Keywords
identification
identity management strategies
How to Cite
Abstract
There are various findings showing that low social status (disadvantaged/minority) groups display a positive attitude towards high-status groups in certain situations where power and status differences are involved. System Justification Theorists claim that these findings reflect the phenomenon of out-group favoritism, and criticize Social Identity Theory (SIT) for failing to satisfactorily explain this phenomenon. The main purpose of this literature review is to compile the theoretical explanations and research findings produced in the context of SIT regarding the positive attitude of the low-status groups towards the high-status groups and to discuss them based on the motivation to maintain a positive social identity. In the literature review, four theoretical explanations and various findings supporting these explanations were reached. Two of these explanations are that those who positively evaluate the high-status group may either be those who follow the individual mobility strategy and define themselves based on the high-status group, or those who follow the superordinate re-categorization strategy, which includes uniting the high-status group with their group under a common in-group identity. Another explanation is that the members who accept the power/competence of the out-group in the dimension determining the status are those who put forward the alternative dimensions in which their group is more successful and who give more value to these dimensions in order to create a more positive identity perception compared to the out-group. The fourth explanation points out that this tendency reflects a passive acceptance of social reality regarding the status system. There are findings in the literature supporting all four explanations. The explanations and findings point out that this tendency of low-status groups -even though it ensures the continuity of the existing system- does not conflict with the motivation of defending, protecting, and supporting ingroup identity.
References
Akdoğan, N. ve Alparslan, K. (2020). Do members of disadvantaged groups possess a motivation of favouritism towards advantaged groups? Mediterranean Journal of Social Sciences, 11(4), 61-73. https://doi.org/10.36941/mjss-2020-0041.
Aktan, T. ve Sakallı-Uğurlu, N. (2013). Kalıpyargı içeriği modeline sosyal bağlamsal bir yaklaşım: Bağlam içinde kalıpyargı içerikleri. Türk Psikoloji Yazıları, 16(31), 15–31.
Alparslan, K. ve Kuşdil, M. E. (2020). Kürt üniversite öğrencilerinin kimlik yönetim stratejileri ve dış-grup tarafgirliğinin kimlikle ilgili eylem ve hedeflerle ilişkileri: Açık ve örtük ölçümlerle bir inceleme. Türk Psikoloji Dergisi, 35(Özel Sayı), 80-98. DOI: 10.31828/tpd1300443320200905x000040.
Ashburn-Nardo, L. ve Johnson, N. J. (2008). Implicit outgroup favoritism and intergroup judgment: The moderating role of stereotypic context. Social Justice Research, 21(4), 490–508.
Batalha, L., Akrami, N. ve Ekehammar, B. (2007). Outgroup favoritism: The role of power perception, gender, and conservatism. Current Research in Social Psychology, 13(4), 38-49.
Bettencourt, B. A., Charlton, K., Dorr, N. ve Hume, D. L. (2001). Status differences and in-group bias: A meta-analytic examination of the effects of status stability, status legitimacy, and group permeability. Psychological Bulletin, 127(4), 520–542. https://doi.org/10.1037/0033-2909.127.4.520.
Blanz, M., Mummendey, A., Mielke, R. ve Klink, A. (1998). Responding to negative social identity : A taxonomy of identity management strategies. European Journal of Social Psychology, 28, 697–729. https://doi.org/10.1002/(SICI)1099-0992(199809/10)28:5<697::AID-EJSP889>3.0.CO;2-%23.
Blanz, M., Mummendey, A. ve Otten, S. (1995). Perceptions of relative group size and group status: Effects on intergroup discrimination in negative evaluations. European Journal of Social Psychology, 25(2), 231-247. https://doi.org/10.1002/ejsp.2420250208.
Brandt, M. J. ve Ark. (2020). Subjective status and perceived legitimacy across countries. European Journal of Social Psychology, 50(5), 921-942. https://doi.org/10.1002/ejsp.2694.
Branthwaite, A., Doyle, S. ve Lightbown, N. (1979). The balance between fairness and discrimination. European Journal of Social Psychology, 9(2), 149-163. https://doi.org/10.1002/ejsp.2420090204.
