Sex Roles

, Volume 62, Issue 7–8, pp 405–419 | Cite as

The Joy of Sexism? A Multinational Investigation of Hostile and Benevolent Justifications for Gender Inequality and Their Relations to Subjective Well-Being

  • Jaime L. NapierEmail author
  • Hulda Thorisdottir
  • John T. Jost
Original Article


Previous research on system justification theory suggests that beliefs that rationalize inequalities are related to subjective well-being. We examine how “complementary” (hostile and benevolent) justifications of gender inequality may serve a palliative function for both men and women. Using multilevel modeling and data from 32 countries (N’s = 362 to 5160), we find that relationships between hostile and benevolent justifications and life satisfaction are moderated by the degree of gender inequality at the national level. In relatively egalitarian nations, individuals who endorse “complementary” justifications are higher on life satisfaction compared to those who endorse an exclusively hostile justification. In nations with high gender inequality, there is no difference in life satisfaction for those who endorse exclusively hostile vs. complementary justifications.


System justification Complementary stereotypes Subjective well-being 


  1. Bem, S. L. & Bem, D. J. (1970). Case study of a nonconscious ideology: Training the woman to know her place. In D. J. Bem (Ed.), Beliefs, attitudes, and human affairs (pp. 89–99). Belmont: Brooks/Cole.Google Scholar
  2. Blanchflower, D. G. & Oswald, A. J. (2004). Well-being over time in Britain and the USA. Journal of Public Economics, 88, 1359–1386.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  3. Cikara, M., Lee, T. T., Fiske, S. T., & Glick, P. (2009). Ambivalent sexism at home and at work: How attitudes toward women in relationships foster exclusion in the public sphere. In J. T. Jost, A. C. Kay & H. Thorisdottir (Eds.), Social and psychological bases of ideology and system justification. New York: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
  4. Cuddy, A. J. C. & Fiske, S. T. (2002). Doddering, but dear: Process, content, and function in stereotyping of older persons. In T. Nelson (Ed.), Ageism: Stereotyping and prejudice against older persons (pp. 3–26). Cambridge: MIT.Google Scholar
  5. Deaux, K. & Lewis, L. L. (1984). Structure of gender stereotypes: interrelationships among components and gender label. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 46, 991–1004.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  6. Diener, E. & Oishi, S. (2000). Money and happiness: Income and subjective well-being across nations. In E. Diener & E. M. Suh (Eds.), Cross-cultural psychology of subjective well-being (pp. 185–218). Boston: MIT.Google Scholar
  7. Diener, E., & Seligman, M. E. P. (2004). Beyond money: toward an economy of well-being. Psychological Science in the Public Interest, 5(1).Google Scholar
  8. Diener, E. & Tov, W. (2007). Subjective well-being and peace. Journal of Social Issues, 63, 421–440.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  9. Dovidio, J. F. & Gaertner, S. L. (1999). Reducing prejudice: combating intergroup biases. Current Directions in Psychological Science, 8, 101–105.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  10. Dovidio, J. F. & Gaertner, S. L. (2000). Aversive racism and selection decisions: 1989 and 1999. Psychological Science, 11, 319–323.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  11. Eagly, A. H. & Steffen, V. (1984). Gender stereotypes stem from the distribution of women and men into social roles. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 46, 735–754.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  12. Elster, J. (1982). Belief, bias, and ideology. In M. Hollis & S. Lukes (Eds.), Rationality and relativism (pp. 123–148). Cambridge: MIT.Google Scholar
  13. Evertsson, M. & Nermo, M. (2004). Dependence within families and the division of labor: comparing Sweden and the United States. Journal of Marriage and Family, 66, 1272–1286.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  14. Fiske, S. T. (1998). Stereotyping, prejudice, and discrimination. In D. T. Gilbert, S. T. Fiske & G. Lindzey (Eds.), Handbook of social psychology (4th ed., Vol. 2, pp. 357–411). New York: McGraw- Hill.Google Scholar
