Is a System Motive Really Necessary to Explain the System Justification Effect? A Response to Jost (2019) and Jost, Badaan, Goudarzi, Hoffarth, and Mogami (2019)

Abstract

The debate between the proponents of SIMSA and SJT does not pivot on whether system justification occurs – we all agree that system justification does occur. The issue is why it occurs? System justification theory (SJT; Jost & Banaji, 1994) assumes that system justification is motivated by a special system justification motive. In contrast, the social identity model of system attitudes (SIMSA; Owuamalam, Rubin, & Spears, 2018) argues that there is insufficient conclusive evidence for this special system motive, and that system justification can be explained in terms of social identity motives, including the motivation to accurately reflect social reality and the search for a positive social identity. Here, we respond to criticisms of SIMSA, including criticisms of its social reality, ingroup bias and hope for future ingroup status explanations of system justification. We conclude that SJT theorists should decide whether system justification is oppositional to, or compatible with social identity motives, and that this dilemma could be resolved by relinquishing the theoretically problematic notion of a system justification motivation.

Who's in power matters: System justification and system derogation in Hungary between 2002 and 2018

“…The literature on system justification has frequently faced and rebutted criticism suggesting that system‐justification can contribute little, if anything, beyond the classic and generally accepted explanations offered by individual‐level‐justification (ego) and social‐identity‐based (group) justification (Jost et al, 2019; Owuamalam et al, 2019a, 2019b). According to Owuamalam et al (2019a), “at the heart of the debate between system justification theorists (…) and social identity theorists (…) is whether an autonomous system justification motive is necessary to explain instances of system justification” (p. 393). In essence, both system justification theorists and their critics agree that system justification does happen, but critics argue that ego and group justification can explain it in full.…”

“…Playing a pivotal role in this discussion is the claim, made by system justification theory, that members of disadvantaged groups are, because of the need to reduce cognitive dissonance, even more likely than advantaged groups to justify the system—this would imply that people justify the system without the presence of ego and/or group interests (Jost et al, 2003). Critics (e.g., Caricati & Owuamalam, 2020; Owuamalam et al, 2016; Owuamalam et al, 2019a, 2019b), on the other hand, have argued that system justification can be explained by group interest (e.g., the supporters of the ruling party are also the ones who justify the system) and/or individual interest (e.g., people with higher status are more willing to justify the system compared to people with lower status). Without an autonomous system justification motive, system justification theory can add very little to social identity theory.…”

“…This issue of system justification versus system derogation can be connected to a broader theoretical debate between proponents of system justification theory and social identity theory regarding the existence of an autonomous system justification motive. Recently social identity theorists (Caricati & Owuamalam, 2020; Owuamalam et al, 2018, 2019a, 2019b) argued that ego and group justification can fully account for system justification tendencies (cf. Jost et al, 2019).…”