NOT ALL IDEOLOGIES ARE CREATED EQUAL: EPISTEMIC, EXISTENTIAL, AND RELATIONAL NEEDS PREDICT SYSTEM-JUSTIFYING ATTITUDES

被引:163
作者
Hennes, Erin P. [1 ]
Nam, H. Hannah [1 ]
Stern, Chadly [1 ]
Jost, John T. [1 ]
机构
[1] NYU, Dept Psychol, New York, NY 10003 USA
基金
美国国家科学基金会;
关键词
TERROR MANAGEMENT THEORY; MORTALITY SALIENCE; POLITICAL ORIENTATION; DECADES; JUSTIFICATION; UNCERTAINTY; PERSONALITY; SUPPORT; THREAT; SELF;
D O I
10.1521/soco.2012.30.6.669
中图分类号
B84 [心理学];
学科分类号
04 ; 0402 ;
摘要
Whereas most social psychological perspectives assume that needs to manage uncertainty, existential anxiety, and social cohesion should motivate any form of ideological zeal, System Justification Theory predicts that these needs are positively associated with the endorsement of system-justifying beliefs, opinions, and values but negatively associated with the endorsement of system-challenging ideological outcomes. For the first time we test a full theoretical model in which system justification mediates the effects of individual differences in epistemic, existential, and relational needs on attitudes toward public policy issues and social movements. Specifically, we conducted a national survey of 182 Americans and found that, as hypothesized, lower need for cognition, greater death anxiety, and a stronger desire to share reality each contributed significantly and independently to economic system justification, which, in turn, contributed to support for the Tea Party (a movement aimed at restoring America's "traditional values") and opposition to Occupy Wall Street (a movement seeking to reduce social and economic inequality and minimize corporate influence on government). Economic system justification also mediated the effects of these needs on the endorsement of status quo positions with respect to health care, immigration, global climate change, and the "Ground Zero mosque." These findings suggest that epistemic, existential, and relational needs lead disproportionately to support for system-justifying, rather than system-challenging, policies and movements.
引用
收藏
页码:669 / 688
页数:20
相关论文
共 90 条
[1]  
Adorno T. W., 1950, AUTHORITARIAN PERSON
[2]   The other "authoritarian personality" [J].
Altemeyer, B .
ADVANCES IN EXPERIMENTAL SOCIAL PSYCHOLOGY, VOL 30, 1998, 30 :47-92
[3]  
Altemeyer B., 2003, Analyses of Social Issues and Public Policy, V3, P161, DOI [110.1111/j.1530-2415.2003.00020.x, DOI 10.1111/J.1530-2415.2003.00020.X]
[4]  
[Anonymous], NY TIMES 0414
[5]  
[Anonymous], 1999, Social Dominance, DOI DOI 10.1017/CBO9781139175043
[6]  
Anson J., 2009, Social and psychological bases of ideology and system justification, P210
[7]   Nursery school personality and political orientation two decades later [J].
Block, Jack ;
Block, Jeanne H. .
JOURNAL OF RESEARCH IN PERSONALITY, 2006, 40 (05) :734-749
[8]   Amazon's Mechanical Turk: A New Source of Inexpensive, Yet High-Quality, Data? [J].
Buhrmester, Michael ;
Kwang, Tracy ;
Gosling, Samuel D. .
PERSPECTIVES ON PSYCHOLOGICAL SCIENCE, 2011, 6 (01) :3-5
[9]   Two Decades of Terror Management Theory: A Meta-Analysis of Mortality Salience Research [J].
Burke, Brian L. ;
Martens, Andy ;
Faucher, Erik H. .
PERSONALITY AND SOCIAL PSYCHOLOGY REVIEW, 2010, 14 (02) :155-195
[10]   THE NEED FOR COGNITION [J].
CACIOPPO, JT ;
PETTY, RE .
JOURNAL OF PERSONALITY AND SOCIAL PSYCHOLOGY, 1982, 42 (01) :116-131