Branscombe, N. R. ve Ellemers, N. (1998). Coping with group-based discrimination: Individualistic versus group-level strategies. J. K. Swim ve C. Stangor (Ed.) Prejudice içinde (ss. 243-266). Academic Press. https://doi.org/10.1016/B978-012679130-3/50046-6.
Brewer, M. B. ve Weber, J. G. (1994). Self-evaluation effects of interpersonal versus intergroup social comparison. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 66(2), 268–275.
Brown, R. ve Williams, J. (1984). Group identification: The same thing to all people? Human Relations, 37(7), 547-564. https://doi.org/10.1177/001872678403700704.
Brown, R. J. ve Zagefka, H. (2006). Choice of comparisons in intergroup settings: The role of temporal information and comparison motives. European Journal of Social Psychology, 36(5), 649–671. https://doi.org/10.1002/ejsp.311.
Crocker, J. ve Major, B. (1989). Social stigma and self-esteem: The self-protective properties of stigma. Psychological Review, 96(4), 608–630. https://doi.org/10.1037/0033-295X.96.4.608.
Dasgupta, N. (2004). Implicit ingroup favoritism, outgroup favoritism, and their behavioral manifestations. Social Justice Research, 17(2), 143-169.
Derks, B., Van Laar, C. ve Ellemers, N. (2007). Social creativity strikes back: Improving motivated performance of low status group members by valuing ingroup dimensions. European Journal of Social Psychology, 37(3), 470–493. https://doi.org/10.1002/ejsp.375.
Doosje, B., Ellemers, N. ve Spears, R. (1995). Perceived intragroup variability as a function of group status and identification. Journal of Experimental Social Psychology, 31(5), 410–436. https://doi.org/10.1006/jesp.1995.1018.
Doosje, B., Spears, R. ve Ellemers, N. (2002). Social identity as both cause and effect: the development of group identification in response to anticipated and actual changes in the intergroup status hierarchy. British Journal of Social Psychology, 41(1), 57–76. https://doi.org/10.1348/014466602165054.
Dumont, K. ve van Lill, B. (2009). Dominant and non-dominant groups’ responses to social change: The economic transformation process in south africa. South African Journal of Psychology, 39(4), 432– 447. https://doi.org/10.1177/008124630903900405.
Ellemers, N. (1993). The influence of socio-structural variables on identity management strategies. European Review of Social Psychology, 4(1), 27-57. https://doi.org/10.1080/14792779343000013.
Ellemers, N., Spears, R. ve Doosje, B. (1997). Sticking together or falling apart: In-group identification as a psychological determinant of group commitment versus individual mobility. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 72(3), 617–626. https://doi.org/10.1037/0022-3514.72.3.617.
Ellemers, N. ve van Rijswijk, W. (1997). Identity needs versus social opportunities: The use of group-level and individual-level identity management strategies. Social Psychology Quarterly, 60(1), 52-65. https://doi.org/10.2307/2787011.
Ellemers, N., Wilke, H. ve Van Knippenberg, A. (1993). Effects of the legitimacy of low group or individual status on individual and collective status-enhancement strategies. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 64(5), 766-778. https://doi.org/10.1037/0022-3514.64.5.766.
Fiske, S. T., Cuddy, A. J. C., Glick, P. ve Xu, J. (2002). A model of (often mixed) stereotype content: Competence and warmth respectively follow from perceived status and competition. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 82(6), 878–902. https://doi.org/10.1037/0022-3514.82.6.878.
Guimond, S., Dif, S. ve Aupy, a. (2002). Social identity, relative status, and intergroup attitudes: When favorable outcomes change intergroup relations... for the worse. European Journal of Social Psychology, 32(6), 739–760. https://doi.org/10.1002/ejsp.118.
Jackson, L. A., Sullivan, L., Harnish, R. ve Hodge, C. N. (1996). Achieving positive social identity: Social mobility, social creativity, and permeability of group boundaries. Interpersonal Relations and Group Processes, 70(2), 241–254. https://doi.org/10.1037/0022-3514.70.2.241.
