title: The status-legitimacy hypothesis revisited: Ethnic-group differences in general and dimension-specific legitimacy.
abstract: The status-legitimacy hypothesis, which predicts that low-status groups will legitimize inequality more than high-status groups, has received inconsistent empirical support. To resolve this inconsistency, we hypothesized that low-status groups would display enhanced legitimation only when evaluating the fairness of the specific hierarchy responsible for their disadvantage. In a New Zealand-based probability sample (N = 6,162), we found that low-status ethnic groups (Asians and Pacific Islanders) perceived ethnic-group relations to be fairer than the high-status group (Europeans). However, these groups did not justify the overall political system more than the high-status group. In fact, Māori showed the least support for the political system. These findings clarify when the controversial status-legitimacy effects predicted by System Justification Theory will - and will not - emerge.
authors.affiliation: School of Psychology, The University of Auckland, New Zealand.
authors.forename: Nikhil K
authors.initials: NK
authors.lastname: Sengupta
authors.affiliation: School of Psychology, The University of Auckland, New Zealand.
authors.forename: Danny
authors.initials: D
authors.lastname: Osborne
authors.affiliation: School of Psychology, The University of Auckland, New Zealand.
authors.forename: Chris G
authors.initials: CG
authors.lastname: Sibley
mesh_terms: D000328:Adult; D005260:Female; D006801:Humans; D008297:Male; D008875:Middle Aged; D009520:New Zealand; D011057:Politics; D012959:Socioeconomic Factors; D044465:White People
keywords: ethnic-group differences; fairness perceptions; ideological dissonance; status-legitimacy hypothesis; system justification