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
[11]   THE EFFICIENT ASSESSMENT OF NEED FOR COGNITION [J].
CACIOPPO, JT ;
PETTY, RE ;
KAO, CF .
JOURNAL OF PERSONALITY ASSESSMENT, 1984, 48 (03) :306-307
[12]  
Campo-Flores A., 2010, NEWSWEEK
[13]   Personalizing politics - A congruency model of political preference [J].
Caprara, GV ;
Zimbardo, PG .
AMERICAN PSYCHOLOGIST, 2004, 59 (07) :581-594
[14]   The Secret Lives of Liberals and Conservatives: Personality Profiles, Interaction Styles, and the Things They Leave Behind [J].
Carney, Dana R. ;
Jost, John T. ;
Gosling, Samuel D. ;
Potter, Jeff .
POLITICAL PSYCHOLOGY, 2008, 29 (06) :807-840
[15]   Ideology, Fear of Death, and Death Anxiety [J].
Castano, Emanuele ;
Leidner, Bernhard ;
Bonacossa, Alain ;
Nikkah, John ;
Perrulli, Rachel ;
Spencer, Bettina ;
Humphrey, Nicholas .
POLITICAL PSYCHOLOGY, 2011, 32 (04) :601-621
[16]   Me, Us, or Them: Who Is More Conformist? Perception of Conformity and Political Orientation [J].
Cavazza, Nicoletta ;
Mucchi-Faina, Angelica .
JOURNAL OF SOCIAL PSYCHOLOGY, 2008, 148 (03) :335-345
[17]   A dual-process cognitive-motivational theory of ideology and prejudice [J].
Duckitt, J .
ADVANCES IN EXPERIMENTAL SOCIAL PSYCHOLOGY, VOL 33, 2001, 33 :41-113
[18]  
Eibach R.P., 2009, SOCIAL PSYCHOL BASES, P402, DOI [10.1093/acprof:oso/9780195320916.003.016, DOI 10.1093/ACPROF:OSO/9780195320916.003.016]
[19]   Political expertise and the use of ideology: Moderating effects of evaluative motivation [J].
Federico, Christopher M. ;
Schneider, Monica C. .
PUBLIC OPINION QUARTERLY, 2007, 71 (02) :221-252
[20]  
Federico ChristopherM., 2009, Social and psychological bases of ideology and system justification, P267, DOI DOI 10.1093/ACPROF:OSO/9780195320916.003.011