Jost, J. T. (2019). A quarter century of system justification theory: Questions, answers, criticisms, and societal applications. British Journal of Social Psychology, 58(2), 263-314. https://doi.org/10.1111/bjso.12297.
Jost, J. T. ve Banaji, M. R. (1994). The role of stereotyping in system‐justification and the production of false consciousness. British Journal of Social Psychology, 33(1), 1-27. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.2044-8309.1994.tb01008.x.
Jost, J. T., Banaji, M. R. ve Nosek, B. A. (2004). A decade of system justification theory: Accumulated evidence of conscious and unconscious bolstering of the status quo. Political Psychology, 25(6), 881-919. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1467-9221.2004.00402.x.
Jost, J. T. ve Burgess, D. (2000). Attitudinal ambivalence and the conflict between group and system justification motives in low status groups. Personality and Social Psychology Bulletin, 26(3), 293– 305. https://doi.org/10.1177/0146167200265003.
Jost, J. ve Hunyady, O. (2002). The psychology of system justification and the palliative function of ideology. European Review of Social Psychology, 13(1), 111-153. https://doi.org/10.1080/10463280240000046.
Jost, J. T., Pelham, B. W. ve Carvallo, M. R. (2002). Non-conscious forms of system justification: Implicit and behavioral preferences for higher status groups. Journal of Experimental Social Psychology, 38(6), 586–602. https://doi.org/10.1016/S0022-1031(02)00505-X.
Jost, J. T. ve Thompson, E. 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(3), 209-232. https://doi.org/10.1006/jesp.1999.1403.
Kaiser, C. R. ve Spalding, K. E. (2015). Do women who succeed in male-dominated domains help other women? The moderating role of gender identification. European Journal of Social Psychology, 45(5), 599–608. https://doi.org/10.1002/ejsp.2113.
Kelly, C. (1990). Social identity and intergroup perceptions in minority-majority contexts. Human Relations, 43(6), 583-599. https://doi.org/10.1177/001872679004300606.
Leach, C. W., Ellemers, N. ve Barreto, M. (2007). Group virtue: The importance of morality (vs. competence and sociability) in the positive evaluation of in-groups. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 93(2), 234–249. https://doi.org/10.1037/0022-3514.93.2.234.
Rubin, M. ve Hewstone, M. (2004). Social identity, system justification, and social dominance: Comme ntary on Reicher, Jost et al., and Sidanius et al. Political Psychology, 25(6), 823-844. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1467-9221.2004.00400.x.
Montoya, R. M. ve Pittinsky, T. L. (2011). When increased group identification leads to outgroup liking and cooperation: The role of trust. The Journal of Social Psychology, 151(6), 784-806. https://doi.org/10.1080/00224545.2010.538762.
Mugny, G., Sanchez‐Mazas, M., Roux, P. ve Pérez, J. A. (1991). Independence and interdependence of group judgments: Xenophobia and minority influence. European Journal of Social Psychology, 21(3), 213-223. https://doi.org/10.1002/ejsp.2420210304.
Mullen, B., Brown, R., & Smith, C. (1992). Ingroup bias as a function of salience, relevance, and status: An integration. European Journal of Social Psychology, 22(2), 103-122. https://doi.org/10.1002/ejsp.2420220202.
Oaker, G. ve Brown, R. (1986). Intergroup relations in a hospital setting: A further test of social identity theory. Human Relations, 39(8), 767-778. https://doi.org/10.1177/001872678603900804.
Oldmeadow, J. A. ve Fiske, S. T. (2010). Social status and the pursuit of positive social identity: Systematic domains of intergroup differentiation and discrimination for high- and low-status groups. Group Processes ve Intergroup Relations, 13(4), 425–444. https://doi.org/10.1177/1368430209355650.
Osborne, D., Jost, J. T., Becker, J. C., Badaan, V. ve Sibley, C. G. (2019). Protesting to challenge or defend the system? A system justification perspective on collective action. European Journal of Social Psychology, 49(2), 244-269. https://doi.org/10.1002/ejsp.2522.