  15. Fiske, S. T., Xu, J., Cuddy, A. J. C., & Glick, P. (1999). (Dis)respecting versus (Dis)liking: status and interdependence predict ambivalent stereotypes of competence and warmth. Journal of Social Issues, 55, 473–490.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  16. Fiske, S. T., Cuddy, A. J. C., Glick, P., & Xu, J. (2002). A model of (often mixed) stereotype content: competence and warmth respectively follow from status and competition. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 82, 878–902.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  17. Glick, P. & Fiske, S. T. (1996). The ambivalent sexism inventory: differentiating hostile and benevolent sexism. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 70, 491–512.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  18. Glick, P. & Fiske, S. T. (2001a). An ambivalent alliance: hostile and benevolent sexism as complementary justifications for gender inequality. American Psychologist, 56, 109–118.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  19. Glick, P. & Fiske, S. T. (2001b). Ambivalent sexism. In M. P. Zanna (Ed.), Advances in experimental social psychology (Vol. 33, pp. 115–188). Thousand Oaks: Academic.Google Scholar
  20. Glick, P., Fiske, S. T., Mladinic, A., Saiz, J., Abrams, D., Masser, B., et al. (2000). Beyond prejudice as simple antipathy: hostile and benevolent sexism across cultures. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 79, 763–775.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  21. Glick, P., Sakalli-Ugurlu, N., Ferreira, M. C., & Aguiar de Souza, M. (2002). Ambivalent sexism and attitudes toward wife abuse in Turkey and Brazil. Psychology of Women Quarterly, 26, 291–296.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  22. Heilman, M. E. (2001). Description and prescription: how gender stereotypes prevent women’s ascent up the organizational ladder. Journal of Social Issues, 57, 657–674.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  23. Jackman, M. R. (1994). The velvet glove: Paternalism and conflict in gender, class, and race relations. Berkeley: University of California Press.Google Scholar
  24. Jost, J. T. & Banaji, M. (1994). The role of stereotyping in system justification and the production of false consciousness. British Journal of Social Psychology, 22, 1–27.Google Scholar
  25. Jost, J. T. & Hunyady, O. (2002). The psychology of system justification and the palliative function of ideology. European Review of Social Psychology, 13, 111–153.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  26. Jost, J. T. & Hunyady, O. (2005). Antecedents and consequences of system-justifying ideologies. Current Directions in Psychological Science, 14, 260–265.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  27. Jost, J. T. & Kay, A. C. (2005). Exposure to benevolent sexism and complementary gender stereotypes: consequences for specific and diffuse forms of system justification. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 88, 498–509.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  28. Jost, J. T., Blount, S., Pfeffer, J., & Hunyady, G. (2003a). Fair market ideology: its cognitive-motivational underpinnings. Research in Organizational Behavior, 25, 53–91.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  29. Jost, J. T., Pelham, B. W., Sheldon, O., & Sullivan, B. N. (2003b). Social inequality and the reduction of ideological dissonance on behalf of the system: evidence of enhanced system justification among the disadvantaged. European Journal of Social Psychology, 33, 13–36.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  30. Jost, J. T., Banaji, M. R., & Nosek, B. A. (2004). A decade of system justification theory: accumulated evidence of conscious and unconscious bolstering of the status quo. Political Psychology, 25, 881–919.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  31. Jost, J. T., Kivetz, Y., Rubini, M., Guermandi, G., & Mosso, C. (2005). System-justifying functions of complementary regional and ethnic stereotypes: cross-national evidence. Social Justice Research, 18, 305–333.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  32. Jost, J. T., Ledgerwood, A., & Hardin, C. D. (2008). Shared reality, system justification, and the relational basis of ideological beliefs. Social and Personality Psychology Compass, 2, 171–186.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  33. Jost, J. T., Federico, C. M., & Napier, J. L. (2009). Political ideology: its structure, functions, and elective affinities. Annual Review of Psychology, 60, 307–337.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  34. Kay, A. C. & Jost, J. T. (2003). Complementary justice: effects of “poor but happy” and “poor but honest” stereotype exemplars on system justification and implicit activation of the justice motive. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 85, 823–837.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  35. Kay, A. C., Jost, J. T., & Young, S. (2005). Victim-derogation and victim-enhancement as alternate routes to system justification. Psychological Science, 16, 204–246.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  36. Kay, A. C., Jost, J. T., Mandisodza, A. N., Sherman, S. J., Petrocelli, J. V., & Johnson, A. L. (2007). Panglossian ideology in the service of system justification: How complementary stereotypes help us to rationalize inequality. In M. Zanna (Ed.), Advances in experimental social psychology (Vol. 39, pp. 305–358). San Diego: Elsevier.Google Scholar
