Attitudinal Ambivalence and the Conflict between Group and System Justification Motives in Low Status Groups

By John T. Jost, D. Burgess. 2000

450 citations recorded by the source corpus.

Subfields: Gender Studies, Social Psychology, Sociology and Political Science

View Paper: https://www.semanticscholar.org/paper/b9953a63960bd295ce38170a10332e0ca5c55411

How researchers see this paper

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

In Gender Studies

In Social Psychology

In Sociology and Political Science

Citations in the corpus

Understanding The Dual Nature of Ambivalence: Why and When Ambivalence Leads to Good and Bad Outcomes (2017, unknown): “…the overall consistency that humans prefer (Heider, 1946; Van Harreveld et al., 2014) and may help to mitigate ambivalence-induced negative affect (Jost and Burgess, 2000), thus making it easier for 4 This is supported by evidence that the effects on cognitive processing are found only in the…”
SUBGROUP DYNAMICS IN INTERNATIONALLY DISTRIBUTED TEAMS: ETHNOCENTRISM OR CROSS-NATIONAL LEARNING? (2004, background): “For higher-status groups, engaging across differences could result in loss of valuable status; they are motivated to legitimize the existing social arrangement rather than seek change (see Jost & Burgess, 2000).”
Consumer Xenocentrism as Determinant of Foreign Product Preference: A System Justification Perspective (2016, background): “Accordingly, system justification is linked to higher ambivalence toward the in-group and lower self-esteem formembers of low-status groups (Jost and Burgess 2000).”
From social class to self-efficacy: internalization of low social status pupils’ school performance (2015, background): “As a result, both high and low status group members are led to develop self-perceptions that are congruent with their position within the system (Jost et al. 2004; Jost and Burgess 2000; Jost 2001).”
Suffering from the possibility of status loss: Physiological responses to social identity threat in high status groups. (2009, background): “…case for instance when reality constraints prevent them from outrightly claiming ingroup superiority (Ellemers, Van Rijswijk, Roefs, & Simons, 1997; Jost & Burgess, 2000), or when calling attention to their group’s inferior position can constitute a first step in seeking social change (Wright,…”
Psychological perspectives on legitimacy and legitimation. (2006, unknown): “F or p er so na l u se o nl y. 25 Oct 2005 16:27 AR ANRV264-PS57-14.tex XMLPublishSM(2004/02/24) P1: KUV LEGITIMACY AND LEGITIMATION 389 2001, Jost & Burgess 2000, Jost et al. 2001).”
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): “…only a partial subset of the full range of consequences and manifestations of the system justification tendency, which also includes stereotypes, ideologies, and attitudes toward systems and authorities (e.g., Jost & Burgess, 2000; Jost, Pelham, Sheldon, & Sullivan, 2003; Jost & Thompson, 2000).”