Ambivalent Sexism and Tolerance of Violence Against Women in India.

We examined associations between sexist beliefs and tolerance of violence against women in India using a nationally representative probability sample of adults (n = 133,398). Research consistently indicates that hostile sexism fosters tolerance of violence against women. However, benevolent sexism is sometimes associated with higher tolerance and sometimes with lower tolerance of violence. We proposed that this inconsistency could be resolved by considering the source of violence: Is violence perpetrated by outsiders or intimate partners? Results of a multigroup structural equation model showed that endorsement of hostile sexism was related to greater tolerance of violence regardless of the source. In contrast, endorsement of benevolent sexism was associated with lower tolerance of violence from outsiders but was simultaneously associated with higher tolerance of spousal violence. These opposing processes indicate that although benevolent sexism promises women protection from violence, the very same ideology legitimizes spousal violence, thereby reinforcing men's power within intimate relationships.

Double trouble: How sectarian and national narcissism relate differently to collective violence beliefs in Lebanon.

Collective narcissism is a belief in ingroup greatness which is contingent on external validation. A lack of research on collective narcissism amongst non-Western contexts and minority groups remains a challenge for the field. However, here we test two types of collective narcissism (sectarian and national) as differential predictors of two dimensions of collective violence beliefs (against outgroup members and leaders) in a large, diverse, community sample from Lebanon (N = 778). We found that sectarian narcissism (narcissism related to smaller political and religious ingroup identity) predicted support for collective violence against members of different sects, while national narcissism predicted opposition to such collective violence. Neither form of collective narcissism had any significant relationship with collective violence against outgroup leaders. We controlled for both sectarian and national identification and found no significant effects in predicting either one of the two dimensions of collective violence beliefs. In this non-Western context, in which a coherent national identity is undermined by sectarianism, national narcissism seems to be a progressive motivator for unity and social change, while sectarian narcissism is rather associated with extreme attitudes, such as support for collective violence.

Does intergroup contact foster solidarity with the disadvantaged? A longitudinal analysis across 7 years.

Contact theory is a well-established paradigm for improving intergroup relations-positive contact between groups promotes social harmony by increasing intergroup warmth. A longstanding critique of this paradigm is that contact does not necessarily promote social equality. Recent research has blunted this critique by showing that contact correlates positively with political solidarity expressed by dominant groups toward subordinate groups, thus furthering the goal of equality. However, this research precludes causal inferences because it conflates within-person change (people with higher contact subsequently expressing higher solidarity) and between-person stability (people with chronically high contact simultaneously expressing chronically high solidarity, and vice versa). We addressed this problem in a highly powered, seven-wave study using two different measures of contact and three different measures of political solidarity (N = 22,646). Results showed no within-person change over a 1-year period (inconsistent with a causal effect), but significant between-person stability (consistent with third-variable explanations). This reinforces doubts about contact as a strategy for promoting equality. (PsycInfo Database Record (c) 2023 APA, all rights reserved).

Examining the relational underpinnings and consequences of system-justifying beliefs: Explaining the palliative effects of system justification.

People often perceive social systems as fair and legitimate in order to satisfy existential, epistemic, and relational needs. Although much work has examined the existential and epistemic roots to system justification, the relational motives underlying the tendency to justify the system have received comparatively less attention. We addressed this oversight by examining the associations approach and avoidance relational goals have with system justification in a national probability sample (N = 21,938). Consistent with the thesis that the need to belong motivates system justification, avoidance goals (i.e., the desire to avoid social conflict) correlated positively with system justification (approach goals also unexpectedly correlated positively with system justification). Also as hypothesized, system justification mediated the relationship between avoidance goals and belongingness. Moreover, system justification mediated the relationship between avoidance goals and belongingness. Finally, sequential mediation analyses revealed that avoidance goals predicted higher well-being via system justification and belongingness. This study is the first to demonstrate that system justification confers palliative benefits by satisfying two different relational goals.

System justification theory at 25: Evaluating a paradigm shift in psychology and looking towards the future.

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 sigh of the oppressed: The palliative effects of ideology are stronger for people living in highly unequal neighbourhoods.

Ideologies that legitimize status hierarchies are associated with increased well-being. However, which ideologies have 'palliative effects', why they have these effects, and whether these effects extend to low-status groups remain unresolved issues. This study aimed to address these issues by testing the effects of the ideology of Symbolic Prejudice on well-being among low- and high-status ethnic groups (4,519 Europeans and 1,091 Maori) nested within 1,437 regions in New Zealand. Results showed that Symbolic Prejudice predicted increased well-being for both groups, but that this relationship was stronger for those living in highly unequal neighbourhoods. This suggests that it is precisely those who have the strongest need to justify inequality that accrue the most psychological benefit from subscribing to legitimizing ideologies.

The Diversity and Prevalence of Sexual Orientation Self-Labels in a New Zealand National Sample.

