Although epistemic needs motivate the endorsement of system-justifying beliefs, few studies have investigated moderators of this association. Here, we argue that because being the target of discrimination should undermine one’s sense of control, the association between epistemic needs and system-justifying beliefs should be stronger for disadvantaged (vs. advantaged) groups. As hypothesized, analyses of a nation-wide random sample of adults (N = 14,929) revealed that the negative relationship between openness to experience (i.e., an indicator of low epistemic needs) and multiple system-justifying beliefs (i.e., gender-based system justification, right-wing political preference, and conservative party support) was stronger for women (vs. men), and that these moderated associations were mediated by perceptions of gender discrimination. Our results suggest that women may sometimes endorse beliefs that conflict with their self and group interests in order to satisfy their epistemic needs.
BahamondesJ.SibleyC. G.OsborneD. (2019). “We look (and feel) better through system-justifying lenses”: System-justifying beliefs attenuate the well-being gap between the advantaged and disadvantaged by reducing perceptions of discrimination. Personality and Social Psychology Bulletin, 45, 1391–1408. https://doi.org/10.1177/0146167219829178
2.
BahamondesJ.SibleyC. G.OsborneD. (2020). System justification and perceptions of group-based discrimination: Investigating the temporal order of the ideologically motivated minimization (or exaggeration) of discrimination across low- and high-status groups. Social Psychological and Personality Science. Advance online publication. https://doi.org/10.1177/1948550620929452
3.
BerdahlJ. L.MooreC. (2006). Workplace harassment: Double jeopardy for minority women. Journal of Applied Psychology, 91, 426–436. https://doi.org/10.1037/0021-9010.91.2.426
4.
BonannoG. A.JostJ. T. (2006). Conservative shift among high-exposure survivors of the September 11th terrorist attacks. Basic and Applied Social Psychology, 28, 311–323. https://doi.org/10.1207/s15324834basp2804_4
5.
BrandtM. J. (2013). Do the disadvantaged legitimize the social system? A large-scale test of the status-legitimacy hypothesis. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 104, 765–785. https://doi.org/10.1037/a0031751
6.
BrescollV. L.UhlmannE. L.NewmanG. E. (2013). The effects of system-justifying motives on endorsement of essentialist explanations for gender differences. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 105, 891–908. https://doi.org/10.1037/a0034701
7.
CarneyD. R.JostJ. T.GoslingS. D.PotterJ. (2008). The secret lives of liberals and conservatives: Personality profiles, interaction styles, and the things they leave behind. Political Psychology, 29, 807–840. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1467-9221.2008.00668.x
8.
CheungR. M.NoelS.HardinC. D. (2011). Adopting the system-justifying attitudes of others: Effects of trivial interpersonal connections in the context of social inclusion and exclusion. Social Cognition, 29, 255–269. https://doi.org/10.1521/soco.2011.29.3.255
9.
CrenshawK. (1991). Mapping the margins: Intersectionality, identity politics, and violence against women of colour. Stanford Law Review, 43, 1241–1299. https://doi.org/10.2307/1229039
DambrunM. (2007). Gender differences in mental health: The mediating role of perceived personal discrimination. Journal of Applied Social Psychology, 37, 1118–1129. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1559-1816.2007.00202.x
FedericoC. M.DeasonG.FisherE. L. (2012). Ideological asymmetry in the relationship between epistemic motivation and political attitudes. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 103, 381–398. https://doi.org/10.1037/a0029063
16.
FedericoC. M.ErgunD.HuntC. (2014). Opposition to equality and support for tradition as mediators of the relationship between epistemic motivation and system-justifying identifications. Group Processes & Intergroup Relations, 17, 524–541. https://doi.org/10.1177/1368430213517273
17.
FeyginaI.JostJ. T.GoldsmithR. E. (2010). System justification, the denial of global warming, and the possibility of “system-sanctioned change.”Personality and Social Psychology Bulletin, 36, 326–338. https://doi.org/10.1177/0146167209351435
18.
FriesenJ. P.KayA. C.EibachR. P.GalinskyA. D. (2014). Seeking structure in social organization: Compensatory control and the psychological advantages of hierarchy. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 106, 590–609. https://doi.org/10.1037/a0035620
19.
FurnhamA.Fenton-O’CreevyM. (2018). Personality and political orientation. Personality and Individual Differences, 129, 88–91. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.paid.2018.03.020
20.
GaucherD.JostJ. T. (2011). Difficulties awakening the sense of injustice and overcoming oppression: On the soporific effects of system justification. In ColemanP. T (Ed.), Conflict, interdependence, and justice (pp. 227–246). Springer.
21.
GoodeC.KeeferL. A.MolinaL. E. (2014). A compensatory control account of meritocracy. Journal of Social and Political Psychology, 2, 313–334. https://doi.org/10.5964/jspp.v2i1.372
HartocollisA.AlcindorY. (2017, January21). Women’s March highlights as huge crowds protest Trump: “We’re not going away.”The New York Times. https://www.nytimes.com /2017/01/21/us/womens-march.html
HennesE. P.NamH. H.SternC.JostJ. T. (2012). Not all ideologies are created equal: Epistemic, existential, and relational needs predict system-justifying attitudes. Social Cognition, 30, 669–688. https://doi.org/10.1521/soco.2012.30.6.669
HenryP. J.SaulA. (2006). The development of system justification in the developing world. Social Justice Research, 19, 365–378. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11211-006-0012-x
28.
