Legitimization and delegitimization of social hierarchy

Although status and wealth are related facets of social stratification, their association is only moderate. In this article, we demonstrate that justification of wealth versus status can be independent processes. To this end, we introduce a novel, nondeclarative measure of system justification. The measure is based on within-individual correlations between the judgments of how a group ‘‘is doing’’ and how it ‘‘should be doing.’’ Two studies demonstrated that the between-group differentiation in terms of material wealth was delegitimized—the more a group was perceived as wealthy, the less it was desired to be wealthy. However, the between-group differentiation in terms of status was generally legitimized—the more a group was perceived as influential, the more it was desired to be influential. We conclude by discussing the role of sociopolitical context in active legitimization and delegitimization of different aspects of the system

Egocentrism shapes moral judgements

We review past and recent literature on how egocentrism shapes moral judgements. We focus on mechanisms by which egocentric evaluations appear to people as objective, impartial and morally right. We also show that people seem to be unaware of these biases and suggest that understanding how egocentrism impacts moral judgements demands studying morality embedded in a specific social context rather than the social void created in a laboratory. Finally, we argue that egocentric biases in moral judgements are not easily overcome and persist even if people deliberately try to omit attitudes in their judgements or if morally relevant information is present. We conclude thategocentric evaluations triggered by such factors as personal and group interests or attitudes may lay at the core of moral judgements of others because they help maintain a strategic social and personal relationships

Self‐judgment and reputation monitoring as a function of the fundamental dimensions, temporal perspective, and culture

Social acceptance and the development of one's competencies and status are fundamental aspects of the human experience, but the former (communion) should take precedence over the latter (agency) in self‐judgment. Study 1 results indicated that (i) people across two cultures judged themselves as possessing higher communion than agency characteristics; (ii) communion self‐judgments were more consistent across temporal perspective; and (iii) level of self‐enhancement across cultures was similar for communion but different for agency. In Study 2, people across culture reported being more troubled and demonstrated a greater desire to repair their reputation when they imagined others perceived them as lacking in communion compared with agency. These findings support the idea that social life pressures people to view themselves as possessing communion traits and to ensure that others have this perception as well. Copyright © 2011 John Wiley & Sons, Ltd.Peer Reviewedhttp://deepblue.lib.umich.edu/bitstream/2027.42/90221/1/ejsp854.pd

Moral tribalism: Moral judgments of actions supporting ingroup interests depend on collective narcissism

In this article, we examine how group identity and protection of group interests shape morality judgments. We argue that actions serving ingroup interests are more likely to be judged as moral (or less immoral) than the same actions that do not serve ingroup interests. However, this group-interest bias should be especially strong among those high in collective narcissism—a defensive belief in ingroup greatness that is not appreciated by others. In Studies 1 (N = 185, Polish and British participants) and 2 (N = 404, British participants), participants judged actions favouring interests of outgroup members as less moral than similar actions favouring interests of their ingroup. However, this effect was only present for those high in national collective narcissism. In Study 3 (N = 400, American participants), moral judgments of the US Senate's decision about Brett Kavanaugh's nomination depended on partisanship, but this effect was strengthened by partisan collective narcissism. Finally, in Study 4 (N = 711, American participants), the association between national collective narcissism and morality judgments of President Trump's decision to remain an ally of Saudi Arabia was especially strong when national interest was salient (vs. not). None of the studies observed similar moderating effects of conventional ingroup identification. Overall, these results suggest that ingroup interests shape moral judgments, but this bias is most prevalent among those who are defensive about their group identity

Complementary stereotyping of ethnic minorities predicts system justification in Poland

We investigate the phenomenon of complementary stereotyping of ethnic minorities in Poland and its relationship to system justification. Using results from a nationally representative survey we test the hypothesis that complementary stereotypes—according to which ethnic minorities are seen as possessing distinctive, offsetting strengths and weaknesses—would be associated with system justification among Polish majority citizens. For four minorities, results indicated that stereotyping them as (a) low in morality but high in competence or (b) high in morality but low in competence predicted greater system justification. These results suggest that even in a context that is low in support for the status quo, complementary stereotyping of ethnic minorities is linked to system justification processes. For the three minority groups that were lowest in social status, complementary stereotyping was unrelated to system justification. It appears that negative attitude towards these groups can be expressed openly, regardless of one’s degree of system justification

Stripped of illusions? Exploring system justification processes in Capitalist and post-Communist societies

