Department of Psychology, FernUniversität in Hagen.
Department of Psychology, University of California, Riverside.
J Pers Soc Psychol. 2021 May;120(5):1204-1230. doi: 10.1037/pspi0000302. Epub 2020 Jul 23.
We examined hypotheses proposed by System Justification Theory (SJT; Jost, Banaji, & Nosek, 2004) regarding intergroup evaluation in disadvantaged groups, using large samples of online participants (total N = 715,721), spanning 8 intergroup domains and 14 nations. Using a meta-analytic approach, we tested these hypotheses at the individual level (as SJT is generally articulated), as well as at the social group level. Consistent with SJT, individual-level analyses revealed that disadvantaged groups demonstrated outgroup favoritism on Implicit Association Tests (IATs; i.e., implicit measures), but demonstrated ingroup favoritism or no intergroup preference on self-report (i.e., explicit) measures. Additionally, these average effects were characterized by high heterogeneity, and follow-up exploratory analyses revealed that intergroup evaluation in disadvantaged groups was moderated by the intergroup domain: Whereas some disadvantaged groups consistently displayed outgroup favoritism (e.g., age, weight), others consistently displayed ingroup favoritism (e.g., sexual orientation, religion), and yet others displayed diverging patterns on implicit and explicit measures (e.g., race, ethnicity). Consistent with SJT, intergroup evaluation on all measures was moderated by self-reported conservatism. Furthermore, the magnitude of these relationships depended on the level of analysis, with small effects emerging at the individual level and medium-sized effects emerging at the social group level. Social group-level analyses also indicated that intergroup evaluation in disadvantaged groups was moderated by stigma. Overall, these findings support and extend the predictions of SJT, but the relatively complex patterns of intergroup evaluation in disadvantaged groups identified here illustrate a need for further theory development and more theory-driven research in this domain. (PsycInfo Database Record (c) 2021 APA, all rights reserved).
我们检验了系统合理化理论（SJT；Jost、Banaji 和 Nosek，2004）关于弱势群体中群体间评价的假设，使用了来自 14 个国家的 8 个群体间领域的大量在线参与者（总计 N=715721）的样本。我们使用元分析方法，在个体层面（如 SJT 通常表述的那样）以及社会群体层面检验了这些假设。与 SJT 一致，个体层面的分析表明，弱势群体在内隐联想测验（IAT；即内隐测量）上表现出对外群体的偏好，但在自我报告（即外显测量）上表现出对内群体的偏好或无群体间偏好。此外，这些平均效应表现出高度的异质性，后续的探索性分析表明，弱势群体的群体间评价受到群体间领域的调节：尽管一些弱势群体始终表现出对外群体的偏好（例如，年龄、体重），而另一些弱势群体则始终表现出对内群体的偏好（例如，性取向、宗教），还有一些弱势群体在内外群体评价上表现出不同的模式（例如，种族、民族）。与 SJT 一致，所有测量上的群体间评价都受到自我报告的保守主义的调节。此外，这些关系的大小取决于分析水平，个体水平上出现小效应，社会群体水平上出现中效应。社会群体层面的分析还表明，弱势群体的群体间评价受到污名的调节。总体而言，这些发现支持并扩展了 SJT 的预测，但这里确定的弱势群体的群体间评价相对复杂的模式表明，需要进一步的理论发展和更多的该领域的理论驱动研究。（PsycInfo 数据库记录（c）2021 APA，保留所有权利）。
