevier, vol. 179(C).
    6. Kennedy, Jessica A. & Kray, Laura J. & Ku, Gillian, 2017. "A social-cognitive approach to understanding gender differences in negotiator ethics: The role of moral identity," Organizational Behavior and Human Decision Processes, Elsevier, vol. 138(C), pages 28-44.
    7. Andrea L Miller & Eugene Borgida, 2016. "The Separate Spheres Model of Gendered Inequality," PLOS ONE, Public Library of Science, vol. 11(1), pages 1-34, January.

    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:hal:journl:hal-00982467. 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.

    We have no bibliographic references for this item. You can help adding them by using 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: CCSD (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://hal.archives-ouvertes.fr/ .

    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.