Abstract
Individuals are motivated to maintain perceptions of order and predictability in the social environment. Compensatory control theory proposes that when an individual’s perception of her or his own control is threatened, the individual can turn to external systems that may provide a perception of control (e.g., organized government). Conversely, the theory also predicts that when external systems of control are threatened, individuals may respond by exaggerating perceptions of personal control, although this effect has received relatively little empirical support. In the present study, we examined how a threat to an external system of economic control affects individual perceptions of personal control. Specifically, we found that a threat to the perceived distribution of economic resources based on hard work and effort (i.e., meritocracy) led to greater perceptions of personal control. Moreover, this increase in personal control directly increased participants’ optimism about their future economic outcomes. This study provides important insight into the broad influence of external systems on individuals' perceptions of personal control and assessment of future action.
This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.
Similar content being viewed by others
Notes
Testing an alternative model with optimism about future economic success as a proposed mediator for the effect of condition on personal control did not produce a significant result, 95 % CI = (−0.01, 0.23). Conducting a separate, dummy-coded analysis (meritocracy threat vs. neutral plus meritocracy threat vs. meritocracy affirmation) also resulted in significant results, 95 % CIs (0.03, 0.27) and (0.06, 0.62), respectively.
Participant political ideology was measured on a hundred point scale (0 = Extremely Liberal; 100 = Extremely Conservative; Mgrand = 45.35; SD = 23.67).
References
Goode, C., Keefer, L. A., & Molina, L. E. (2014). A compensatory control account of meritocracy. Journal of Social and Political Psychology, 2, 313–334.
Hochschild, J. L. (1995). Facing up to the American dream: Race, class, and the soul of a nation. Princeton, NJ:Princeton University Press.
Jackman, M. R. (1994). The velvet glove: Paternalism and conflict in gender, class, and race relations. Berkeley, CA:University of California Press.
Jost, J. T., & Hunyady, O. (2005). Antecedents and consequences of system-justifying ideologies. Current Directions in Psychological Science, 14, 260–265.
Jost, J. T., Blount, S., Pfeffer, J., & Hunyady, G. (2003a). Fair market ideology: Its cognitive-motivational underpinnings. Research in Organizational Behavior, 25, 53–91.
Jost, J. T., Glaser, J., Kruglanski, A. W., & Sulloway, F. J. (2003b). Political conservatism as motivated social cognition. Psychological Bulletin, 129, 339–375.
Jost, J. T., Pelham, B. W., Sheldon, O., & Sullivan, B. N. (2003c). 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.
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.
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.
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.
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. Advances in Experimental Social Psychology, 39, 305–358.
Kay, A. C., Gaucher, D., Napier, J. L., Callan, M. J., & Laurin, K. (2008). God and the government: testing a compensatory control mechanism for the support of external systems. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 95, 18–35.
Kay, A. C., Laurin, K., Fitzsimons, G. M., & Landau, M. J. (2014a). A functional basis for structure-seeking: exposure to structure promotes willingness to engage in motivated action. Journal of Experimental Psychology: General, 143, 486–491.
Kay, A. C., Sullivan, D., & Landau, M. J. (2014b). The psychological importance of beliefs in control and order: historical and contemporary perspectives in social and personality psychology. In M. Mikulincer, & P. R. Shaver (Eds.), APA handbook of social and personality psychology (pp. 309–337). Washington DC: American Psychological Association.
Kluegel, J. R., & Smith, E. R. (1986). Beliefs about inequality: Americans' view of what is and what ought to be. Hawthorne, NY:Aldine de Gruyter.
Lefcourt, H. M. (1981). Research with the locus of control construct: Volume 1. New York:Academic Press.
Pearlin, L. L., Lieberman, M. A., Menaghan, E. A., & Mullan, J. T. (1981). The stress process. Journal of Health and Social Behavior, 22, 337–356.
Pew Research Center (2012). Economic mobility and the American dream: Where do we stand in the wake of the great recession? Retrieved April 17, 2012, from http://www.pewstates.org/research/analysis/economic-mobility-and-the-american-dream-where-do-we-stand-in-the-wake-of-the-great-recession-85899378421
Preacher, K. J., & Hayes, A. F. (2008). Asymptotic and resampling strategies for assessing and comparing indirect effects in multiple mediator models. Behavior Research Methods, 40, 879–891.
Rothbaum, R., Weisz, J. R., & Snyder, S. S. (1982). Changing the world and changing the self: a two-process model of perceived control. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 42, 5–37.
Shepherd, S., Kay, A. C., Landau, M. J., & Keefer, L. A. (2011). Evidence for the specificity of control motivations in worldview defense: distinguishing compensatory control from uncertainty management and terror management processes. Journal of Experimental Social Psychology, 47, 949–958.
Author information
Authors and Affiliations
Corresponding author
Appendix
Appendix
Meritocracy Endorsement (items not listed in-text)
Hard work offers little guarantee of success (reverse scored).
Differences in income provide incentive for individuals to work harder.
Incomes cannot be made more equal since people's abilities and talents are unequal.
Perceived Personal Control (items not listed in-text)
My life is determined exclusively by my own actions.
What happens to me in the future mostly depends on me.
I am not in control of most things that occur in my life.
Essay Primes
Meritocracy threat condition:
Harder and Harder for Americans to Rise from Lower Rungs
WASHINGTON — Benjamin Franklin did it. Henry Ford did it. And American life is built on the faith that others can do it, too: rise from humble origins to economic heights. But many researchers have reached a conclusion that turns conventional wisdom on its head: Americans today enjoy drastically less economic mobility than previous generations. Many of the Americans we talked to highlighted the same story, the failed success of hard work and natural talent in getting ahead in American life. Experts have argued that the present evidence suggests a lack of access to the traditional American Dream. The promise of hard work, effort and talent paying off in greater economic success is no longer true. In today’s American economic system it seems one can possess all three of these crucial elements and still get left far behind.
Meritocracy affirmation essay:
Still Possible for Americans to Rise from Lower Rungs
WASHINGTON — Benjamin Franklin did it. Henry Ford did it. And American life is built on the faith that others can do it, too: rise from humble origins to economic heights. Many researchers have reached a conclusion that supports conventional wisdom: Americans today still enjoy drastically more economic mobility than previous generations. Many of the Americans we talked to highlighted the same story, the continued success of hard work and natural talent in getting ahead in American life. Experts have argued that the present evidence suggests a bulk of access to the traditional American Dream. The promise of hard work, effort and talent paying off in greater economic success is still true. In today’s American economic system it seems one can possess all three of these crucial elements and still get their dream fulfilled.
Neutral essay:
Timber on the Rise, Coal on the ropes.
WASHINGTON — We burn it. We create with it. American timber is climbing in economic circles. The energy market has been moving in a different direction over the last few years. Many researchers have reached a conclusion that supports conventional wisdom: Americans today use timber products for a variety of things. Many of the American timber farmers and coal field owners we talked to highlighted the same story, the continued success of timber versus coal in the American materials market. Experts have argued that the present evidence suggests a strong level of access to the American materials market for timber products. The promise of timber production and use paying off in today’s economic market is true. In todays’ American economic system it seems that timber is now outstripping the ore market and this trend does not look likely to change.
Rights and permissions
About this article
Cite this article
Goode, C., Keefer, L.A. Grabbing Your Bootstraps: Threats to Economic Order Boost Beliefs in Personal Control. Curr Psychol 35, 142–148 (2016). https://doi.org/10.1007/s12144-015-9376-0
Published:
Issue Date:
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s12144-015-9376-0