Testing the status-legitimacy hypothesis: Predicting system justification using objective and subjective socioeconomic status in China and the United States

IF 2.1 3区 心理学 Q3 PSYCHOLOGY, SOCIAL
Evan A. Valdes, James H. Liu, Matt Williams
{"title":"Testing the status-legitimacy hypothesis: Predicting system justification using objective and subjective socioeconomic status in China and the United States","authors":"Evan A. Valdes,&nbsp;James H. Liu,&nbsp;Matt Williams","doi":"10.1111/ajsp.12555","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p>The status-legitimacy hypothesis proposes that those who are most disadvantaged by unequal social systems are even more likely than members of more advantaged groups to provide ideological support for the very social system that is responsible for their disadvantages. Li, Yang, Wu, and Kou (2020, <i>Personality and Social Psychology Bulletin</i>) sought to expand the generalizability of this hypothesis by testing it in China, addressing inconsistencies surrounding the empirical support for this hypothesis by postulating that the construct of status should be separated into an objective and subjective status marker. They reported that objective socioeconomic status (SES; income and education) negatively predicted system justification, while subjective SES positively predicted system justification. In the present study we attempt to replicate and extend the work of Li et al. in a cross-cultural comparison of demographic stratified quota online samples in China and the United States. We test the status-legitimacy hypothesis using objective and subjective SES to predict system justification using cross-sectional and cross-lagged regression analyses. We received partial support for Li et al.'s findings. Specifically, subjective SES positively predicted system justification for both societies during cross-sectional and cross-lagged longitudinal analyses. However, we failed to replicate Li et al.'s findings surrounding objective SES in China during cross-sectional and cross-lagged analyses.</p>","PeriodicalId":47394,"journal":{"name":"Asian Journal of Social Psychology","volume":"26 2","pages":"238-253"},"PeriodicalIF":2.1000,"publicationDate":"2022-10-05","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/epdf/10.1111/ajsp.12555","citationCount":"1","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Asian Journal of Social Psychology","FirstCategoryId":"102","ListUrlMain":"https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/10.1111/ajsp.12555","RegionNum":3,"RegionCategory":"心理学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q3","JCRName":"PSYCHOLOGY, SOCIAL","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 1

Abstract

The status-legitimacy hypothesis proposes that those who are most disadvantaged by unequal social systems are even more likely than members of more advantaged groups to provide ideological support for the very social system that is responsible for their disadvantages. Li, Yang, Wu, and Kou (2020, Personality and Social Psychology Bulletin) sought to expand the generalizability of this hypothesis by testing it in China, addressing inconsistencies surrounding the empirical support for this hypothesis by postulating that the construct of status should be separated into an objective and subjective status marker. They reported that objective socioeconomic status (SES; income and education) negatively predicted system justification, while subjective SES positively predicted system justification. In the present study we attempt to replicate and extend the work of Li et al. in a cross-cultural comparison of demographic stratified quota online samples in China and the United States. We test the status-legitimacy hypothesis using objective and subjective SES to predict system justification using cross-sectional and cross-lagged regression analyses. We received partial support for Li et al.'s findings. Specifically, subjective SES positively predicted system justification for both societies during cross-sectional and cross-lagged longitudinal analyses. However, we failed to replicate Li et al.'s findings surrounding objective SES in China during cross-sectional and cross-lagged analyses.

Abstract Image

检验身份合法性假说:利用中国和美国的客观和主观社会经济地位预测系统正当性
地位-合法性假说认为,那些在不平等的社会制度中处于最不利地位的人,甚至比处于更有利地位的群体的成员更有可能为造成他们不利地位的社会制度提供意识形态上的支持。李、杨、吴和寇(2020,《人格与社会心理学公报》)试图通过在中国进行测试来扩大这一假设的普遍性,通过假设地位结构应该分为客观和主观地位标记来解决围绕这一假设的经验支持的不一致。他们报告了客观社会经济地位(SES;收入和教育)负向预测制度正当性,主观社会经济地位正向预测制度正当性。在本研究中,我们试图复制和扩展Li等人的工作,对中国和美国的人口分层配额在线样本进行跨文化比较。我们使用客观和主观SES来测试状态合法性假设,并使用横截面和交叉滞后回归分析来预测系统合理性。我们得到了Li等人研究结果的部分支持。具体而言,在横断面和交叉滞后的纵向分析中,主观SES积极预测了两种社会的制度合理性。然而,在横断面和交叉滞后分析中,我们未能复制Li等人在中国关于客观SES的发现。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 求助全文
来源期刊
CiteScore
4.60
自引率
4.20%
发文量
48
期刊介绍: Asian Journal of Social Psychology publishes empirical papers and major reviews on any topic in social psychology and personality, and on topics in other areas of basic and applied psychology that highlight the role of social psychological concepts and theories. The journal coverage also includes all aspects of social processes such as development, cognition, emotions, personality, health and well-being, in the sociocultural context of organisations, schools, communities, social networks, and virtual groups. The journal encourages interdisciplinary integration with social sciences, life sciences, engineering sciences, and the humanities. The journal positively encourages submissions with Asian content and/or Asian authors but welcomes high-quality submissions from any part of the world.
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术官方微信