Owuamalam, C. K., Caricati, L., Rubin, M., Matos, A. S., ve Spears, R. (2021). Why do women support socio‐economic systems that favour men more? A registered test of system justification‐and social identity‐inspired hope explanations. European Journal of Social Psychology, 51, 1073-1095. https://doi.org/10.1002/ejsp.2754.
Owuamalam, C. K., Rubin, M. ve Issmer, C. (2016). Reactions to group devaluation and social inequality: A comparison of social identity and system justification predictions. Cogent Psychology, 3(1), 1-29. https://doi.org/10.1080/23311908.2016.1188442.
Owuamalam, C. K., Rubin, M., Spears, R. ve Weerabangsa, M. M. A. (2017). Why do people from low‐status groups support class systems that disadvantage them? A test of two mainstream explanations in Malaysia and Australia. Journal of Social Issues, 73(1), 80-98. https://doi.org/10.1111/josi.12205.
Owuamalam, C. K., Rubin, M. ve Spears, R. (2018). Addressing evidential and theoretical inconsistencies in system-justification theory with a social identity model of system attitudes. Current Directions in Psychological Science, 27(2), 91-96. https://doi.org/10.1177/0963721417737136.
Owuamalam, C. K., Rubin, M. ve Spears, R. (2019). Revisiting 25 years of system motivation explanation for system justification from the perspective of social identity model of system attitudes. British Journal of Social Psychology, 58(2), 362-381. https://doi.org/10.1111/bjso.12285.
Owuamalam, C. K. ve Spears, R. (2020). Do humans possess an autonomous system justification motivation? A Pupillometric test of the strong system justification thesis. Journal of Experimental Social Psychology, 86, 1-13. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jesp.2019.103897.
Reichl, A. J. (1997). Ingroup favouritism and outgroup favouritism in low status minimal groups: Differential responses to status-related and status-unrelated measures. European Journal of Social Psychology, 27(6), 617–633. https://doi.org/10.1002/(SICI)1099-0992(199711/12)27:6<617::AID-EJSP829>3.0.CO;2-T.
Sachdev, I. ve Bourhis, R. Y. (1987). Status differentials and intergroup behaviour. European Journal of Social Psychology, 17, 277–293. https://doi.org/10.1002/ejsp.2420170304.
Sanchez‐Mazas, M., Roux, P. ve Mugny, G. (1994). When the outgroup becomes ingroup and when the ingroup becomes outgroup: Xenophobia and social categorization in a resource allocation task. European Journal of Social Psychology, 24(3), 417- 423.https://doi.org/10.1002/ejsp.2420240309.
Schubert, T. W. ve Otten, S. (2002). Overlap of self, ingroup, and outgroup: Pictorial measures of self- categorization. Self and Identity, 1(4), 353–376. https://doi.org/10.1080/152988602760328012.
Tajfel, H. ve Turner, J. C. (1979). An integrative theory of intergroup conflict. W. G. Austin ve S. Worchel (Ed.), The social psychology of intergroup relations içinde (ss. 33–47). Monterey, CA: Brooks/Cole.
Taylor, D. M., Moghaddam, F. M. ve Bellerose, J. (1989). Social comparison in an intergroup context. The Journal of Social Psychology, 129(4), 499–515. https://doi.org/10.1080/00224545.1989.9712068.
Taylor, D. M. ve McKirnan, D. J. (1984). Theoretical contributions: A five‐stage model of intergroup relations. British Journal of Social Psychology, 23(4), 291-300. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.2044-8309.1984.tb00644.x.
Van der Toorn, J., ve Jost, J. T. (2014). Twenty years of system justification theory: Introduction to the special issue on “Ideology and system justification processes”. Group Processes & Intergroup Relations, 17(4), 413-419. https://doi.org/10.1177/1368430214531509.
Wright, S. C., Taylor, D. M. ve Moghaddam, F. M. (1990). Responding to membership in a disadvantaged group: From acceptance to collective protest. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 58(6), 994–1003.
This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial-NoDerivatives 4.0 International License.
Copyright (c) 2022 Nesne Psikoloji Dergisi