The psychology of system justification and the palliative function of ideology

By John T. Jost, Orsolya Hunyady. 2002

839 citations recorded by the source corpus.

Subfields: Political Science and International Relations, Social Psychology, Sociology and Political Science

View Paper: https://www.semanticscholar.org/paper/fc1d0625de88139b92770f8c2d24e1ff2d6cbc6c

How researchers see this paper

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

In Political Science and International Relations

In Social Psychology

In Sociology and Political Science

Citations in the corpus

Compensation between warmth and competence: Antecedents and consequences of a negative relation between the two fundamental dimensions of social perception (2010, neutral): “In the first experiment, as in Judd et al. (2005), Kervyn et al. (2009b), and Yzerbyt et al.”
Social Identity, System Justification, and Social Dominance: Commentary on Reicher, Jost et al., and Sidanius et al. (2004, background): “Hence, Sidanius, Levin, Federico, and Pratto (2001) defined SDO as a "general desire for unequal relations among social groups, regardless of whether this means ingroup domination or ingroup subordination" (p.”
A sense of powerlessness fosters system justification: Implications for the legitimation of authority, hierarchy, and government (2015, neutral): “When given the opportunity to legitimize the authority or system, they should experience a decrease in negative emotion and arousal, consistent with the palliative function of system justiﬁcation (Jost & Hunyady, 2002; Wakslak, Jost, Tyler, & Chen, 2007).”
General Belief in A Just World and Resilience: Evidence from A Collectivistic Culture (2011, background): “Furthermore, it is implied that these justification strategies could serve the palliative function of releasing frustration in face of harsh realities (Jost & Hunyady, 2002; Jost et al., 2003).”
Working for the System: Motivated Defense of Meritocratic Beliefs (2011, background): “By contrast, many other system-justifying beliefs (e.g., stereotypical ascriptions of laziness or incompetence to low-status groups) are more obviously psychologically costly for disadvantaged group members (e.g., Jost & Hunyady, 2002; Jost & Thompson, 2000).”
Not Competent but Warm... Really? Compensatory Stereotypes in the French-speaking World (2005, methodology): “Building on ELIT and the SCM, we would predict that both high- and low-status members associate the high-status group more readily with competence and the low-status group more readily with warmth (see also Social Dominance Theory, Sidanius & Pratto, 1999, and System Justification Theory, Jost & Ban”
A quarter century of system justification theory: Questions, answers, criticisms, and societal applications (2018, background): “And, although I share Lewin’s (1947) conviction that resistance to change is all too common in human affairs, when regime change is perceived as extremely likely (or inevitable), many people will begin to justify the newly emerging status quo (Kay et al.”
Uncertainty and the Roots of Extremism (2013, background): “People can go to great lengths to support and justify the existing social structure, even if such behavior places themselves and their group in a relatively disadvantaged position—an idea explored by system justification theory (e.g., Jost & Hunyadi, 2002; Jost & Van der Toorn, 2011).”
Shared Reality, System Justification, and the Relational Basis of Ideological Beliefs (2008, background): “Although system justification results in negative consequences for some individuals – most especially for members of disadvantaged groups who are harmed by the current state of affairs – there are a number of psychological reasons why it would be functional for people to actively seek to justify the”
Can Evidence Impact Attitudes? Public Reactions to Evidence of Gender Bias in STEM Fields (2015, background): “People may therefore respond to such information defensively, exhibiting negatively-valenced reactions such as denying the validity of damning evidence or justifying the existence of gender bias (Crandall & Eshleman, 2003; Jost & Hunyady, 2002).”
Group‐based Differences in Perceptions of Racism: What Counts, to Whom, and Why? (2015, background): “For example, minorities who endorse status-legitimizing beliefs, and thus justify the current status hierarchy, are less likely to perceive prejudice against members of their ingroup ( Jost & Banaji, 1994; Jost & Hunyady, 2002; Major & Schmader, 2001).”
Antecedents and Consequences of System-Justifying Ideologies (2005, background): “To investigate how and why people accept and maintain the social systems that affect them, we have developed system justification theory (Jost, Banaji, & Nosek, 2004; Jost & Hunyady, 2002 ).”