Divergent effects of system justification salience on the academic self-assessments of men and women

Virginie Bonnot, John Jost

Research output: Contribution to journalArticle

Abstract

Based on system justification theory, we hypothesized that, when the salience of system justification concerns are high, both men and women would bias estimates of their own and their group's academic competence so as to make them more congruent with complementary gender stereotypes concerning mathematical and verbal abilities. Results show that, compared to men, women reported lesser competence and recalled lower achievement scores in math following the activation of system justification concerns, while at the same time reporting greater competence in verbal domains, albeit less strongly. Concerning perceptions of their group's competence, men endorsed complementary gender stereotypes more strongly in the high (vs. low) system justification salience condition. However, women were less prone to endorse abstract gender stereotypes when system justification was made salient, which may suggest reactance rather than acquiescence.

Original languageEnglish (US)
Pages (from-to)453-464
Number of pages12
JournalGroup Processes and Intergroup Relations
Volume17
Issue number4
DOIs
StatePublished - 2014

Fingerprint

System theory
self-assessment
Mental Competency
Chemical activation
stereotype
gender
reactance
Aptitude
system theory
activation
Group
Self-Assessment
Self-assessment
Justification
ability
trend
Gender Stereotypes

Keywords

  • gender stereotypes
  • SAT score recall
  • self-concept of capacity
  • stereotype endorsement
  • system justification

ASJC Scopus subject areas

  • Social Psychology
  • Cultural Studies
  • Communication
  • Arts and Humanities (miscellaneous)
  • Sociology and Political Science

Cite this

Divergent effects of system justification salience on the academic self-assessments of men and women. / Bonnot, Virginie; Jost, John.

In: Group Processes and Intergroup Relations, Vol. 17, No. 4, 2014, p. 453-464.

Research output: Contribution to journalArticle

@article{8f9a09bac3a249c9a14b4fee09e63f8c,
title = "Divergent effects of system justification salience on the academic self-assessments of men and women",
abstract = "Based on system justification theory, we hypothesized that, when the salience of system justification concerns are high, both men and women would bias estimates of their own and their group's academic competence so as to make them more congruent with complementary gender stereotypes concerning mathematical and verbal abilities. Results show that, compared to men, women reported lesser competence and recalled lower achievement scores in math following the activation of system justification concerns, while at the same time reporting greater competence in verbal domains, albeit less strongly. Concerning perceptions of their group's competence, men endorsed complementary gender stereotypes more strongly in the high (vs. low) system justification salience condition. However, women were less prone to endorse abstract gender stereotypes when system justification was made salient, which may suggest reactance rather than acquiescence.",
keywords = "gender stereotypes, SAT score recall, self-concept of capacity, stereotype endorsement, system justification",
author = "Virginie Bonnot and John Jost",
year = "2014",
doi = "10.1177/1368430213512008",
language = "English (US)",
volume = "17",
pages = "453--464",
journal = "Group Processes and Intergroup Relations",
issn = "1368-4302",
publisher = "SAGE Publications Ltd",
number = "4",

}

TY - JOUR

T1 - Divergent effects of system justification salience on the academic self-assessments of men and women

AU - Bonnot, Virginie

AU - Jost, John

PY - 2014

Y1 - 2014

N2 - Based on system justification theory, we hypothesized that, when the salience of system justification concerns are high, both men and women would bias estimates of their own and their group's academic competence so as to make them more congruent with complementary gender stereotypes concerning mathematical and verbal abilities. Results show that, compared to men, women reported lesser competence and recalled lower achievement scores in math following the activation of system justification concerns, while at the same time reporting greater competence in verbal domains, albeit less strongly. Concerning perceptions of their group's competence, men endorsed complementary gender stereotypes more strongly in the high (vs. low) system justification salience condition. However, women were less prone to endorse abstract gender stereotypes when system justification was made salient, which may suggest reactance rather than acquiescence.

AB - Based on system justification theory, we hypothesized that, when the salience of system justification concerns are high, both men and women would bias estimates of their own and their group's academic competence so as to make them more congruent with complementary gender stereotypes concerning mathematical and verbal abilities. Results show that, compared to men, women reported lesser competence and recalled lower achievement scores in math following the activation of system justification concerns, while at the same time reporting greater competence in verbal domains, albeit less strongly. Concerning perceptions of their group's competence, men endorsed complementary gender stereotypes more strongly in the high (vs. low) system justification salience condition. However, women were less prone to endorse abstract gender stereotypes when system justification was made salient, which may suggest reactance rather than acquiescence.

KW - gender stereotypes

KW - SAT score recall

KW - self-concept of capacity

KW - stereotype endorsement

KW - system justification

UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/record.url?scp=84993731439&partnerID=8YFLogxK

UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/citedby.url?scp=84993731439&partnerID=8YFLogxK

U2 - 10.1177/1368430213512008

DO - 10.1177/1368430213512008

M3 - Article

AN - SCOPUS:84993731439

VL - 17

SP - 453

EP - 464

JO - Group Processes and Intergroup Relations

JF - Group Processes and Intergroup Relations

SN - 1368-4302

IS - 4

ER -