More than a decade of research from the perspective of system-justification theory (Jost & Banaji, 1994) has demonstrated that people engage in motivated psychological processes that bolster and support the status quo. We propose that this motive is highly contextual: People do not justify their social systems at all times but are more likely to do so under certain circumstances. We describe four contexts in which people are prone to engage in system-justifying processes: (a) system threat, (b) system dependence, (c) system inescapability, and (d) low personal control. We describe how and why, in these contexts, people who wish to promote social change might expect resistance.
CutrightK.M.WuE.C.BanfieldJ.C.KayA.C.FitzsimonsG.J. (2011). When your world must be defended: Choosing products to justify the system. Journal of Consumer Research, 38, 62–77.
2.
FeinS.SpencerS.J. (1997). Prejudice as self-image maintenance: Affirming the self through derogating others. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 73, 31–44.
JostJ.T.BanajiM.R. (1994). The role of stereotyping in system-justification and the production of false consciousness. British Journal of Social Psychology, 33, 1–27.
5.
JostJ.T.KivetzY.RubiniM.GuermandiG.MossoC. (2005). System-justifying functions of complementary regional and ethnic stereotypes: Cross-national evidence. Social Justice Research, 18, 305–333.
6.
JostJ.T.LiviatanI.van der ToornJ.LedgerwoodA.MandisodzaA.NosekB. A. (2010). System justification: How do we know it’s motivated? In BobocelR.D.KayA.C.ZannaM.P.OlsonJ.M. (Eds.), The psychology of justice and legitimacy: The Ontario symposium (Vol. 11, pp. 173–203). New York, NY: Psychology Press.
7.
KaiserC.R.MillerC.T. (2001). Stop complaining! The social costs of making attributions to discrimination. Personality and Social Psychology Bulletin, 27, 254–263.
8.
KayA.C.GaucherD.NapierJ.L.CallanM.J.LaurinK. (2008). God and the government: Testing a compensatory control mechanism for the support of external systems. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 95, 18–35.
9.
KayA.C.GaucherD.PeachJ.M.LaurinK.FriesenJ.ZannaM.P.SpencerS.J. (2009). The power of the status quo: Direct evidence for a motivation to see the way things are as the way they should be. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 97, 421–434.
10.
KayA.C.JimenezM.C.JostJ.T. (2002). Sour grapes, sweet lemons, and the anticipatory rationalization of the status quo. Personality and Social Psychology Bulletin, 28, 1300–1312.
11.
KayA.C.JostJ.T.YoungS. (2005). Victim derogation and victim enhancement as alternate routes to system justification. Psychological Science, 16, 240–246.
12.
KayA.C.WhitsonJ.A.GaucherD.GalinskyA.D. (2010). Compensatory control: Achieving order through the mind, our institutions, and the heavens. Current Directions in Psychological Science, 18, 264–268.
13.
LammersJ.GalinskyA.D.GordijinE.H.OttenS. (2008). Illegitimacy moderates the effect of power on approach. Psychological Science, 19, 558–564.
14.
LaurinK.ShepherdS.KayA.C. (2010). Restricted emigration, system inescapability, and the defense of the status quo: System-justifying consequences of restricted exit opportunities. Psychological Science, 21, 1075–1082.
15.
LernerM.J. (1980). The belief in a just world: A fundamental delusion. New York, NY: Plenum.
16.
NapierJ.L.MandisodzaA.N.AndersenS.M.JostJ.T. (2006). System justification in responding to the poor and displaced in the aftermath of Hurricane Katrina. Analyses of Social Issues and Public Policy, 6, 57–73.
17.
RusbultC.E. (1980). Commitment and satisfaction in romantic associations: A test of the investment model. Journal of Experimental Social Psychology, 16, 172–186.
18.
RutjensB.T.van HarreveldF.van der PligtJ. (2010). Yes we can: Belief in progress as compensatory control. Social Psychological and Personality Science, 1, 246–252.
19.
ShepherdS.KayA.C.LandauM.J.KeeferL.A. (2011). Evidence for the specificity of control motivations in worldview defense: Distinguishing compensatory control from uncertainty management and terror management processes. Journal of Experimental Social Psychology, 47, 949–958.
20.
SmithD.M.LoewensteinG.JankovicA.UbelP.A. (2009). Happily hopeless: Adaptation to a permanent, but not a temporary, disability. Health Psychology, 28, 787–791.
21.
UllrichJ.CohrsJ.C. (2007). Terrorism salience increases system justification: Experimental evidence. Social Justice Research, 20, 117–139.
22.
Van der ToornJ.TylerT.R.JostJ.T. (2011). More than fair: Outcome dependence, system justification, and the perceived legitimacy of authority figures. Journal of Experimental Social Psychology, 47, 127–138.
23.
WillerR. (2004). The effects of government-issued terror warnings on presidential approval ratings. Current Research in Social Psychology, 10(1), 1–12.
