Premium
Can moral convictions against gender inequality overpower system justification effects? Examining the interaction between moral conviction and system justification
Author(s) -
De Cristofaro Valeria,
Pellegrini Valerio,
Giacomantonio Mauro,
Livi Stefano,
Zomeren Martijn
Publication year - 2021
Publication title -
british journal of social psychology
Language(s) - English
Resource type - Journals
SCImago Journal Rank - 1.855
H-Index - 98
eISSN - 2044-8309
pISSN - 0144-6665
DOI - 10.1111/bjso.12451
Subject(s) - conviction , system justification , disadvantaged , ingroups and outgroups , social psychology , collective action , psychology , derogation , inequality , action (physics) , moral disengagement , political science , law , politics , mathematical analysis , physics , mathematics , quantum mechanics , ideology
It has been shown that disadvantaged groups who endorse system‐justifying beliefs tend to internalize their state of inferiority by expressing ingroup derogation and opposing collective action for change. In the present research, we recruited women – as disadvantaged group – from different countries (the United States, the United Kingdom, Italy) and examined whether their moral conviction against gender inequality, as an absolute stance that does not tolerate any violation, may interact with and overpower system‐justifying beliefs. Results from three studies provided support for our hypotheses. First, when women held strong moral conviction, they expressed higher identification with their disadvantaged ingroup and, in turn, higher collective action intentions, independent of system‐justifying beliefs. Second, when women held weak moral conviction, higher system‐justifying beliefs reduced women’s ingroup identification and, in turn, undermined their collective action intentions. This support is found across different contexts of gender inequality (the gender leadership gap, the gender pay gap, and the gender power imbalance), using different methodological approaches (online survey, online experiment, laboratory experiment). Implications, limits, and future directions are discussed.