Dynamic Cognitive and Motivational Properties of System Justification

这个项目的目的是调查人类对针对现有社会制度的威胁的反应。对现状的威胁可能是直接的，比如美国的体制在9/11事件中遭到袭击；也可能是间接的，比如当它的缺陷暴露出来时，比如卡特里娜飓风的余波。这种威胁往往会引发负面影响，并激励人们捍卫和巩固社会制度。这种防御性反应有助于重建积极的影响，但它可能会产生意想不到的，有时甚至是有害的后果。制度辩护指的是一种心理过程，即仅仅因为现状存在就捍卫和维持现状，这与刻板印象、指责受害者和抵制变革的增加有关。为系统辩护的反应是由对系统的威胁引起和加强的，它们可以帮助维持一个不完美但已建立的状态。三个实验研究将检验制度正当化的认知动机基础。在研究1中，研究者将确定系统论证是否是一个有动机的、目标导向的过程。如果在系统受到威胁时确实激活了系统正当性目标，那么恢复系统合法性的动机应该驱动行为，直到它实现为止。只要一个目标可以通过各种手段实现，这些手段就应该是可替代的。虽然系统威胁应该导致参与者体验不舒服的感觉，但系统正当化的目标可以通过肯定系统的任何几个积极特征来实现，从而恢复积极的影响。在研究2中，研究者将通过观察那些被系统威胁激活了系统正当性目标的人，与那些目标没有被激活的人相比，是否更有可能在目标被中断后实现目标，来解决目标恢复的动机属性。在研究3中，研究者将通过比较高社会经济地位和低社会经济地位的参与者对系统威胁的反应来确定系统正当性是否是一个不同于自我提升和内部偏袒的目标。假设是，自我肯定和群体肯定作为肯定社会系统价值的途径是不可替代的，因此，肯定自己或自己的群体不应该使系统正当化目标失效——除非一个人的群体被视为系统的高度代表性。这项研究将促进科学训练、教学和学习，因为本科生和研究生将参与研究的各个阶段。与以前的工作一样，PI将与各种各样的学生和合作者密切合作。研究结果将广泛传播给公众和科学听众。

The aim of this project is to investigate human responses to threats directed at existing social systems. Threats to the status quo may be direct, as when the American system was attacked on 9/11, or indirect, as when its faults are exposed, as in the aftermath of Hurricane Katrina. Such threats tend to provoke negative affect and motivate people to defend and bolster the social system. This defensive response serves to reestablish positive affect, but it can have unanticipated and sometimes deleterious consequences. System justification, which refers to the psychological process whereby the status quo is defended and upheld simply because it exists, has been associated with increased stereotyping, victim-blaming, and resistance to change. System-justifying responses are elicited and accentuated by threats to the system, and they can help maintain an imperfect but established state. Three experimental studies will examine the cognitive-motivational basis of system justification. In Study 1, the investigators will determine whether system justification is a motivated, goal-oriented process. If the system justification goal is indeed activated when the system is threatened, the motivation to restore system legitimacy should drive behavior until it is achieved. Insofar as a goal can be attained through various means, these means should be substitutable. While system threat should lead participants to experience feelings of discomfort, the goal of system justification can be met by affirming any of several positive features of the system, thereby restoring positive affect. In Study 2, the investigators will address the motivational property of goal-resumption by observing whether people for whom the system justification goal has been activated by system threat are more likely to fulfill the goal after it has been interrupted, in comparison with people for whom the goal has not been activated. In Study 3, the investigators will determine whether system justification is a goal that is distinct from self-enhancement and ingroup favoritism by comparing responses of high vs. low socio-economic status participants to system threat. The hypothesis is that self- affirmation and group-affirmation are not substitutable as routes to affirming the value of the social system, so that affirming oneself or one's group should not deactivate the system justification goal--unless one's group is seen as highly representative of the system. This research will promote scientific training, teaching, and learning, because undergraduate and graduate students will be involved in all phases of the research. As in previous work, the PI will work closely with a diverse group of students and collaborators. The research results will be disseminated widely to a public and scientific audience.