Priming meritocracy and the psychological justification of inequality

The belief that status in society is based on merit is a central feature of the American Dream. This belief system justifies status inequalities by locating the cause of status differences in the individual talents and efforts of group members. We hypothesized that activating meritocratic beliefs in...

Full description

Saved in:
Bibliographic Details
Published in:Journal of experimental social psychology 2007-05, Vol.43 (3), p.341-351
Main Authors: McCoy, Shannon K., Major, Brenda
Format: Article
Language:English
Subjects:
Belief & doubt
Biological and medical sciences
Discrimination
Fundamental and applied biological sciences. Psychology
Groups
Inequality
Meritocracy
Perceptions
Psychology
Psychology. Psychoanalysis. Psychiatry
Psychology. Psychophysiology
Sexism
Social attribution, perception and cognition
Social classes
Social psychology
Social systems
Stereotype
Stereotypes
System justification
U.S.A
Citations: Items that this one cites
Items that cite this one
Online Access:Get full text
Tags: Add Tag
No Tags, Be the first to tag this record!
Description
Summary:The belief that status in society is based on merit is a central feature of the American Dream. This belief system justifies status inequalities by locating the cause of status differences in the individual talents and efforts of group members. We hypothesized that activating meritocratic beliefs increases the extent to which individuals psychologically justify status inequalities, even when those inequalities are disadvantageous to the self. Specifically, we hypothesized that priming meritocracy prompts individuals to engage in system-justifying psychological responses when they experience threat either at the personal or group level. Across two studies, priming meritocracy led members of a low status group to justify both personal and group disadvantage by decreasing perceptions of discrimination (Studies 1 and 2) and increasing the extent to which they stereotyped themselves and their group in status-justifying ways (Study 2).
ISSN:0022-1031
1096-0465
DOI:10.1016/j.jesp.2006.04.009