Encyclopedia of Quality of Life and Well-Being Research

2014 Edition
| Editors: Alex C. Michalos

Job Satisfaction and Perceived Fairness in Hungary and USA

  • Jojanneke van der Toorn
  • John T. Jost
  • Mihály Berkics
Reference work entry
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/978-94-007-0753-5_4184


What determines the individual’s  quality of life at home and at work? Experiencing fair treatment and feeling satisfied in day-to-day activities are probably high on the list. Given that most people spend a majority of their waking hours at work, employment is an important area in which to investigate the antecedents and consequences of perceived fairness and satisfaction. People differ not only in the ways in which they view and approach their surroundings as a function of individual dispositions or personality characteristics but also as a function of the specific contexts in which they live and work. As a result, there is probably a wide range of factors that affect whether individuals perceive fairness and are satisfied in relation to their job. In the current research, we examined the psychological tendency to justify the system in two national contexts – the United States and Hungary – and its potential to shape reactions to  equity equalitytrade-offs in the...

This is a preview of subscription content, log in to check access.


  1. Boll, Th., Ferring, D., & Filipp, S.-H. (2005). Effects of parental differential treatment on relationship quality with siblings and parents: Justice evaluations as mediators. Social Justice Research, 18, 155–182.Google Scholar
  2. Deutsch, M. (1975). Equity, equality, and need: What determines which value will be used as the basis of distributive justice? Journal of Social Issues, 31, 137–149.Google Scholar
  3. Gelfand, M. J., Higgins, M., Nishii, L. H., Raver, J. L., Dominquez, A., Murakami, F., et al. (2002). Culture and egocentric perceptions of fairness in conflict and negotiation. Journal of Applied Psychology, 87, 833–845.Google Scholar
  4. Homans, G. C. (1974). Social behavior: Its elementary forms (2nd ed.). New York: Harcourt Brace Jovanovich.Google Scholar
  5. Hunyady, Gy. (2002). Psychology of contraselection. Applied Psychology in Hungary, 3–4, 7–31.Google Scholar
  6. Hunyady, Gy. (2010). A társadalmi közérzet hullámverése [Waves of social discomfort]. Budapest: Napvilág Kiadó.Google Scholar
  7. Jost, J. T., & Banaji, M. R. (1994). The role of stereotyping in system-justification and the production of false consciousness. British Journal of Social Psychology, 33, 1–27.Google Scholar
  8. Jost, J. T., Blount, S., Pfeffer, J., & Hunyady, Gy. (2003). Fair market ideology: Its cognitivemotivational underpinnings. Research in Organizational Behavior, 25, 53–91.Google Scholar
  9. Jost, J. T., & Hunyady, O. (2005). Antecedents and consequences of system-justifying ideologies. Current Directions in Psychological Science, 14, 260–265.Google Scholar
  10. 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.Google Scholar
  11. Jost, J. T., & Van der Toorn, J. (2011). System justification theory. In P. A. M. van Lange, A. W. Kruglanski, & E. T. Higgins (Eds.), Handbook of theories of social psychology (pp. 313–343). London: Sage.Google Scholar
  12. Jost, J. T., & Van der Toorn, J. (2012). System justification theory. In P. A. M. van Lange, A. W. Kruglanski, & E. T. Higgins (Eds.), Handbook of theories of social psychology (pp. 313–343). London: Sage.Google Scholar
  13. 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.Google Scholar
  14. Kay, A. C., Gaucher, D., Peach, J. M., Friesen, J., Laurin, K., Zanna, M. P., et al. (2009). Inequality, discrimination, and the power of the status quo: Direct evidence for a motivation to view what is as what should be. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 97, 421–434.Google Scholar
  15. Kay, A., Jimenez, M. C., & Jost, J. T. (2002). Sour grapes, sweet lemons, and the anticipatory rationalization of the status quo. Personality and Social Psychology Bulletin, 28, 1300–1312.Google Scholar
  16. Lerner, M. J. (1974). The justice motive: “Equity” and “parity” among children. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 29, 539–550.Google Scholar
  17. Loewenstein, G., Thompson, L., & Bazerman, M. H. (1989). Social utility and decision making in interpersonal contexts. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 57, 426–441.Google Scholar
  18. Mandisodza, A. N., Jost, J. T., & Unzueta, M. M. (2006). Tall poppies and American dreams: Reactions to rich and poor in Australia and the U.S.A. Journal of Cross-Cultural Psychology, 37, 659–668.Google Scholar
  19. Mason, D. S., & Kluegel, J. R. (2000). Marketing democracy: Changing opinion about inequality and politics in East Central Europe. Lanham: Rowman & Littlefield Publishers.Google Scholar
  20. Örkény, A. (1997). Hétköznapok igazsága. Igazságossági felfogások egy nemzetközi összehasonlítás tükrében. [Everyday justice. Perception of social justice in a comparative perspective]. Budapest: Uj Mandátum Kiadó.Google Scholar
  21. Ullrich, J., & Cohrs, J. C. (2007). Terrorism salience increases system justification: Experimental evidence. Social Justice Research, 20, 117–139.Google Scholar
  22. Van der Toorn, J., Berkics, M., & Jost, J. T. (2010). System justification, satisfaction, and perceptions of fairness and typicality at work: A cross-system comparison involving the U.S. and Hungary. Social Justice Research, 23, 189–210.Google Scholar
  23. Wojciszke, B., Baryla, W., & Mikiewicz, A. (2008). Delegitimization of material wealth. Unpublished manuscript.Google Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer Science+Business Media Dordrecht 2014

Authors and Affiliations

  • Jojanneke van der Toorn
    • 1
  • John T. Jost
    • 2
  • Mihály Berkics
    • 3
  1. 1.Leiden UniversityLeidenThe Netherlands
  2. 2.New York UniversityNew YorkUSA
  3. 3.Institute of Psychology Eötvös Loránd UniversityBudapestHungary