Suchergebnisse

Since first being proposed 25 years ago, system justification theory has become a paradigm-shifting framework for understanding intergroup relations and political psychology. Based on the thesis that people are motivated to defend and bolster the societal status quo, system justification theory helps to explain varied phenomena, including resistance to change, outgroup favouritism, and other instances of false consciousness. This paper summarizes four tenets of the theory including the following: (1) antecedents to system justification, (2) palliative effects of system justification, (3) status-based asymmetries in conflict between justification motives, and (4) societal consequences of system justification. Throughout our review, we highlight how system justification theory helps to explain why disadvantaged groups might sometimes support the status quo, emphasizing research conducted outside the United States when possible. We conclude by calling on future research to (1) further utilize nationally representative and multi-level data, (2) investigate the relational motives behind system justification, (3) address social change from a system justification perspective, and (4) extend system justification theory's focus beyond WEIRD societies.

The status-legitimacy hypothesis, which predicts that low-status groups will legitimise inequality more than high-status groups, has received inconsistent empirical support. To resolve this inconsistency, we hypothesised that low-status groups would display enhanced legitimation only when evaluating the fairness of the specific hierarchy responsible for their disadvantage. In a New Zealand-based probability sample (N = 6162), we found that low-status ethnic groups (Asians and Pacific Islanders) perceived ethnic-group relations to be fairer than the high-status group (Europeans). However, these groups did not justify the overall political system more than the high-status group. In fact, Māori showed the least support for the political system. These findings clarify when the controversial status-legitimacy effects predicted by System Justification Theory will—and will not—emerge.

Documenting the relationship between Agreeableness and political conservatism has proven elusive. We address this anomaly by showing that two aspects of Agreeableness – politeness and compassion – have countervailing relationships with political conservatism through right-wing authoritarianism (RWA) and social dominance orientation (SDO). To test this, we analyzed data from a nationally representative sample of New Zealanders (N = 4,553). Politeness was positively, but compassion was negatively, correlated with political conservatism. Consistent with the differential mediation hypothesis derived from the dual process model of ideology and prejudice, these opposing relationships were differentially mediated by RWA and SDO. This attenuated the bivariate relationship between the higher-order trait of Agreeableness and political conservatism. These results demonstrate the complex relationship between personality and political orientation.

Although trust in, and cooperation with, the police is critical to effective crime prevention, the relationship between citizens and police can be tenuous, especially for ethnic minorities. However, the impact that membership in multiple marginalised groups has on attitudes toward the police has received limited attention. We address this oversight using a national probability sample of New Zealand adults ( N = 11,669) to examine how the intersection between ethnicity and socioeconomic status (SES) affects trust in, and willingness to cooperate with, the police. As hypothesised, minorities trusted the police less than did ethnic majority group members. However, ethnic group differences in trust in the police were heightened at low (vs. high) levels of SES. In turn, trust in the police mediated the relationship between minority status and willingness to cooperate with the police. These results demonstrate that (low) SES exacerbates the already fragile relationship between ethnic minorities and the police.

Abstract
Does the day of the week an email is sent inviting existing participants to complete a follow-up questionnaire for an annual online survey impact response rate? We answer this question using a preregistered experiment conducted as part of an ongoing national probability panel study in New Zealand. Across 14 consecutive days, existing participants in a panel study were randomly allocated a day of the week to receive an email inviting them to complete the next wave of the questionnaire online (N = 26,126). Valid responses included questionnaires completed within 31 days of receiving the initial invitation. Results revealed that the day the invitation was sent did not affect the likelihood of responding. These results are reassuring for researchers conducting ongoing panel studies and suggest that, once participants have joined a panel, the day of the week they are contacted does not impact their likelihood of responding to subsequent waves.

Purpose
– The purpose of this paper is to examine individual differences in people's resilience to changes in psychological distress following the 22 February 2011 Christchurch earthquake.


Design/methodology/approach
– Data were based on a subsample of the New Zealand Attitudes and Values Study (NZAVS) – an annual nation-wide longitudinal study of New Zealand adults that began in 2009. In both waves of the NZAVS examined here, participants completed measures of the Big-Five, psychological distress, and demographic covariates. As such, the analyses, which focus on participants who were living in the Canterbury region before the 2011 earthquake (n=325), use measures of personality collected in late October of 2010 (Time 1) to predict changes in psychological distress after the devastation that unfolded on 22 February 2011.


Findings
– Time 1 levels of Emotional Stability were inversely associated with increases in psychological distress following the 2011 earthquake. Psychological distress assessed at Time 1, however, was uncorrelated with changes in Emotional Stability.


Practical implications
– These results show that Emotional Stability protects people against decrements to mental health following a disaster. Thus, efforts to rebuild disaster-stricken communities should ensure that those who are particularly likely to experience increases in psychological distress (i.e. those who, before a disaster, are low on Emotional Stability) receive the help they need.


Originality/value
– This study assesses a subsample of respondents from a longitudinally based national probability study to show that Emotional Stability exerts a cross-lagged effect on changes in psychological distress following a natural disaster. The access to such measures affords us the rare opportunity to explain how people cope in the wake of a catastrophic disaster.