The Role of Income in System Justification.

Background: System justification theory asserts that people's motivation to defend, justify, and maintain the status quo depends on their socio-economic status. At the same time practically nothing is known about the mediators for the relationship between a person's income and his adherence to system justification. Objective: The aim of this study was to clarify the role of income in motivating an individual to justify the system, taking into account as potential mediators of this relationship his sense of control over life and level of life satisfaction. Design: In an online study (N = 410), a double sequential mediation model was tested, with an individual's income as an independent variable, his/her system justification as a dependent variable, and his/her perceived control over life and level of life satisfaction as mediators. The impact of education was controlled by inserting it into the model as a covariate. Results: The results demonstrated that people with low incomes justify the system more than people with high incomes do. At the same time, there was a positive indirect effect of income on system justification, indicating that, compared to people with low incomes, those with high incomes had a more pronounced sense of control over their lives, which contributed to an increase in their level of life satisfaction, and was positively associated with justification of the status quo. Conclusion: The results are discussed in terms of differences in the palliative function of system justification for individuals of different socio-economic status.

Factors in workers' dehumanization: Multiple stigmatization, social status, and workers' sex.

The aim of this study is to examine how different factors (multiple stigmatization, perceived social status, and workers' sex) as well as their interactions are associated with the dehumanization of workers. In the preliminary study (N = 991), we selected 16 occupations with different types of stigmatization and perceived status relevant to the Russian socio-cultural context. In two experimental studies (N1 = 1060, N2 = 1081), we demonstrated that multiple stigmatization increases metaphor-based and attribute-based animalistic but not mechanistic dehumanization: low-status workers were more animalistically dehumanized than high-status workers; the high status decreased the metaphor-based animalistic dehumanization of occupations with multiple stigmatization, and the attribute-based animalistic and mechanistic dehumanization of workers regardless of their stigmatization; and male workers were more mechanistically dehumanized than female ones but there were no differences in animalistic dehumanization. The results obtained are discussed in the context of understanding the specificity of workers' dehumanization and the possible consequences of this dehumanization.

The Role of Valence and Uniqueness of Emotions in the Context of Infrahumanization Theory.

Background: Infrahumanization is a result of group comparison when the ingroup is considered as fully human in comparison to an outgroup that is viewed as lacking humanness and similar to animals. Infrahumanization theory proposed that the attribution of emotions to ingroups and out-groups is based on their uniqueness, regardless of the valence of these emotions. Since the valence of information plays an important role in its processing and perception, it was decided to clarify the role of uniqueness and valence. Objective: This article aims to explore the role of valence and uniqueness in the perception of emotions within the framework of the infrahumanization theory. Design: Three studies were conducted. A preliminary study selected emotions with extreme values for uniqueness and valence to create a list for measuring infrahumanization for the Russian socio-cultural context. In Study 1, we tested three alternative models of perception of emotions' uniqueness and valence. In Study 2, we replicate the results from Study 1 and check the robustness of the models obtained. Results: In a preliminary study (N = 146), twelve emotions with different levels of uniqueness and valence were selected for the Russian sociocultural context. CFA was used for testing the models in Studies 1 and 2. The results of Study 1 (N = 243) demonstrated the role of valence and uniqueness in the perception of emotions. Study 2 (N = 482) confirmed the results obtained in Study 1. Conclusion: For the first time, the infrahumanization measure was adapted to the Russian socio-cultural context. Infrahumanization research should control valence for a qualitative discussion of the results.

Are people more prejudiced towards groups that are perceived as coherent? A meta-analysis of the relationship between out-group entitativity and prejudice.

A meta-analysis was conducted to examine the relationship between out-group entitativity and prejudice. A quantitative analysis of 85 effect sizes from 33 independent samples showed a significant positive relationship between entitativity and prejudice (Fisher's z = .414, 95% CI [0.272, 0.557], p < .0001). Three possible moderators of the relationship between entitativity and prejudice were tested: conceptualization of the entitativity (essence-based entitativity scale, agency-based entitativity scale, common entitativity scale), the target of the prejudice, and the measures of prejudice (attitudes, emotions, behaviour towards out-group). Results demonstrated that out-group entitativity correlated with prejudice only when entitativity was conceptualized as an essence-based or common-based scale, and prejudice was measured as the attitude to the out-group. The target of prejudice does not moderate the relationship between entitativity and prejudice.

A hierarchical (multicomponent) model of in-group identification: examining in Russian samples.

The aim of this study was to examine the validity and reliability of Leach et al.'s (2008) model of in-group identification in two studies using Russian samples (overall N = 621). In Study 1, a series of multi-group confirmatory factor analysis revealed that the hierarchical model of in-group identification, which included two second-order factors, self-definition (individual self-stereotyping, and in-group homogeneity) and self-investment (satisfaction, solidarity, and centrality), fitted the data well for all four group identities (ethnic, religious, university, and gender) (CFI > .93, TLI > .92, RMSEA < .06, SRMR < .06) and demonstrated a better fit, compared to the alternative models. In Study 2, the construct validity and reliability of the Russian version of the in-group identification measure was examined. Results show that these measures have adequate psychometric properties. In short, our results show that Leach et al.'s model is reproduced in Russian culture. The Russian version of this measure can be recommended for use in future in-group research in Russian-speaking samples.

A hierarchical (multicomponent) model of in-group identification: examining in Russian samples

The aim of this study was to examine the validity and reliability of Leach et al.’s (2008) model of in-group identification in two studies using Russian samples (overall N = 621). In Study 1, a series of multi-group confirmatory factor analysis revealed that the hierarchical model of in-group identification, which included two second-order factors, self-definition (individual self-stereotyping, and in-group homogeneity) and self-investment (satisfaction, solidarity, and centrality), fitted the data well for all four group identities (ethnic, religious, university, and gender) (CFI > .93, TLI > .92, RMSEA < .06, SRMR < .06) and demonstrated a better fit, compared to the alternative models. In Study 2, the construct validity and reliability of the Russian version of the in-group identification measure was examined. Results show that these measures have adequate psychometric properties. In short, our results show that Leach et al.’s model is reproduced in Russian culture. The Russian version of this measure can be recommended for use in future in-group research in Russian-speaking samples (AU)

No disponible