The Estrangement of Social Constructionism and Experimental Social Psychology: History of the Rift and Prospects for Reconciliation

Jost, John T.; Kruglanski, Arie W.

doi:10.1207/s15327957pspr0603_1

Cited by 118 publications

(106 citation statements)

References 89 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

106

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…On this issue, we are closer to the social constructionist position taken by social identity theorists (e.g., Berger & Luckmann, 1966;Jost & Kruglanski, 2002;Reicher, 2004;Tajfel, 1981). What seems less speculative to us (but speculative nonetheless, given the dearth of direct evidence concerning the circumstances of our evolutionary history) is the possibility that human beings have developed generally adaptive capacities to accommodate, internalize, and even rationalize key features of their socially constructed environments, especially those features that are difficult or impossible to change (e.g., Gilbert, Pinel, Wilson, Blumberg, & Wheatley, 1998;Kay et al, 2002;McGuire & McGuire, 1991;Wilson, Wheatley, Kurtz, Dunn, & Gilbert, 2004).…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 60%

A Decade of System Justification Theory: Accumulated Evidence of Conscious and Unconscious Bolstering of the Status Quo

Jost

Banaji²,

Nosek

2004

Political Psychology

Self Cite

2,262

114

2,163

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Most theories in social and political psychology stress self-interest, intergroup conflict, ethnocentrism, homophily, ingroup bias, outgroup antipathy, dominance, and resistance. System justification theory is influenced by these perspectives-including social identity and social dominance theories-but it departs from them in several respects. Advocates of system justification theory argue that (a) there is a general ideological motive to justify the existing social order, (b) this motive is at least partially responsible for the internalization of inferiority among members of disadvantaged groups, (c) it is observed most readily at an implicit, nonconscious level of awareness and (d) paradoxically, it is sometimes strongest among those who are most harmed by the status quo. This article reviews and integrates 10 years of research on 20 hypotheses derived from a system justification perspective, focusing on the phenomenon of implicit outgroup favoritism among members of disadvantaged groups (including African Americans, the elderly, and gays/lesbians) and its relation to political ideology (especially liberalism-conservatism).KEY WORDS: ideology, system justification, intergroup relations, implicit bias There is a cluster of related theories that are by now so prevalent in social science that they strike the contemporary reader as self-evidently true. Although these theories are by no means indistinguishable, they share a set of common features, including the tenets that groups serve their own interests, develop ideolo-

show abstract

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 60%

A Decade of System Justification Theory: Accumulated Evidence of Conscious and Unconscious Bolstering of the Status Quo

Jost

Banaji²,

Nosek

2004

Political Psychology

Self Cite

2,262

114

2,163

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…The socially constructed nature of human belief systems (see Jost & Kruglanski, 2002) makes it unlikely that a complete explanation of conservative ideology could ever be provided in terms of a single motivational syndrome. Ideologies, like other social representations, may be thought of as possessing a core and a periphery (Abric, 2001), and each may be fueled by separate motivational concerns.…”

Section: What Have We Learned?mentioning

confidence: 99%

Political conservatism as motivated social cognition.

