Search

Estimates suggest that around 20% of women may have experienced rape. Various misconceptions about rape (i.e., rape myths) are closely related to victim blaming. In our studies we tested the link between system justification, beliefs in biological origins of gender differences, ambivalent sexism and beliefs concerning sexual violence. Study 1 was conducted among 433 Polish students. The sequential mediation analysis suggests that system justification predicts the level of rape myth acceptance through beliefs in biological origins of gender differences and then hostile (but not benevolent) sexism. In Study 2, conducted among 197 Polish students, we tested the relationship between beliefs in biological origins of gender differences and beliefs concerning sexual violence using experimental design. Contrary to our expectations, students who read the text about social origins of gender differences perceived the survivor of a hypothetical acquaintance rape as less credible, and proposed a lower sentence for a stranger rape perpetrator, compared to participants who read about biological origins of gender differences. We suspect that this is due to experiencing reactance when confronted with social explanations of gender differences. We discuss implications for research and policy. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

The present study examined perceptions of racism in events that occurred during the aftermath of Hurricane Katrina among a community sample of New Orleans area residents. Drawing on system justification theory, we examined system justification motives (i.e., meritocracy beliefs) and group justification motives (i.e., group identity) as predictors of perceptions of racism among African Americans and European Americans. Compared to African Americans, European Americans perceived much lower levels of racism in Katrina-related events. Furthermore, meritocracy beliefs were negatively related to perceptions of racism among both African Americans and European Americans. However, private regard (a component of group identity) was positively related to perceptions of racism among African Americans, but negatively related to perceptions of racism among European Americans. The results suggest that both system and group justification motives independently predict perceptions of racism in an important real-world event. Furthermore, system and group justification motives appear to operate in opposition for African Americans, but in tandem for European Americans. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

In this paper we examined the joint effects of perceived economic inequality and legitimacy on ideal economic inequality. We hypothesized that only for those individuals who legitimize inequality, perceived inequality will be positively related to ideal inequality. Conversely, for individuals that do not legitimize inequality, a weaker relation between these variables will be observed. We tested these ideas in two studies. In Study 1, we measured perceived and ideal inequalities (i.e., pay gap) and individual differences in the legitimization of inequality. In Study 2, we measured perceived and ideal inequalities using a novel abacus procedure in which participants had to allocate resources to the different income quintiles, and we then manipulated the legitimacy (vs. illegitimacy) of economic inequality. According to our hypothesis, in both studies we found that when individuals legitimize inequality (vs. when they do not), the relation between perceived and ideal economic inequalities tends to be stronger. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

This study applied system justification theory to understand the function of rape myth acceptance. Participants read a rape scenario that manipulated the difference in status between the perpetrator and victim, as well as the potential threat to perpetrator as depicted by whom the victim told about the rape. People's opposition to equality and gender separately and together predicted rape myth acceptance. People with higher opposition to equality reported less rape myth acceptance when a higher-status perpetrator got away with rape than when he was reported to police. Conversely, people with lower opposition to equality reported more rape myth acceptance when the higher-status perpetrator got away with rape. People's opposition to equality and gender interacted such that men with lower opposition to equality also reported more rape myth acceptance when the equal- and lower-status perpetrator got away with rape. Gender predicted rape myth acceptance such that when the lower-status perpetrator was reported to the police, women reported more rape myth acceptance whereas men reported less rape myth acceptance. This is the first study to show that rape myth acceptance is malleable and strategically motivated. These findings have implications for not only understanding rape myth acceptance, but also other ideologies that explain unethical behavior by advantaged groups. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]