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

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 (N-total = 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

Positive temporal comparison facilitates a hope-induced system justification amongst women

We examined whether women’s support for gender-based pay inequality (i.e., system justification) might be explained by hope. In particular, we considered whether such hope is likely prompted by positive temporal comparisons: It is entirely possible (even if previously untested) that the more women believe that their outcomes are getting better relative to what it had been at some point in the past, the greater their optimism about a better gender-based outcome could be, prompting women to support the systems that permitted such advancements. These central propositions were derived from the social identity model of systems attitude (SIMSA) and were corroborated in a correlational study involving 611 female healthcare professionals (Study 1). Study 2 (213 Italian- and 79 Spanish-women) offered a conceptual replication and extension of the evidence from Study 1: It showed that inducing positive temporal contrasts caused women’s hope for a better gender-based outcome in the future to increase, consequently allowing them to support the prevailing gender-syste

Editorial: Exploring system justification phenomenon among disadvantaged individuals

The question of why (or even when) the disadvantaged might be more or less supportive of existing social arrangements is a matter of debate amongst social and political psychologists (e.g., Passini, 2019; Jost, 2020, see also Rubin et al., 2022). Accordingly, for this Research Topic, we chose a title that was deliberately broad in scope, accommodating several aspects that included: (a) the drivers of system justification; (b) the socio-structural conditions that enhance or dampen system justification, (c) the ideological correlates of system support, and (d) the impact of system justification on wellbeing. Taken together, the contributions comprised in this Research Topic provide a comprehensive analysis of these four issue

Responses to metastereotype activation amongst members of devalued groups

EThOS - Electronic Theses Online ServiceGBUnited Kingdo

Fact or Fiction

<p>In a previous study we showed that people generally perceive members of low status groups to be more expressive of anger and less of calm compared to their higher status counterparts. In that study we operationalised status in terms of race and perceivers were asked to rate the extent to which they expected either a low status (African targets) or high status (Caucasians targets) to be expressive of anger and calm. Although the results confirmed our theorising in terms of the hunchback stereotype, the specific racial context we used may be conceived by some as having pre-existing stereotypes regarding emotional expressions. That is, Black Africans are generally perceived to be more aggressive than Caucasians and this racial bias introduces another explanation to the patterns we found, over and above the theorised hunchback effect. For this reason, we plan to replicate the same experiment using the same racial context, but this time introducing another status variable - weight. Weight is generally negatively regarded in most societies and people often attach low social status to those who are ‘large’ compared to those who are thin. Note that individuals who are large generally score highly on warmth (Durante et al., 2014) and this physical feature provides a stringent test of the hunchback stereotype rather than a biased test of it, because the positive warmth perceptions should work against a negative anger perception. That is, if the hunchback stereotype is true, then beyond an effect of status based on race, one should also see a similar effect based on size – such that large people of any of the two racial groups would be expected to be (a) more expressive of anger, and (b) less expressive of calm, compared to thin targets. For applied reasons, we would also include clothing type (formal vs. casual) to explore whether or not members of low status group (race and size) are buffered against the hunchback stereotype if they are dressed in clothing that is presumed to accord high status in society (formal attire).</p

Fact or Fiction_Main.doc

<p>HBs</p

On the psychological barriers to the workplace: When and why metastereotyping undermines employability beliefs of women and ethnic minorities.

We investigated the effect of beliefs about how one expects one’s group to be viewed by a dominant outgroup (i.e. meta-stereotypes) on disadvantaged group members’ employability beliefs. Grounded in the research on stereotype threat, we hypothesised that activating negative meta-stereotypes would undermine employability beliefs of members of disadvantaged groups because such beliefs threaten group members’ state self-esteem. In particular, we expected that an effect of negative meta-stereotyping on employability beliefs that is explained by momentary self-doubts would be particularly evident among members whose dispositional self-esteem is high rather than low to begin with. Taken jointly, results from a correlational study (N = 80) and an experimental one (N = 56) supported these hypotheses. The discussion focuses on the implications of our findings for mobility into the workplace among members of disadvantaged groups

On the psychological barriers to the workplace: When and why metastereotyping undermines employability beliefs of women and ethnic minorities.

We investigated the effect of how one might expect one’s group to be viewed by a dominant outgroup (i.e., metastereotypes) on employability beliefs of members of disadvantaged groups. Based on the extensive literature on stereotype threat, we hypothesized that activating negative metastereotypes would undermine employability beliefs of members of disadvantaged groups, because such beliefs are likely to threaten their state self-esteem. In particular, we expected that an effect of negative metastereotyping on employability beliefs would be explained by momentary self-doubts and be particularly evident among members whose dispositional self-esteem is high rather than low to begin with. Taken jointly, results from a correlational study (n = 80) and an experimental study (n = 56) supported these hypotheses, and discussion focuses on their implications for mobility into the workplace

When Might Heterosexual Men Be Passive or Compassionate Toward Gay Victims of Hate Crime? Integrating the Bystander and Social Loafing Explanations

Compassionate feelings for people who are victimized because of their perceived sexual deviance (e.g., gay men) may be incompatible with support for heterosexual norms among heterosexual men. But, indifference (or passivity) toward such victims could raise concern over heterosexual men’s gay-tolerance attitude. Two classic social psychological theories offer competing explanations on when heterosexual men might be passive or compassionate toward gay victims of hate crime. The bystander model proposes passivity toward victims in an emergency situation if other bystanders are similarly passive, but compassionate reactions if bystanders are responsive to the victims. Conversely, the social loafing model proposes compassionate reactions toward victims when bystanders are passive, but passivity when other bystanders are already responsive toward the victims’ predicament. We tested and found supportive evidence for both models across two experiments (Ntotal = 501) in which passivity and compassionate reactions to gay victims of a purported hate crime were recorded after heterosexual men’s concern for social evaluation was either accentuated or relaxed. We found that the bystander explanation was visible only when the potential for social evaluation was strong, while the social loafing account occurred only when the potential for social evaluation was relaxed. Hence, we unite both models by showing that the bystander explanation prevails in situations where cues to social evaluation are strong, whereas the social loafing effect operates when concern over social judgement is somewhat muted

Heterosexual men in Trump's America downplay compassion more for masculine (than for feminine) gay victims of hate crime: Why?

Why would heterosexual men downplay their compassion for masculine (vs. feminine) gay victims of hate crime? Two social identity-inspired explanations provide contrasting answers to this question. The reactive distinctiveness thesis (RD) assumes that heterosexual men would downplay their compassion more, when cued to a gay victim's masculinity than to their femininity, provided evaluative concerns are strong. In contrast, the feminization-threat thesis (FT) assumes that compassion downplays would be more visible when heterosexual men are cued to a gay victim's femininity (not to the victim's masculinity), provided evaluative concerns are strong too. Consistent with RD, three experiments (Ntotal = 1,475) revealed that heterosexual men who read news about (gay) victims at a hate crime scene downplayed their compassion to a greater degree when cued to the masculinity rather than to the femininity of such targets (Studies 1–3). Meanwhile FT's prediction received partial support when considering feminine (vs. masculine) heterosexual victims, rather than homosexual victims (Study 3)