Conflicts of legitimation among self, group, and system: The integrative potential of system justification theory

By John T. Jost, D. Burgess, C. Mosso. 2001

205 citations recorded by the source corpus.

View Paper: https://www.semanticscholar.org/paper/405aaf2511a29850272fab26b1609a8318fb6152

How researchers see this paper

The researchers whose trusted networks rank it highest, strongest advocate first. Every researcher gets a different order.

Citations in the corpus

Connecting Work—Family Policies to Supportive Work Environments (2009, background): “Lambert’s (2000) assertion that signals may be more recognized by certain individuals, along with Prabhu and Stewart’s (2001) claim that interpretation of the signal is key, would suggest that particular family characteristics may heighten the signaling potential of work–family policies.”
A quarter century of system justification theory: Questions, answers, criticisms, and societal applications (2018, background): “On the contrary, system justificationon the part of the disadvantaged is typically attenuated by countervailingmotives for ego and group justification, as Jost et al. (2001) pointed out long ago.”
Warmth and Competence As Universal Dimensions of Social Perception: The Stereotype Content Model and the BIAS Map (2008, background): “That is, one function of viewing them as competent yet unsociable is to justify a system whereby competence is rewarded but some competent groups are rejected on other grounds, such as lacking sociability (Glick and Fiske, 2001b; Jost et al., 2001).”
The Space between Us and Them: Perceptions of Status Differences (2009, background): “On the other hand, system justifi cation theory holds that, in some circumstances, subordinates are even more strongly motivated than dominants to perceive the social system as just and fair (Jost et al., 2001; Jost, Pelham, Sheldon, & Sullivan, 2003; Jost & Banaji, 2004; Jost et al., 2004).”
Missing in (Collective) Action (2017, background): “7) highlights the following additions to basic tenets of SIMCA: (a) epistemic, existential, and relational needs underlie and contribute to system justification; (b) in-group identification should be positively associated with system justification for those who are advantaged but negatively associat”
Complementary justice: effects of "poor but happy" and "poor but honest" stereotype exemplars on system justification and implicit activation of the justice motive. (2003, background): “…BJW and political conservatism—help to explain ingroup ambivalence, outgroup favoritism, depressed entitlement, and the internalization of inferiority among members of disadvantaged groups (e.g., Jost & Burgess, 2000; Jost et al., 2001; Jost & Thompson, 2000; Rudman, Feinberg, & Fairchild, 2002).”
A Decade of System Justification Theory: Accumulated Evidence of Conscious and Unconscious Bolstering of the Status Quo (2004, background): “Jost et al. (2001) analyzed national survey data from Italy and found that northern Italians expressed stronger ingroup favoritism as they held increasingly right-wing political opinions, whereas southern Italians expressed (slightly) stronger outgroup favoritism as they held increasingly rightwing…”
Consumer Xenocentrism as Determinant of Foreign Product Preference: A System Justification Perspective (2016, background): “…tendency to develop and maintain a favorable self-image (ego justificationmotive), the desire to develop and maintain favorable images of their own group (group justification motive), and the acceptance of the legitimacy of the social system (system justification) (Jost, Burgess, and Mosso 2001).”
Social psychological perspectives on the legitimation of social inequality: Past, present and future (2013, unknown): “As suggested by Jost, Burgess, and Mosso (2001), these processes operate at the level of the individual, the group, and the system.”