Jost¹,

Glaser²,

Kruglanski³

et al. 2003

Psychological Bulletin

Self Cite

3,833

247

3,256

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Analyzing political conservatism as motivated social cognition integrates theories of personality (authoritarianism, dogmatism-intolerance of ambiguity), epistemic and existential needs (for closure, regulatory focus, terror management), and ideological rationalization (social dominance, system justification). A meta-analysis (88 samples, 12 countries, 22,818 cases) confirms that several psychological variables predict political conservatism: death anxiety (weighted mean r ϭ .50); system instability (.47); dogmatism-intolerance of ambiguity (.34); openness to experience (-.32); uncertainty tolerance (-.27); needs for order, structure, and closure (.26); integrative complexity (-.20); fear of threat and loss (.18); and self-esteem (-.09). The core ideology of conservatism stresses resistance to change and justification of inequality and is motivated by needs that vary situationally and dispositionally to manage uncertainty and threat.Conservatism is a demanding mistress and is giving me a migraine.-George F. Will, BuntsFor more than half a century, psychologists have been tracking the hypothesis that different psychological motives and tendencies underlie ideological differences between the political left and the right. The practice of singling out political conservatives for special study began with Adorno, Frenkel-Brunswik, Levinson, and Sanford's (1950) landmark study of authoritarianism and the fascist potential in personality. An asymmetrical focus on right-wing authoritarianism (RWA) was criticized heavily on theoretical and methodological grounds (e.g., Christie, 1954;Eysenck, 1954;Rokeach, 1960;Shils, 1954), but it has withstood the relentless tests of time and empirical scrutiny (e.g., Altemeyer, 1981Altemeyer, , 1988Altemeyer, , 1996Altemeyer, , 1998Billig, 1984;Brown, 1965;Christie, 1991;Elms, 1969;Sidanius, 1985;W. F. Stone, 1980;W. F. Stone, Lederer, & Christie, 1993;Tetlock, 1984;Wilson, 1973c). A voluminous literature, which we review here, facilitates the comparison of cognitive styles and motivational needs of political conservatives with those of moderates, liberals, radicals, and left-wingers. In addition to classic and contemporary approaches to authoritarianism, we cover less obvious sources of theory and research on individual differences associated with dogmatism and intolerance of ambiguity, uncertainty avoidance, need for cognitive closure, and social dominance orientation (SDO) insofar as each of these psychological variables contributes to a deeper and more nuanced understanding of political conservatism.The study of authoritarianism and other personality theories of political attitudes is often dismissed a priori as an illegitimate, value-laden attempt to correlate general psychological profiles with specific ideological beliefs (e.g., Durrheim, 1997; J. L. Martin, 2001;Ray, 1988). The psychological study of ideological conservatism is one that invites controversy (e.g., Redding, 2001;Sears, 1994;Sidanius, Pratto, & Bobo, 1996;Sniderman & Tetlock, 1986;Tetlock, 1994;Tetlock & Mitchell,...

show abstract

“…Thus, if a theoretical conjecture predicts a specific observation, then, with respect to the modus tollens principle, empirically falsifying this relationship leads to falsifying the conjecture. This approach is often regarded as the golden standard of scientific inquiry and is indeed very popular among experimental social psychologists (Jost & Kruglanski, 2002). It enables making strong inference as to which of several competing theories should be rejected as being false and which deserve further investigation.…”

Section: Hidden Auxiliary Assumptions and Psychological Theories' Repmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…As a matter of fact, the conflict between the search for psychological universals and the social constructivist approach that circumscribes human behavior to its historical and cultural context already has a long-standing tradition in our field (see Jost & Kruglanski, 2002). In some way, current debates on replicability issues related to context-dependency echo the intellectual crisis from the 1970s that called into question the epistemological foundations of the mainstream experimental social psychology (e.g., Gergen, 1973).…”

Section: Hidden Auxiliary Assumptions and Psychological Theories' Repmentioning

confidence: 99%

Replicability Crisis in Social Psychology: Looking at the Past to Find New Pathways for the Future

Świątkowski¹,

Dompnier

2017

rips

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Over the last few years, psychology researchers have become increasingly preoccupied with the question of whether findings from psychological studies are generally replicable. The debates have originated from some unfortunate events of scientific misconduct in the field, and they have reached a climax with the recent discovery of a relatively weak rate of replicability of published literature, leading to the so-called replicability crisis in psychology.The present paper is concerned with examining the issue of replicability in the field of social psychology. We begin by drawing a state of the art of the crisis in this field. We then highlight some possible causes for the crisis, discussing topics of statistical power, questionable research practices, publication standards, and hidden auxiliary assumptions of context-dependency of social psychological theories. Finally, we argue that given the absence of absolute falsification in science, social psychology could greatly benefit from adopting McGuire's perspectivist approach to knowledge construction.

show abstract

The Estrangement of Social Constructionism and Experimental Social Psychology: History of the Rift and Prospects for Reconciliation

Cited by 118 publications

References 89 publications

A Decade of System Justification Theory: Accumulated Evidence of Conscious and Unconscious Bolstering of the Status Quo

A Decade of System Justification Theory: Accumulated Evidence of Conscious and Unconscious Bolstering of the Status Quo

Political conservatism as motivated social cognition.

Replicability Crisis in Social Psychology: Looking at the Past to Find New Pathways for the Future

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About