Advancing a Social Identity Model of System Attitudes

2019 ◽  
Vol 57 (1-2) ◽  
pp. 114-137 ◽  
Author(s):  
Kwan-Lamar Blount-Hill
Keyword(s):  
Social Identity ◽  
Social Identity Theory ◽  
Identity Theory ◽  
Group Identification ◽  
System Justification ◽  
System Justification Theory ◽  
Disadvantaged Groups ◽  
Area Of Interest ◽  
Identity Model ◽  
The Government

AbstractThe connection between social identity and attitudes toward the criminal justice system (CJS) is an area of interest among criminologists and legitimacy scholars. Previous work has proposed a social identity theory of legitimation, positing that individuals categorize CJS officials as either in-group (i.e. legitimate authority) or out-group (i.e. illegitimate enforcer). Subsequently, how individuals perceive their CJS – including the sincerity of its commitment to the rule of law – is tied to this relationship. Those viewing the government as an out-group oppressor are less likely to accept its legitimacy. This article explores this thesis. From the perspective of system justification theory, how the CJS is categorized should depend on how strongly an individual identifies as belonging to a group disadvantaged by the CJS. System justification theorists hypothesize that system justification (including acceptance of system legitimacy) is more likely when members of disadvantaged groups believe that group interests are less important. Alternative models that explain attitudes toward the system by using social identity theory suggest the opposite: Those who identify more strongly with disadvantaged groups and hold their interests to be more important nonetheless justify oppositional systems and view them legitimately. The present study uses a sample of Black Americans (a disadvantaged group in the American CJS) to determine whether group identification predicts system justification.

scholarly journals Psychologiczne podstawy konfliktów społecznych: wokół dyspozycyjnych i sytuacyjnych mechanizmów wrogości i uprzedzeń

2017 ◽  
Vol 22 ◽  
pp. 108-134
Author(s):  
Paweł Ścigaj
Keyword(s):  
Group Theory ◽  
Social Identity ◽  
Social Identity Theory ◽  
Identity Theory ◽  
System Justification ◽  
Intergroup Bias ◽  
Social Conflicts ◽  
System Justification Theory ◽  
Political Conflicts ◽  
Evolutionary Aspects

Psychological foundations of social conflicts: on dispositional and situational aspects of intergroup bias and prejudiceThe aim of the paper is to discuss main theories explaining the psychological basis of social and political conflicts, especially causes of intergroup bias and prejudice. Theories of authoritarianism and social dom­inance orientation are discussed referring dispositional causes of intergroup bias and prejudice, while real­istic conflict group theory, social identity theory and system-justification theory are called for explaining situational determinants of intergroup bias and prejudice. Evolutionary aspects of hostility and aggression in social and political conflicts are also debated.

scholarly journals Revisiting 25 years of system motivation explanation for system justification from the perspective of social identity model of system attitudes

2018 ◽  
Author(s):  
Chuma Kevin Owuamalam ◽  
Mark Rubin ◽  
Russell Spears
Keyword(s):  
Social Identity ◽  
Cognitive Dissonance ◽  
Social System ◽  
Social Systems ◽  
System Justification ◽  
System Justification Theory ◽  
Knowing That ◽  
Parsimonious Explanation ◽  
Long Run ◽  
Identity Model

Do the disadvantaged have an autonomous system justification motivation that operates against their personal and group interests? System justification theory (SJT; Jost & Banaji, 1994) proposes that they do, and that this motivation helps to (a) reduce cognitive dissonance and associated uncertainties and (b) soothe the pain that is associated with knowing that one’s group is subject to social inequality. However, 25 years of research on this system justification motivation has given rise to several theoretical and empirical inconsistencies. The present article argues that these inconsistencies can be resolved by a social identity model of system attitudes (SIMSA; Owuamalam, Rubin, & Spears, 2018). SIMSA assumes that instances of system justification are often in alignment with (rather than opposed to) the interests of the disadvantaged. According to SIMSA, the disadvantaged may support social systems (a) in order to acknowledge social reality, (b) when they perceive the wider social system to constitute a superordinate ingroup, and (c) because they hope to improve their ingroup’s status through existing channels in the long run. These propositions are corroborated by existing and emerging evidence. We conclude that SIMSA offers a more coherent and parsimonious explanation for system justification than does SJT.

scholarly journals Transformasi Pengucapan Syukur: Identitas dan Relasi Sosial Era Pandemi Covid-19 di Tomohon

Tumou Tou ◽  
2021 ◽  
Vol 8 (1) ◽  
pp. 53-61
Author(s):  
Wolter Weol ◽  
Nency Aprilia Heydemans ◽  
Fienny Maria Langi
Keyword(s):  
Social Identity ◽  
Social Relations ◽  
Social Identity Theory ◽  
Identity Theory ◽  
Field Research ◽  
Cultural Integration ◽  
Mutual Cooperation ◽  
The Social ◽  
The Government ◽  
Depth Interviews

This paper describes the transformation of gratitude: identity and social relations during the Covid-19 pandemic era in Tomohon. The expression of gratitude to God Almighty (Opo Empung Wailan Wangko) was inherited from the ancestors of the Tou (people) of Minahasa for the yields obtained in the form of offerings. This one gratitude is done every one person in social relations and cultural integration. This article aims to analyze the transformation of gratitude carried out in Tomohon during the Covid-19 Pandemic era. This study reveals the social identity theory from the sociological paradigm by Steph Lawler (2014) which functions as a relationship between relatives as individuals, which in this study is called family, basudara. The article data uses field research with the method of observation and in-depth interviews. The results of the research are expected to help the government and society in preventing Covid-19 so as to minimize consumptive lifestyles and maintain distance. There are three values ​​that are useful for building life, namely the value of brotherhood, mutual cooperation (mapalus) and spirituality.

