“Justified dependency”: Effects of perceived stability of social hierarchy and level of system justification on help-seeking behavior of low-status group members
Restricted accessResearch articleFirst published online July, 2014
“Justified dependency”: Effects of perceived stability of social hierarchy and level of system justification on help-seeking behavior of low-status group members
Recent research on intergroup helping has shown that receiving and seeking help can be a way in which groups assert or challenge the existing hierarchy. The present research, consisting of two studies conducted in the Arab–Jewish Israeli context, examined how the manipulated perceived stability of social hierarchy and dispositional levels of system justification (SJ) influence the willingness of Arab participants to seek assistance from a Jewish helper (representing low- and high-status groups in Israel, respectively). As expected, findings indicate that Arab participants who perceive the social hierarchy as just and stable, show a significantly higher preference to seek dependency-oriented help from Jews. On the other hand, those characterized as low SJs report overall low willingness to seek help from Jewish group members, but show some readiness to seek autonomy-oriented help when status relations between Arabs and Jews are perceived as stable. Theoretical and practical implications for intergroup helping relations are discussed.
AikenL. S.WestS. G. (1991). Multiple regression: Testing and interpreting interactions. Newbury Park, CA: Sage.
2.
BanfieldJ. C.KayA. C.CutrightK. M.WuE. C.FitzsimonsG. J. (2011). A person by situation account of motivated system defense. Social Psychological and Personality Science, 2, 212–219. doi:10.1177/1948550610386809
3.
HalabiS.DovidioJ. F.NadlerA. (2008). When and how high status groups offer help: Effects of social dominance orientation and status threat. Political Psychology, 29, 841–858. doi:10.1111/j.1467-9221.2008.00669.x
4.
HalabiS.NadlerA.DovidioJ. F. (2011). Reactions to receiving assumptive help: The moderating effects of group membership and perceived need for help. Journal of Applied Social Psychology, 41(12), 2793–2815. doi:10.1111/j.1559-1816.2011.00859.x
5.
HalabiS.NadlerA.DovidioJ. F.NoorM. (2010, July). Help that hurts: Effects of perceived security of hierarchy and perceived trust in the out-group on interpretation of out-group assistance. Paper presented at the annual meeting of the International Society for the Study of Political Psychology, San Francisco, CA.
6.
JackmanM. R. (1994). The velvet glove: Paternalism and conflict in gender, class, and race relations. Berkeley: University of California Press.
7.
JostJ. T. (2001). Out-group favoritism and the theory of system justification: A paradigm for investigating the effects of socioeconomic success on stereotype content. In MoskowitzG. B. (Ed.), Cognitive social psychology: The Princeton Symposium on the legacy and future of social cognition (pp. 89–102). Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum.
8.
JostJ. T. (2011). System justification theory as compliment, complement, and corrective to theories of social identification and social dominance. In DunningD. (Ed.), Social motivation (pp. 223–263). New York, NY: Psychology Press.
9.
JostJ. T.BanajiM. (1994). The role of stereotyping in system justification and the production of false consciousness. British Journal of Social Psychology, 33(1), 1–27. doi:10.1111/j.2044-8309.1994.tb01008.x
10.
JostJ. T.BanajiM. R.NosekB. A. (2004). A decade of system justification theory: Accumulated evidence of conscious and unconscious bolstering of the status quo. Political Psychology, 25, 881–919. doi:10.1111/j.1467-9221.2004.00402.x
11.
JostJ. T.BurgessD. (2000). Attitudinal ambivalence and the conflict between group and system justification motives in low status groups. Personality and Social Psychology Bulletin, 26, 293–305. doi:10.1177/0146167200265003
12.
JostJ. T.GlaserJ.KruglanskiA. W.SullowayF. (2003). Political conservatism as motivated social cognition. Psychological Bulletin, 129, 339–375. doi:10.1037/0033-2909.129.3.339
13.
JostJ. T.HunyadyO. (2003). The psychology of system justification and the palliative function of ideology. European Review of Social Psychology, 13, 111–153. doi:10.1080/10463280240000046
14.
JostJ. T.HunyadyO. (2005). Antecedents and consequences of system-justifying ideologies. Current Directions in Psychological Science, 14, 260–265. doi:10.1111/j.0963-7214.2005.00377.x
15.
JostJ. T.PelhamB. W.CarvalloM. (2002). Non-conscious forms of system justification: Cognitive, affective, and behavioral preferences for higher status groups. Journal of Experimental Social Psychology, 38, 586–602. doi:10.1016/S0022-1031(02)00505-X
16.
JostJ. T.PelhamB. W.SheldonO.SullivanB. (2002). Social inequality and the reduction of ideological dissonance on behalf of the system: Evidence of enhanced system justification among the disadvantaged. European Journal of Social Psychology, 33, 13–36. doi:10.1002/ejsp.127
17.
JostJ. T.ThompsonE. P. (2000). Group-based dominance and opposition to equality as independent predictors of self-esteem, ethnocentrism, and social policy attitudes among African Americans and European Americans. Journal of Experimental Social Psychology, 36, 209–232. doi:10.1006/jesp.1999.1403
18.
KayA. C.BanfieldJ. C.LaurinK. (2010). The system justification motive and the maintenance of social power. In GuinoteA.VescioT. K. (Ed.), The social psychology of power (pp. 313–340). New York, NY: Guilford Press.