In this study, we asked participants to "describe their sexual orientation" in an open-ended measure of self-generated sexual orientation. The question was included as part of the New Zealand Attitudes and Values Study (N = 18,261) 2013/2014 wave, a national probability survey conducted shortly after the first legal same-sex marriages in New Zealand. We present a two-level classification scheme to address questions about the prevalence of, and demographic differences between, sexual orientations. At the most detailed level of the coding scheme, 49 unique categories were generated by participant responses. Of those who responded with the following, significantly more were women: bisexual (2.1 % of women, compared to 1.5 % of men), bicurious (0.7 % of women, 0.4 % of men), and asexual (0.4 % of women and less than 0.1 % of men). However, significantly fewer women than men reported being lesbian or gay (1.8 % of women, compared to 3.5 % of men). Those openly identifying as bicurious, bisexual, or lesbian/gay were significantly younger than those with a heterosexual orientation. This study shows diversity in the terms used in self-generated sexual orientations, and provides up-to-date gender, age, and prevalence estimates for the New Zealand population. Finally, results reveal that a substantial minority of participants may not have understood the question about sexual orientation.

Perceived discrimination predicts increased support for political rights and life satisfaction mediated by ethnic identity: A longitudinal analysis.

OBJECTIVES: The aim of the current research is to test predictions derived from the rejection-identification model and research on collective action using cross-sectional (Study 1) and longitudinal (Study 2) methods. Specifically, an integration of these 2 literatures suggests that recognition of discrimination can have simultaneous positive relationships with well-being and engagement in collective action via the formation of a strong ingroup identity. METHOD: We test these predictions in 2 studies using data from a large national probability sample of Maori (the indigenous peoples of New Zealand), collected as part of the New Zealand Attitudes and Values Study (Ns for Study 1 and 2 were 1,981 and 1,373, respectively). RESULTS: Consistent with the extant research, Study 1 showed that perceived discrimination was directly linked with decreased life satisfaction, but indirectly linked with increased life satisfaction through higher levels of ethnic identification. Perceived discrimination was also directly linked with increased support for Maori rights and indirectly linked with increased support for Maori rights through higher levels of ethnic identification. Study 2 replicated these findings using longitudinal data and identified multiple bidirectional paths between perceived discrimination, ethnic identity, well-being, and support for collective action. CONCLUSION: These findings replicate and extend the rejection-identification model in a novel cultural context by demonstrating via cross-sectional (Study 1) and longitudinal (Study 2) analyses that the recognition of discrimination can both motivate support for political rights and increase well-being by strengthening ingroup identity. (PsycINFO Database Record

The status-legitimacy hypothesis revisited: Ethnic-group differences in general and dimension-specific legitimacy.

The status-legitimacy hypothesis, which predicts that low-status groups will legitimize inequality more than high-status groups, has received inconsistent empirical support. To resolve this inconsistency, we hypothesized 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 = 6,162), 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, Maori 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.

Ingroup friendship and political mobilization among the disadvantaged.

This study investigated the effects of ingroup contact in a large, national sample of Maori (a disadvantaged ethnic group; N = 940) on political attitudes relevant to decreasing ethnic inequality in New Zealand. We tested the role of 2 mediating mechanisms-ethnic identification and system justification-to explain the effects of ingroup contact on the dependent variables. Time spent with ingroup friends predicted increased support for the Maori Party and support for symbolic and resource-specific reparative policies benefiting Maori. These effects were partially mediated by increased ethnic identification. Although ingroup contact also reduced levels of system justification among Maori, its effects on policy attitudes and party preference were not mediated by system justification. This suggests that a key antecedent to system challenging political attitudes is an increased sense of identification with a disadvantaged group resulting, in part, from interactions with ingroup friends.

The wallpaper effect: the contact hypothesis fails for minority group members who live in areas with a high proportion of majority group members.

We aim to provide one explanation for why the link between contact and prejudice is consistently less strong for minority group members than it is for majority group members. Specifically, we propose a "wallpaper effect" such that contact works to increase minority group members' positivity towards majority groups when they live in areas densely populated with other minority group members. Conversely, we suggest that when minority group members live in neighborhoods patterned with majority group faces (as is so often the case), contact will be less transformative. We test this assumption using a large sample of both New Zealander minority (Maori; N = 925) and majority (European; N = 3805) group members. In line with predictions, Maori who lived in minority dense neighborhoods showed the traditional association between contact and increased warmth towards New Zealander Europeans. This relationship, however, was weak or non-existent when they lived in primarily European neighborhoods. Contact effects in majority group members were unaffected by neighborhood composition. The interaction held when controlling for, and was not explained by: gender, income, experiences of harm, cognitions of race-based rejection, or realistic threat. We provide the first evidence to suggest that when it comes to minority group members' intergroup attitudes, contact with majority group members may be a relatively ineffective predictor unless the "wallpaper" of their lives is minority-dense.

Perpetuating one's own disadvantage: intergroup contact enables the ideological legitimation of inequality.

Contact with the dominant group can increase opposition, among the disadvantaged, to social policies that would benefit their group. This effect can be explained in terms of contact promoting support for an ideology of meritocracy, which privileges the distribution of societal resources based on individual merit, rather than group-level disadvantage. We tested this ideological mechanism in a large, nationally representative sample of Maori (a disadvantaged group in New Zealand; N = 1,008). Positive intergroup contact with the dominant group (New Zealand Europeans) predicted increased opposition to a topical reparative policy (Maori ownership of the foreshore), and this was fully mediated by increased support for the ideology of meritocracy. Intergroup contact may enable the ideological legitimation of inequality among members of disadvantaged groups, engendering political attitudes that are detrimental to their group's interests. Contact with ingroup members had the opposite effect, increasing support for reparative policy by reducing subscription to meritocratic ideology.