Sociologists and political scientists have often observed that citizens of Central and Eastern Europe express high levels of disillusionment with their social, economic and political systems, in comparison with citizens of Western capitalist societies. In this review, we analyze system legitimation and delegitimation in post-Communist societies from a social psychological perspective. We draw on system justification theory, which seeks to understand how, when and why people do (and do not) defend, bolster and justify existing social systems. We review some of the major tenets and findings of the theory and compare research on system-justifying beliefs and ideologies in traditionally Capitalist and post-Communist countries to determine: (1) whether there are robust differences in the degree of system justification in post-Communist and Capitalist societies, and (2) the extent to which hypotheses derived from system justification theory receive support in the post-Communist context. To this end, we summarize research findings from over 20 countries and cite previously unpublished data from a public opinion survey conducted in Poland. Our analysis confirms that there are lower levels of system justification in post-Communist countries. At the same time, we find that system justification possesses similar social and psychological antecedents, manifestations and consequences in the two types of societies. We offer potential explanations for these somewhat complicated patterns of results and conclude by addressing implications for theory and research on system justification and system change (or transition)

‘Communities of resistance’ and the use of newspaper discussion boards Polish workers in Japanese foreign investments

This is the peer reviewed version of the following article: Maciej Bancarzewski, and Jane Hardy, ‘‘Communities of resistance’ and the use of newspaper discussion boards: Polish workers in Japanese foreign investments’, New Technology, Work and Employment, Vol. 32 (2): 160-173, July 2017, which has been published in final form at https://doi.org/10.1111/ntwe.12091. Under embargo until 25 July 2019. This article may be used for non-commercial purposes in accordance with Wiley Terms and Conditions for Self-Archiving.This article examines the content of two hundred posts on newspaper discussion boards by workers in a cluster of Japanese foreign investments in Poland. The conclusions are first, that the material experiences of workers generate a set of themes in relation to the labour process with regard to wages and working conditions, bullying and monitoring that exhibit similarities across countries. Second, we argue that an analysis of the discourse used is shaped by political and institutional conditions, which reveal national differences in how workers perceive and locate their exploitation. Finally, in relation to debates about workers’ resistance and the use of the internet we argue that the interaction of themes related to the material experience of work are intertwined with institutionally embedded understandings of exploitation, which not only enable a shared framework for venting, but also provide the basis for a community of resistance.Peer reviewedFinal Accepted Versio

Partner in Crime: Beneficial Cooperation Overcomes Children’s Aversion to Antisocial Others

Young children display strong aversion toward antisocial individuals, but also feel responsible for joint activities and express a strong sense of group loyalty. This paper aims to understand how beneficial cooperation with an antisocial partner shapes preschoolers’ attitudes, preferences and moral judgments concerning antisocial individuals. We argue that although young children display a strong aversion to antisocial characters, children may overcome this aversion when they stand to personally benefit. In Study 1a (N = 62), beneficial cooperation with an antisocial partner resulted in the children’s later preference for the antisocial partner over the neutral partner. Study 1b (N = 91) replicated this effect with discrete measurement of liking (resource distribution) and showed that children rewarded more and punished less the antisocial partner in the beneficial cooperation setting. In Study 2, (N = 58), children’s aversion to an antisocial ingroup member decreased when the cooperation benefited other ingroup members. Finally, in Study 3 (N = 62), when children passively observed the antisocial individual, personal benefits from the antisocial behavior did not change their negative attitude toward the antisocial individual. Overall, beneficial cooperation with the antisocial partner increased the children’s liking and preference for the antisocial partner, but did not affect the children’s moral judgments. Presented evidence suggests that by the age of 4, children develop a strong obligation to collaborate with partners who help them to acquire resources – even when these partners harm third parties, which children recognize as immoral

To strike a pose: no stereotype backlash for power posing women

Power posing, the adoption of open and powerful postures, has effects that parallel those of actual social power. This study explored the social evaluation of adopting powerful versus powerless body postures in men and women regarding perceived warmth, competence, and the likelihood of eliciting admiration, envy, pity, and contempt. Previous findings suggest that the display of power by women may have side effects due to gender stereotyping, namely reduced warmth ratings and negative emotional reactions. An experiment (N = 2,473) asked participants to rate pictures of men and women who adopted high-power or low-power body postures. High-power posers were rated higher on competence, admiration, envy, and contempt compared to low-power posers, whereas the opposite was true for pity. There was no impact of power posing on perceived warmth. Contrary to expectations, the poser’s gender did not moderate any of the effects. These findings suggest that nonverbal displays of power do influence fundamental dimensions of social perception and their accompanying emotional reactions but result in comparably positive and negative evaluations for both genders