scholarly journals A Social Identity Theory of Leadership

2001 ◽  
Vol 5 (3) ◽  
pp. 184-200 ◽  
Author(s):  
Michael A. Hogg
Keyword(s):  
Social Identity ◽  
Social Identity Theory ◽  
Group Process ◽  
Identity Theory ◽  
Group Identification ◽  
Empirical Support ◽  
Charismatic Leadership ◽  
Structural Differentiation ◽  
Social Attraction ◽  
Attribution Process

A social identity theory of leadership is described that views leadership as a group process generated by social categorization and prototype-based depersonalization processes associated with social identity. Group identification, as self-categorization, constructs an intragroup prototypicality gradient that invests the most prototypical member with the appearance of having influence; the appearance arises because members cognitively and behaviorally conform to the prototype. The appearance of influence becomes a reality through depersonalized social attraction processes that make followers agree and comply with the leader's ideas and suggestions. Consensual social attraction also imbues the leader with apparent status and creates a status-based structural differentiation within the group into leader(s) and followers, which has characteristics of unequal status intergroup relations. In addition, a fundamental attribution process constructs a charismatic leadership personality for the leader, which further empowers the leader and sharpens the leader-follower status differential. Empirical support for the theory is reviewed and a range of implications discussed, including intergroup dimensions, uncertainty reduction and extremism, power, and pitfalls of prototype-based leadership.

scholarly journals Is a System Motive Really Necessary to Explain the System Justification Effect? A Response to Jost (2019) and Jost, Badaan, Goudarzi, Hoffarth, and Mogami (2019)

2019 ◽  
Author(s):  
Chuma Kevin Owuamalam ◽  
Mark Rubin
Keyword(s):  
Social Identity ◽  
Social Reality ◽  
Conclusive Evidence ◽  
System Justification ◽  
Ingroup Bias ◽  
Special System ◽  
System Justification Theory ◽  
The Social ◽  
Identity Model ◽  
Identity Motives

The debate between the proponents of SIMSA and SJT does not pivot on whether system justification occurs – we all agree that system justification does occur. The issue is why it occurs? System justification theory (SJT; Jost & Banaji, 1994) assumes that system justification is motivated by a special system justification motive. In contrast, the social identity model of system attitudes (SIMSA; Owuamalam, Rubin, & Spears, 2018) argues that there is insufficient conclusive evidence for this special system motive, and that system justification can be explained in terms of social identity motives, including the motivation to accurately reflect social reality and the search for a positive social identity. Here, we respond to criticisms of SIMSA, including criticisms of its social reality, ingroup bias and hope for future ingroup status explanations of system justification. We conclude that SJT theorists should decide whether system justification is oppositional to, or compatible with social identity motives, and that this dilemma could be resolved by relinquishing the theoretically problematic notion of a system justification motivation.

scholarly journals Addressing evidential and theoretical inconsistencies in system justification theory with a social identity model of system attitudes

2017 ◽  
Author(s):  
Chuma Kevin Owuamalam ◽  
Mark Rubin ◽  
Russell Spears
Keyword(s):  
Social Identity ◽  
Social Reality ◽  
System Justification ◽  
Ingroup Bias ◽  
P System ◽  
System Justification Theory ◽  
Identity Processes ◽  
The Future ◽  
Identity Model ◽  
Group Interests

System justification theory (SJT; Jost & Banaji, 1994) proposes that people have an inherent motive to support societal systems, even at the expense of their personal and group interests. However, the evidence for this system justification motive is mixed, and a close examination of the relevant propositions yields some important theoretical inconsistencies. To address this mixed evidence and theoretical inconsistency, we introduce a social identity model of system attitudes (SIMSA). SIMSA integrates a cluster of different social identity processes and proposes that system justification can occur among members of low-status groups (a) due to a passive reflection of social reality, (b) as a form of ingroup bias (at the superordinate level), and (c) in the hope that ingroup advancement is possible in the future within the prevailing system. It is concluded that SIMSA provides a more comprehensive and theoretically-consistent explanation of system justification than SJT.

Social Identity Theory and the Authoritarian Personality Theory in South Africa

2003 ◽  
Vol 33 (2) ◽  
pp. 109-117 ◽  
Author(s):  
Ulrike Niens ◽  
Ed Cairns ◽  
Gillian Finchilescu ◽  
Don Foster ◽  
Colin Tredoux
Keyword(s):  
Social Identity ◽  
Collective Efficacy ◽  
Social Identity Theory ◽  
Identity Management ◽  
Identity Theory ◽  
Management Strategies ◽  
Group Identification ◽  
Individual Identity ◽  
Personality Theory ◽  
Authoritarian Personality

Social identity theory assumes that individuals and collectives apply identity management strategies in order to cope with threatened social identities. It is argued here that an integration of social identity theory and the authoritarian personality theory may help to investigate identity management strategies for minority and majority groups. It was intended to investigate predictors of identity management strategies applied by students at the University of Cape Town. Analyses are based on a questionnaire survey of 457 university students. Results only partially confirmed assumptions derived from social identity theory. Group identification and perceptions of legitimacy were related to the individual identity management strategy, “individualisation”, while the collective strategy “social competition” was associated with collective efficacy and authoritarianism. Perceptions of instability and authoritarianism predicted preferences for “temporal comparisons”. ‘Superordinate recategorisation’ was only very weakly predicted by group identification. The study indicated that social identity theory and the authoritarian personality theory might play different roles in preferences for identity management strategies. While social identity theory appears better in explaining individual identity management strategies, the authoritarian personality theory might be better in explaining collective strategies.

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document