Chuma Kevin Owuamalam, Luca Caricati, Chee Meng Tan, Andrea Soledad Matos, Chiara Bonetti, Mark Rubin, Russell Spears, Marco Marinucci
{"title":"Re-Examining Buchel et al.’s (2021) Test of the Status Legitimacy Hypothesis","authors":"Chuma Kevin Owuamalam, Luca Caricati, Chee Meng Tan, Andrea Soledad Matos, Chiara Bonetti, Mark Rubin, Russell Spears, Marco Marinucci","doi":"10.1002/ejsp.3173","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p>The status-legitimacy hypothesis posits that low-status groups more strongly endorse social hierarchies and disadvantageous systems (i.e., engage in system justification), particularly under extreme societal inequality. Buchel et al. (2021) found supportive evidence for this hypothesis based on a 28-nation survey (<i>N</i> = 48,802). However, other large-scale studies have produced contradictory evidence. Consequently, we re-examined Buchel et al.’s (2021) data, this time breaking down the critical status <span></span><math>\n <semantics>\n <mo>×</mo>\n <annotation>$ \\times $</annotation>\n </semantics></math> inequality interaction and visualizing the patterns with scatterplots. Contrary to the status-legitimacy hypothesis, our results often showed that both objective and subjective status were associated with system justification in the <i>opposite</i> direction–even in contexts of high societal inequality. However, higher societal inequality sometimes reduces the system justification gap between status groups. We discuss the implications of these mixed findings for the debate around the existence of a system justification motive.</p>","PeriodicalId":48377,"journal":{"name":"European Journal of Social Psychology","volume":"55 5","pages":"950-965"},"PeriodicalIF":2.7000,"publicationDate":"2025-05-21","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/epdf/10.1002/ejsp.3173","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"European Journal of Social Psychology","FirstCategoryId":"102","ListUrlMain":"https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/10.1002/ejsp.3173","RegionNum":2,"RegionCategory":"心理学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q2","JCRName":"PSYCHOLOGY, SOCIAL","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0
Abstract
The status-legitimacy hypothesis posits that low-status groups more strongly endorse social hierarchies and disadvantageous systems (i.e., engage in system justification), particularly under extreme societal inequality. Buchel et al. (2021) found supportive evidence for this hypothesis based on a 28-nation survey (N = 48,802). However, other large-scale studies have produced contradictory evidence. Consequently, we re-examined Buchel et al.’s (2021) data, this time breaking down the critical status inequality interaction and visualizing the patterns with scatterplots. Contrary to the status-legitimacy hypothesis, our results often showed that both objective and subjective status were associated with system justification in the opposite direction–even in contexts of high societal inequality. However, higher societal inequality sometimes reduces the system justification gap between status groups. We discuss the implications of these mixed findings for the debate around the existence of a system justification motive.
期刊介绍:
Topics covered include, among others, intergroup relations, group processes, social cognition, attitudes, social influence and persuasion, self and identity, verbal and nonverbal communication, language and thought, affect and emotion, embodied and situated cognition and individual differences of social-psychological relevance. Together with original research articles, the European Journal of Social Psychology"s innovative and inclusive style is reflected in the variety of articles published: Research Article: Original articles that provide a significant contribution to the understanding of social phenomena, up to a maximum of 12,000 words in length.