Department of Ergonomics and Psychology, Budapest University of Technology and Economics, Budapest, Hungary.
Swedish School of Social Science, University of Helsinki, Helsinki, Finland.
Int J Psychol. 2021 Oct;56(5):679-687. doi: 10.1002/ijop.12747. Epub 2021 Feb 15.
The present study employed European Social Survey (ESS) data collected between 2002 and 2018 to investigate system justification versus derogation in Hungary. In all nine ESS rounds, system derogation was stronger than system justification. System justification was consistently at its strongest among those who had voted for the ruling party, be it left-wing MSZP (until 2008) or right-wing Fidesz (2010 onward). This pattern can be explained by ego and group justification motives alone, with no need to posit an autonomous system justification motive. Voters of Jobbik, who were as right-wing as Fidesz voters, but whose party was not in power, did not believe the system to be any more just than did left-wing voters. Much of the research supporting system justification theory has been conducted in stable Western democracies. Our results highlight the need for research in more politically volatile contexts.
本研究采用 2002 年至 2018 年间收集的欧洲社会调查（ESS）数据，考察了匈牙利的制度辩护与诋毁。在所有九轮 ESS 中，制度诋毁都强于制度辩护。在那些投票给执政党（无论是左翼的社会党（MSZP）[直到 2008 年]还是右翼的青民盟（Fidesz）[2010 年以后]）的人中，制度辩护一直是最强的。这种模式仅可以通过自我和群体辩护动机来解释，无需假定自主的制度辩护动机。与青民盟选民一样右翼的、但其所在政党未执政的“为了更好的匈牙利运动”（Jobbik）的选民，并不比左翼选民更相信制度的公正性。支持制度辩护理论的大部分研究都是在稳定的西方民主国家进行的。我们的结果强调了在政治环境更加动荡的情况下开展研究的必要性。