HessY. D.LedgerwoodA. (2014). Bolstering system-justifying beliefs in response to social exclusion. Group Processes & Intergroup Relations, 17, 494–508. https://doi.org/10.1177/1368430213510572
29.
HoggM. A. (2007). Uncertainty-identity theory. In ZannaM. P. (Ed.), Advances in experimental social psychology (Vol. 39, pp. 70–126). Academic Press.
30.
JenningsM. K.NiemiR. G. (1981). Generations and politics: A panel study of young adults and their parents. Princeton University Press.
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. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1467-9221.2004.00402.x
34.
JostJ. T.BlountS.PfefferJ.HunyadyG. (2003). Fair market ideology: Its cognitive-motivational underpinnings. Research in Organizational Behavior, 25, 53–91. https://doi.org/10.1016/S0191-3085(03)25002-4
35.
JostJ. T.Chaikalis-PetritsisV.AbramsD.SidaniusJ.van der ToornJ.BrattC. (2012). Why men (and women) do and don’t rebel: Effects of system justification on willingness to protest. Personality and Social Psychology Bulletin, 38, 197–208. https://doi.org/10.1177/0146167211422544
36.
JostJ. T.GaucherD.SternC. (2015). “The world isn’t fair”: A system justification perspective on social stratification and inequality. In MikulincerM.ShaverP. R.DovidioJ. F.SimpsonJ. A. (Eds.), APA handbook of personality and social psychology (Vol. 2, pp. 317–340). American Psychological Association.
37.
JostJ. T.GlaserJ.KruglanskiA. W.SullowayF. J. (2003). Political conservatism as motivated social cognition. Psychological Bulletin, 129, 339–375. https://doi.org/10.1037/0033-2909.129.3.339
38.
JostJ. T.HunyadyO. (2005). Antecedents and consequences of system-justifying ideologies. Current Directions in Psychological Science, 14, 260–265. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.0963-7214.2005.00377.x
39.
JostJ. T.KayA. C. (2005). Exposure to benevolent sexism and complementary gender stereotypes: Consequences for specific and diffuse forms of system justification. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 88, 498–509. https://doi.org/10.1037/0022-3514.88.3.498
40.
JostJ. T.LedgerwoodA.HardinC. D. (2008). Shared reality, system justification, and the relational basis of ideological beliefs. Social and Personality Psychology Compass, 2, 171–186. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1751-9004.2007.00056.x
41.
JostJ. T.LiviatanI.van der ToornJ.LedgerwoodA.MandisodzaA.NosekB. (2010). System justification: How do we know it’s motivated? In BobocelD. R.KayA. C.ZannaM. P.OlsonJ. M. (Eds.), The psychology of justice and legitimacy: The Ontario SymposiumVol. 11 (pp. 173−203). Psychology Press.
42.
JostJ. T.PelhamB. W.CarvalloM. R. (2002). Non-conscious forms of system justification: Implicit and behavioral preferences for higher status groups. Journal of Experimental Social Psychology, 38, 586–602. https://doi.org/10.1016/S0022-1031(02)00505-X
43.
JostJ. T.PelhamB. W.SheldonO.SullivanB. N. (2003). 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. https://doi.org/10.1002/ejsp.127
KayA. C.EibachR. P. (2013). Compensatory control and its implications for ideological extremism. Journal of Social Issues, 69, 564–585. https://doi.org/10.1111/josi.12029
46.
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. https://doi.org/10.1177/0963721411422059
47.
KayA. C.GaucherD.McGregorI.NashK. (2010). Religious belief as compensatory control. Personality and Social Psychology Review, 14, 37–48. https://doi.org/10.1177/1088868309353750
48.
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. https://doi.org/10.1037/0022-3514.95.1.18
49.
KrausM. W.PiffP. K.KeltnerD. (2009). Social class, sense of control, and social explanation. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 97, 992–1004. https://doi.org/10.1037/a0016357
MalkaA.SotoC. J.InzlichtM.LelkesY. (2014). Do needs for security and certainty predict cultural and economic conservatism? A cross-national analysis. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 106, 1031–1051. https://doi.org/10.1037/a0036170
54.
McCoyS. K.MajorB. (2007). Priming meritocracy and the psychological justification of inequality. Journal of Experimental Social Psychology, 43, 341–351. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jesp.2006.04.009
MillerA. L.BorgidaE. (2019). The temporal dimension of system justification: Gender ideology over the course of the 2016 election. Personality and Social Psychology Bulletin, 45, 1057–1067. https://doi.org/10.1177/0146167218804547
NapierJ. L.SuppesA.BettinsoliM. L. (2020). Denial of gender discrimination is associated with better subjective well-being among women: A system justification account. European Journal of Social Psychology. Advance online publication. https://doi.org/10.1002/ejsp.2702
60.
