The effects of system-justifying motives on endorsement of essentialist explanations for gender differences

Victoria Brescoll, Eric Luis Uhlmann and George E. Newman
Additional contact information
Victoria Brescoll: Department of Psychology - Yale University [New Haven], School of Management - Yale University [New Haven]
Eric Luis Uhlmann: GREGH - Groupement de Recherche et d'Etudes en Gestion à HEC - HEC Paris - Ecole des Hautes Etudes Commerciales - CNRS - Centre National de la Recherche Scientifique
George E. Newman: Yale School of Management - Yale University [New Haven]

Post-Print from HAL

Abstract: People have a fundamental motive to view their social system as just, fair, and good and will engage in a number of strategies to rationalize the status quo (Jost & Banaji, 1994). We propose that one way in which individuals may "justify the system" is through endorsement of essentialist explanations, which attribute group differences to deep, essential causes. We suggest that system-justifying motives lead to greater endorsement of essentialist explanations because those explanations portray group differences as immutable. Study 1 employed an established system threat manipulation. We found that activating system-justifying motives increases both male and female participants' endorsement of essentialist explanations for gender differences and that this effect is mediated by beliefs in immutability. In Study 2, we used a goal contagion manipulation and found that both male and female participants primed with a system-justifying goal are significantly more likely to agree with essentialist explanations for gender differences. Study 3 demonstrated that providing an opportunity to explicitly reject a system threat (an alternative means of satisfying the goal to defend the system) attenuates system threat effects on endorsement of essentialist explanations, further suggesting that this process is motivated. Finally, Studies 4a and 4b dissociated the type of cause (biological vs. social) from whether group differences are portrayed as mutable versus immutable and found that system threat increases endorsement of immutable explanations, independent of the type of cause.

Keywords: Social system; essentialist explanations; gender differences (search for similar items in EconPapers)
Date: 2013-12
References: Add references at CitEc
Citations: View citations in EconPapers (7)

Published in Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 2013, 105 (6), pp.891-908. ⟨10.1037/a0034701⟩

There are no downloads for this item, see the EconPapers FAQ for hints about obtaining it.

Related works:
This item may be available elsewhere in EconPapers: Search for items with the same title.

Export reference: BibTeX RIS (EndNote, ProCite, RefMan) HTML/Text

Persistent link: https://EconPapers.repec.org/RePEc:hal:journl:hal-00982467

DOI: 10.1037/a0034701

Access Statistics for this paper

More papers in Post-Print from HAL
Bibliographic data for series maintained by CCSD ().