Sour Grapes, Sweet Lemons, and the Anticipatory Rationalization of the Status Quo

By Aaron C. Kay, M. C. Jiménez, John T. Jost. 2002

214 citations recorded by the source corpus.

Subfields: Applied Psychology, Cognitive Neuroscience, Sociology and Political Science

View Paper: https://www.semanticscholar.org/paper/c2895e9d6867f9c9f24f68fe8d87f4f907a7d21a

How researchers see this paper

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

In Applied Psychology

In Cognitive Neuroscience

In Sociology and Political Science

Citations in the corpus

Resistance to Change: A Social Psychological Perspective (2015, background): “…resist changes to the status quo, but once it appears to be highly likely (or perhaps inevitable) that a new regime will take its place, these same individuals tend to engage in anticipatory justification of the new status quo (Kay, Jimenez, and Jost 2002; Laurin, Kay, and Fitzsimons 2012).”
God and the government: testing a compensatory control mechanism for the support of external systems. (2008, background): “…on why we hold this desire—which is a topic that has received considerable attention elsewhere (e.g., Dechesne et al., 2000; Greenberg et al., 1995; Kay et al., 2002; Kruglanski, 1989; Kruglanski & Webster, 1996; Landau et al., 2004, 2006)— nor on documenting the desire itself, which also has…”
A quarter century of system justification theory: Questions, answers, criticisms, and societal applications (2018, background): “…unwelcome social and political outcomes – such as restrictions on their freedoms and various forms of disadvantageous inequality – when these are perceived as inevitable or inescapable (Kay et al., 2002; Laurin, Gaucher, & Kay, 2013; Laurin, Kay, & Fitzsimons, 2012; Laurin, Shepherd, & Kay, 2010).”
Are public opinion polls self-fulfilling prophecies? (2014, background): “, 2005); and (3) people resolving cognitive dissonance by switching to the side they infer is going to win based on the poll (Kay et al., 2002; Laurin et al., 2012).”
The psychology of system justification and the palliative function of ideology (2002, background): “Specifically, we argue that people engage in system justification (and other forms of rationalisation) in order to cope with and adapt to unjust or unpleasant realities that appear to be inevitable (see also Dalbert, 1997; Kay et al., 2002; Kieselbach, 1997).”
Identity, morals, and taboos: beliefs as assets. (2011, background): “Kay et al. [2002] found similar outcomes among political partisans for electoral outcomes and among students for changes in tuition. In the health domain, Kunda [1987] found that a purported scientic article about the increased risk of breast cancer from co¤ee was judged less credible (among female”
Antecedents and Consequences of System-Justifying Ideologies (2005, background): “Experiments by Kay, Jimenez, and Jost (2002) suggest that, when regime change seems inevitable, people will begin to rationalize the new arrangements almost immediately.”
A Decade of System Justification Theory: Accumulated Evidence of Conscious and Unconscious Bolstering of the Status Quo (2004, background): “Kay, Jimenez, and Jost (2002) elaborated on the McGuires' analysis of rationalization and offered the following hypothesis to distinguish its consequences from predictions derived from cognitive dissonance and social identity theories:”
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): “Lane (1959), for example, argued on the basis of structured interviews that members of the working class rationalize their own state of relative disadvantage by clinging to the belief that in other domains—especially happiness and morality—they are subjectively equal to or even better off than elite”