19.
KayA. C.FriesenJ. (2011). On social stability and social change: Understanding when system justification does and does not occur. Current Directions in Psychological Science, 20, 360–364. doi:10.1177/0963721411422059
20.
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. doi:10.1177/01461672022812014
21.
KayA. C.JostJ. T. (2003). Complementary justice: Effects of “poor but happy” and “poor but honest” stereotype exemplars on system justification and implicit activation of the justice motive. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 85, 823–837. doi:10.1037/0022-3514.85.5.823
22.
KayA. C.ShepherdS.BlatzC. W.ChuaS. N.GalinksyA. (2010). For God (or) country: The hydraulic relation between government instability and belief in religious sources of control. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 99, 725–739. doi:10.1037/a0021140
23.
LaneR. E. (1962). The fear of equality. In LaneR. E. (Ed.), Political ideology: Why the American common man believes what he does (pp. 57–81). New York, NY: Free Press.
24.
LaurinM. J.KayA. C.ShepherdS. (2010). Restricted emigration, system inescapability, and defense of the status quo system-justifying consequences of restricted exit opportunities. Psychological Science, 21(8), 1075–1082. doi:10.1177/0956797610375448
25.
MajorB.O’BrienL. T. (2005). The social psychology of stigma. Annual Review of Psychology, 56, 393–421. doi:10.1146/annurev.psych.56.091103.070137
26.
MillerD. T.PorterC. A. (1983). Self-blame in victims of violence. Journal of Social Issues, 39, 139–152. doi:10.1111/j.1540-4560.1983.tb00145.x
27.
NadlerA. (1998). Esteem, relationships and achievement explanations of help seeking behavior. In KarabenickS. A. (Ed.), Strategic help seeking: Implications for learning and teaching (pp. 61–96). Hillsdale, NJ: Erlbaum.
28.
NadlerA. (2002). Inter-group helping relations as power relations: Helping relations as affirming or challenging inter-group hierarchy. Journal of Social Issues, 58, 487–503. doi:10.1111/1540-4560.00272
29.
NadlerA. (2012). From help-giving to helping relations: Belongingness and independence in social interaction. In SnyderM.DeauxK. (Eds.), The handbook of personality and social psychology (pp. 394–418). New York, NY: Oxford University Press.
30.
NadlerA.FisherJ. D. (1986). The role of threat to self-esteem and perceived control in recipient reactions to aid: Theory development and empirical validation. In BerkowitzL. (Ed.), Advances in experimental social psychology (Vol. 19, pp. 81–124). New York, NY: Academic Press.
31.
NadlerA.HalabiS. (2006). Intergroup helping as status relations: Effects of status stability, identification, and type of help on receptivity to high status group’s help. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 91, 97–110. doi:10.1037/0022-3514.91.1.97
32.
NadlerA.HalabiS.Harpaz-GorodeiskyG. (2009). Intergroup helping as status organizing processes: Implications for intergroup misunderstandings. In DemoulinS.LeyensJ. P.DovidioJ. F. (Eds.), Intergroup misunderstandings: Impact of divergent social realities (pp. 311–331). Washington, DC: Psychology Press.
33.
NadlerA.HalabiS.Harpaz-GorodeiskyG.Ben-DavidY. (2010). Helping relations as status relations. In MikulincerM.ShaverP. R. (Eds.), Prosocial motives, emotions, and behavior (pp. 181–200). Washington, DC: American Psychological Association.
34.
NadlerA.Harpaz-GorodeiskyG.Ben-DavidY. (2009). Defensive helping: Threat to group identity, ingroup identification, status stability and common group identity as determinants of intergroup helping. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 97(5), 823–834. doi:10.1037/a0015968
35.
SuleimanR. (2004). The planned meeting as a microcosm. In HalabiR. (Ed.), Israeli and Palestinian identities in dialogue (pp. 47–67). Piscataway, NJ: Rutgers University Press.
36.
TajfelH.TurnerJ. C. (1986). The social identity theory of intergroup behavior. In WorchelS.AustinW. (Eds.), Psychology of intergroup relations (pp. 7–24). Chicago, IL: Nelson Hall.
37.
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. doi:10.1016/j.jesp.2010.09.003
38.
Van LeeuwenE.TäuberS. (2010). The strategic side of out-group helping. In StürmerS.SnyderM. (Eds.). The psychology of prosocial behavior: Group processes, intergroup relations, and helping (pp. 81−102). Chichester, UK: Wiley-Blackwell.
39.
Van LeeuwenE.TäuberS. (2011). Demonstrating knowledge: The effects of group status on out-group helping. Journal of Experimental Social Psychology, 47(1), 147–156. doi:10.1016/j.jesp.2010.09.008
40.
Van VugtM.ParkJ. H. (2009). The tribal instinct hypothesis: Evolution and the social psychology of intergroup relations. In StürmerS.SnyderM. (Eds.), The psychology of prosocial behavior: Group processes, intergroup relations, and helping (pp. 13–32). Oxford, UK: Wiley-Blackwell.
41.
WakslakC. J.JostJ. T.TylerT. R.ChenE. S. (2007). Moral outrage mediates the dampening effect of system justification on support for redistributive social policies. Psychological Science, 18, 267–274. doi:10.1111/j.1467-9280.2007.01887.x