OsborneD.SatherleyN.SibleyC. G. (in press). Personality and ideology: A meta-analysis of the reliable, but non-causal, association between openness and conservatism. In MintzA.TerrisL. (Eds.), Oxford handbook on behavioral political science. Oxford University Press.
61.
OsborneD.SenguptaN.SibleyC. G. (2019). System justification theory at 25: Evaluating a paradigm shift in psychology and looking forward. British Journal of Social Psychology, 58, 340–361. https://doi.org/10.1111/bjso.12302
62.
OsborneD.SibleyC. G. (2012). Does personality matter? Openness correlates with vote choice, but particularly for politically sophisticated voters. Journal of Research in Personality, 46, 743–751. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jrp.2012.09.001
63.
OsborneD.SibleyC. G. (2015). Within the limits of civic training: Education moderates the relationship between openness and political attitudes. Political Psychology, 36, 295–313. https://doi.org/10.1111/pops.12070
64.
PashlerH.WagenmakersE. J. (2012). Editors’ introduction to the special section on replicability in psychological science: A crisis of confidence?Perspectives on Psychological Science, 7, 528–530. https://doi.org/10.1177/1745691612465253
65.
PierroA.CiceroL.BonaiutoM.van KnippenbergD.KruglanskiA. W. (2005). Leader group prototypicality and leadership effectiveness: The moderating role of need for cognitive closure. The Leadership Quarterly, 16, 503–516. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.leaqua.2005.06.002
ReidP. T. (1984). Feminism versus minority group identity: Not for Black woman only. Sex Roles, 10, 247–255. https://doi.org/10.1007/BF00287778
68.
RobertsB. W.DelVecchioW. F. (2000). The rank-order consistency of personality traits from childhood to old age: A quantitative review of longitudinal studies. Psychological Bulletin, 126, 3–25. https://doi.org/10.1037//0033-2909.126.1.3
69.
RuggieroK. M.TaylorD. M. (1997). Why minority group members perceive or do not perceive the discrimination that confronts them: The role of self-esteem and perceived control. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 72, 373–389. https://doi.org/10.1037/0022-3514.72.2.373
70.
SchoelC.BluemkeM.MuellerP.StahlbergD. (2011). When autocratic leaders become an option—Uncertainty and self-esteem predict implicit leadership preferences. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 101, 521–540. https://doi.org/10.1037/a0023393
71.
SenguptaN. K.OsborneD.SibleyC. G. (2015). The status-legitimacy hypothesis revisited: Ethnic-group differences in general and dimension-specific legitimacy. British Journal of Social Psychology, 54, 324–340. https://doi.org/10.1111/bjso.12080
SibleyC. G.LuytenN.PurnomoM.MobberleyA.WoottonL. W.HammondM. D.SenguptaN.PerryR.West-NewmanT.WilsonM. S.McLellanL.HoverdW. J.RobertsonA. (2011). The mini-IPIP6: Validation and extension of a short measure of the Big-Six factors of personality in New Zealand. New Zealand Journal of Psychology, 40, 142–159. https://www.psychology.org.nz/journal-archive/SibleyIPIP.pdf
74.
SibleyC. G.OsborneD.DuckittJ. (2012). Personality and political orientation: Meta-analysis and test of a threat-constraint model. Journal of Research in Personality, 46, 664–677. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jrp.2012.08.002
75.
SteuterE. (1992). Women against feminism: An examination of feminist social movements and anti-feminist countermovements. Canadian Review of Sociology/Revue Canadienne de Sociologie, 29, 288–306. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1755-618X.1992.tb02440.x
76.
SuppesA.NapierJ. L.van der ToornJ. (2019). The palliative effects of system justification on the health and happiness of lesbian, gay, bisexual, and transgender individuals. Personality and Social Psychology Bulletin, 45, 372–388. https://doi.org/10.1177/0146167218785156
77.
TanX.LiuL.HuangZ.ZhengW.LiangY. (2016). The effects of general system justification on corruption perception and intent. Frontiers in Psychology, 7, 1–11. https://doi.org/10.3389/fpsyg.2016.01107
78.
Van den BosK. (2009). Making sense of life: The existential self trying to deal with personal uncertainty. Psychological Inquiry, 20, 197–217. https://doi.org/10.1080/10478400903333411
79.
Van der ToornJ.JostJ. T.LoffredoB. (2017). Conservative ideological shift among adolescents in response to system threat. Zeitschrift für Psychologie, 225, 357–362. https://doi.org/10.1027/2151-2604/a000299
80.
VargasE. A.ChirinosD. A.MahalingamR.MarshallR. A.WongM.KershawK. N. (2020). Discrimination, perceived control, and psychological health among African Americans with hypertension. Journal of Health Psychology. Advance online publication. https://doi.org/10.1177/1359105320937073
81.
Vargas-SalfateS. (2019). The role of personal control in the palliative function of system justification among indigenous and non-indigenous Peruvian students. International Journal of Social Psychology, 34, 168–201. https://doi.org/10.1080/02134748.2018.1537650