  37. Kluegel, J. R. & Smith, E. R. (1986). Beliefs about inequality: Americans’ view of what is and what ought to be. New York: Aldine de Gruyter.Google Scholar
  38. Lane, R. E. (2004). The fear of equality. In J. T. Jost & J. Sidanius (Eds.), Political psychology: Key readings (pp. 217–229). New York: Psychology Press/Taylor & Francis. (Original work published 1959).Google Scholar
  39. Langford, T. & MacKinnon, N. J. (2000). The affective bases for the gendering of traits: comparing the United States and Canada. Social Psychology Quarterly, 63, 34–48.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  40. Lerner, M. (1980). The belief in a just world: A fundamental delusion. New York: Plenum.Google Scholar
  41. Major, B. (1994). From social inequality to personal entitlement: The role of social comparisons, legitimacy appraisals, and group membership. In M. P. Zanna (Ed.), Advances in experimental social psychology (Vol. 26, pp. 293–355). San Diego: Academic.Google Scholar
  42. Martin, D. (1976). Battered wives. Volcano, CA: Volcano Press, Inc.Google Scholar
  43. Myers, D. G. & Diener, E. (1995). Who is happy? Psychological Science, 6, 10–19.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  44. Mueller, R. (2006). Quoted in Look, 5 March 1957. In F. R. Shapiro (Ed.), The Yale Book of Quotations (p. 541). Google Scholar
  45. Napier, J. L. & Jost, J. T. (2008). Why are conservatives happier than liberals? Psychological Science, 19, 565–572.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  46. Naylor, L. L. (1998). American culture: Myth and reality of a culture of diversity. Westport: Greenwood Publishing Group.Google Scholar
  47. O’Brien, L. T. & Major, B. N. (2005). System justifying beliefs and psychological well-being: the roles of group status and identity. Personality and Social Psychology Bulletin, 31, 1718–1729.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  48. People’s Century (2009). Public Broadcasting System (PBS). Retrieved from
  49. Preacher, K. J., Curran, P. J., & Bauer, D. J. (2006). Computational tools for probing interaction effects in multiple linear regression, multilevel modeling, and latent curve analysis. Journal of Education and Behavioral Statistics, 31, 437–448.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  50. Rankin, L., Jost, J. T., & Wakslak, C. J. (2009). System justification and the meaning of life: are the existential benefits of ideology distributed unevenly across racial groups? Social Justice Research, 22, 312–333.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  51. Rawls, J. (1999). A theory of justice. Cambridge: Harvard University Press. Original work published 1971.Google Scholar
  52. Rudman, L. A. & Phelan, J. E. (2007). The interpersonal power of feminism: is feminism good for romantic relationships? Sex Roles, 57, 787–799.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  53. Schechter, S. (1982). Women and male violence: The visions and struggles of the battered women’s movement. Cambridge, MA: South End Press.Google Scholar
  54. Schuman, H., Steele, C., Bobo, L., & Krysan, M. (1997). Racial attitudes in America: trends and interpretations (Revisedth ed.). Cambridge: Harvard University Press.Google Scholar
  55. Sears, D. O. (1988). Symbolic racism. In P. A. Katz & D. A. Taylor (Eds.), Eliminating racism: Profiles in controversy (pp. 53–84). New York: Plenum.Google Scholar
  56. Sen, A. (1990). More than 100 million women are missing. New York Review of Books, 37(20).Google Scholar
  57. Sibley, C. G., Overall, N. C., & Duckitt, J. (2007). When women become more hostilely sexist toward their gender: the system-justifying effect of benevolent sexism. Sex Roles, 57, 743–754.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  58. United Nations Development Programme. (2000). Human Development Report 2000. New York: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
  59. Wakslak, C., Jost, J. T., Tyler, T. R., & Chen, E. (2007). Moral outrage mediates the dampening effect of system justification on support for redistributive social policies. Psychological Science, 18, 267–274.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  60. Williams, J. E. & Best, D. L. (1982). Measuring sex stereotypes: A thirty-nation study. Beverly Hills: Sage.Google Scholar
  61. World Values Survey (2006). European and World Values Surveys Four-Wave Integrated Data File, 1981–2004, v.20060423. Retrieved from

Copyright information

© Springer Science+Business Media, LLC 2009

Authors and Affiliations

  • Jaime L. Napier
    • 1
    Email author
  • Hulda Thorisdottir
    • 2
  • John T. Jost
    • 3
  1. 1.Department of PsychologyYale UniversityNew HavenUSA
  2. 2.University of IcelandReykjavíkIceland
  3. 3.New York UniversityNew YorkUSA

Personalised recommendations