Hostname: page-component-586b7cd67f-t7fkt Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-11-30T20:20:23.476Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

System-justifying motives can lead to both the acceptance and the rejection of innate explanations for group differences

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  24 October 2014

Eric Luis Uhlmann ,
Luke Zhu ,
Victoria L. Brescoll  and
George E. Newman
Eric Luis Uhlmann
Affiliation:
HEC Paris – School of Management, Management and Human Resources Department, 78351 Jouy-en-Josas, France. [email protected]://www.socialjudgments.com
Luke Zhu
Affiliation:
Sauder School of Business, University of British Columbia, Vancouver, BC V6Z 3B7, Canada. [email protected]://www.sauder.ubc.ca/Programs/PhD_in_Business_Administration/Current_Students/Zhu_Luke
Victoria L. Brescoll
Affiliation:
School of Management, Yale University, New Haven, CT 06511. [email protected]://som.yale.edu/[email protected]://som.yale.edu/george-e-newman
George E. Newman
Affiliation:
School of Management, Yale University, New Haven, CT 06511. [email protected]://som.yale.edu/[email protected]://som.yale.edu/george-e-newman
Get access Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Abstract

Recent experimental evidence indicates that intuitions about inherence and system justification are distinct psychological processes, and that the inherence heuristic supplies important explanatory frameworks that are accepted or rejected based on their consistency with one's motivation to justify the system.

Type
Open Peer Commentary
Information
Behavioral and Brain Sciences , Volume 37 , Issue 5 , October 2014 , pp. 503 - 504
Copyright
Copyright © Cambridge University Press 2014 

Access options

Get access to the full version of this content by using one of the access options below. (Log in options will check for institutional or personal access. Content may require purchase if you do not have access.)

References

Brescoll, V. L. & Uhlmann, E. L. (2013) [Unpublished raw data.] Yale University.Google Scholar
Brescoll, V. L., Uhlmann, E. L. & Newman, G. N. (2013) The effects of system-justifying motives on endorsement of essentialist explanations for gender differences. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology 105:891–908.Google Scholar
Cutright, K. M., Wu, E. C., Banfield, J. C., Kay, A. C. & Fitzsimons, G. J. (2011) When your world must be defended: Choosing products to justify the system. Journal of Consumer Research 38:62–77.Google Scholar
Dunning, D., Leuenberger, A. & Sherman, D. A. (1995) A new look at motivated inference: Are self-serving theories of success a product of motivational forces? Journal of Personality and Social Psychology 69:58–68.Google Scholar
Jost, J. T. & Banaji, M. R. (1994) The role of stereotyping in system-justification and the production of false consciousness. British Journal of Social Psychology 33:1–27.Google Scholar
Jost, J. T. Banaji, M. R. & Nosek, B. A. (2004) A decade of system justification theory: Accumulated evidence of conscious and unconscious bolstering of the status quo. Political Psychology 25:881–919.Google Scholar
Jost, J. T., Kivetz, Y., Rubini, M., Guermandi, G. & Mosso, C. (2005) System-justifying functions of complementary regional and ethnic stereotypes: Cross-national evidence. Social Justice Research 18:305–33.Google Scholar
Kay, A. C., Jost, J. T. & Young, S. (2005) Victim derogation and victim enhancement as alternate routes to system justification. Psychological Science 16:240–46.Google Scholar
Kunda, Z. (1990) The case for motivated reasoning. Psychological Bulletin 108:480–98.Google Scholar
Lau, G. P., Kay, A. C. & Spencer, S. J. (2008) Loving those who justify inequality: The effects of system threat on attraction to women who embody benevolent sexist ideals. Psychological Science 19:20–21.Google Scholar
Laurin, K., Shepard, S. & Kay, A. C. (2010) Restricted emigration, system inescapability, and the defense of the status quo: System-justifying consequences of restricted exit opportunities. Psychological Science 21:1075–82.Google Scholar
Zhu, L., Kay, A. C. & Eibach, R. P. (2013) A test of the flexible ideology hypothesis: System justification motives interact with ideological cuing to predict political judgments. Journal of Experimental Social Psychology 49:755–58.Google Scholar