弱势少数群体成员的制度正当性、主观幸福感和心理健康症状。

IF 13.7 1区 心理学 Q1 PSYCHOLOGY, CLINICAL Clinical Psychology Review Pub Date : 2025-02-01 Epub Date: 2024-12-22 DOI:10.1016/j.cpr.2024.102532
Bruno Ponte Belarmino Lima, Luana Elayne Cunha de Souza, John T Jost
{"title":"弱势少数群体成员的制度正当性、主观幸福感和心理健康症状。","authors":"Bruno Ponte Belarmino Lima, Luana Elayne Cunha de Souza, John T Jost","doi":"10.1016/j.cpr.2024.102532","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><p>Although system justification-believing that the societal status quo is legitimate and desirable-is positively associated with subjective well-being and mental health outcomes for members of advantaged groups, the picture is more complicated for members of disadvantaged minority groups. According to system justification theory, believing that the social system is legitimate and desirable is a way of coping with one's own and fellow in-group members' state of disadvantage. At the same time, it is also a potential stressor, insofar as it implies that there are deficiencies of the individuals and groups who \"fail\" to succeed in a fair system. In this article, we quantitatively summarize the results of 34 articles (and 65 effect sizes) identified through computerized searches of scientific databases. Meta-analytic results revealed that system justification among members of disadvantaged minority groups was associated with lower levels of psychological distress (r = -0.131, k = 22, N = 25,506) and higher levels of subjective well-being (r = 0.190, k = 31, N = 172,075) and self-esteem (r = 0.106, k = 12, N = 4,839). These findings are consistent with the notion that, in general, system justification serves the palliative function of reducing distress and improving subjective well-being, most likely by increasing perceptions of personal control and individual mobility and decreasing perceptions of discrimination. At the same time, system justification can come at the expense of mental health when associated with the internalization of inferiority. Suggestions for future research are provided.</p>","PeriodicalId":48458,"journal":{"name":"Clinical Psychology Review","volume":"115 ","pages":"102532"},"PeriodicalIF":13.7000,"publicationDate":"2025-02-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"System justification, subjective well-being, and mental health symptoms in members of disadvantaged minority groups.\",\"authors\":\"Bruno Ponte Belarmino Lima, Luana Elayne Cunha de Souza, John T Jost\",\"doi\":\"10.1016/j.cpr.2024.102532\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"<p><p>Although system justification-believing that the societal status quo is legitimate and desirable-is positively associated with subjective well-being and mental health outcomes for members of advantaged groups, the picture is more complicated for members of disadvantaged minority groups. According to system justification theory, believing that the social system is legitimate and desirable is a way of coping with one's own and fellow in-group members' state of disadvantage. At the same time, it is also a potential stressor, insofar as it implies that there are deficiencies of the individuals and groups who \\\"fail\\\" to succeed in a fair system. In this article, we quantitatively summarize the results of 34 articles (and 65 effect sizes) identified through computerized searches of scientific databases. Meta-analytic results revealed that system justification among members of disadvantaged minority groups was associated with lower levels of psychological distress (r = -0.131, k = 22, N = 25,506) and higher levels of subjective well-being (r = 0.190, k = 31, N = 172,075) and self-esteem (r = 0.106, k = 12, N = 4,839). These findings are consistent with the notion that, in general, system justification serves the palliative function of reducing distress and improving subjective well-being, most likely by increasing perceptions of personal control and individual mobility and decreasing perceptions of discrimination. At the same time, system justification can come at the expense of mental health when associated with the internalization of inferiority. Suggestions for future research are provided.</p>\",\"PeriodicalId\":48458,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Clinical Psychology Review\",\"volume\":\"115 \",\"pages\":\"102532\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":13.7000,\"publicationDate\":\"2025-02-01\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Clinical Psychology Review\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"102\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.1016/j.cpr.2024.102532\",\"RegionNum\":1,\"RegionCategory\":\"心理学\",\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"2024/12/22 0:00:00\",\"PubModel\":\"Epub\",\"JCR\":\"Q1\",\"JCRName\":\"PSYCHOLOGY, CLINICAL\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Clinical Psychology Review","FirstCategoryId":"102","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1016/j.cpr.2024.102532","RegionNum":1,"RegionCategory":"心理学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"2024/12/22 0:00:00","PubModel":"Epub","JCR":"Q1","JCRName":"PSYCHOLOGY, CLINICAL","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

摘要

尽管制度正当性——相信社会现状是合理的和可取的——与优势群体成员的主观幸福感和心理健康结果呈正相关,但弱势少数群体成员的情况更为复杂。根据制度正当化理论,相信社会制度是合法的、可取的,是一种应对自身和群体内成员劣势状态的方式。与此同时,它也是一个潜在的压力源,因为它意味着在公平制度中“失败”的个人和群体存在缺陷。在这篇文章中,我们定量地总结了34篇文章(65个效应值)的结果,这些结果是通过计算机检索科学数据库确定的。meta分析结果显示,弱势少数群体成员的制度合理化与较低的心理困扰水平(r = -0.131, k = 22, N = 25,506)、较高的主观幸福感(r = 0.190, k = 31, N = 172,075)和自尊水平(r = 0.106, k = 12, N = 4,839)相关。这些发现与这样一种观点是一致的,即总的来说,制度辩护具有减轻痛苦和改善主观幸福感的缓和功能,最有可能的是通过增加个人控制和个人流动性的感知,以及减少歧视的感知。与此同时,当与自卑感内化联系在一起时,制度正当性可能以牺牲心理健康为代价。最后对今后的研究提出了建议。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
查看原文
分享 分享
微信好友 朋友圈 QQ好友 复制链接
本刊更多论文
System justification, subjective well-being, and mental health symptoms in members of disadvantaged minority groups.

Although system justification-believing that the societal status quo is legitimate and desirable-is positively associated with subjective well-being and mental health outcomes for members of advantaged groups, the picture is more complicated for members of disadvantaged minority groups. According to system justification theory, believing that the social system is legitimate and desirable is a way of coping with one's own and fellow in-group members' state of disadvantage. At the same time, it is also a potential stressor, insofar as it implies that there are deficiencies of the individuals and groups who "fail" to succeed in a fair system. In this article, we quantitatively summarize the results of 34 articles (and 65 effect sizes) identified through computerized searches of scientific databases. Meta-analytic results revealed that system justification among members of disadvantaged minority groups was associated with lower levels of psychological distress (r = -0.131, k = 22, N = 25,506) and higher levels of subjective well-being (r = 0.190, k = 31, N = 172,075) and self-esteem (r = 0.106, k = 12, N = 4,839). These findings are consistent with the notion that, in general, system justification serves the palliative function of reducing distress and improving subjective well-being, most likely by increasing perceptions of personal control and individual mobility and decreasing perceptions of discrimination. At the same time, system justification can come at the expense of mental health when associated with the internalization of inferiority. Suggestions for future research are provided.

求助全文
通过发布文献求助,成功后即可免费获取论文全文。 去求助
来源期刊
Clinical Psychology Review
Clinical Psychology Review PSYCHOLOGY, CLINICAL-
CiteScore
23.10
自引率
1.60%
发文量
65
期刊介绍: Clinical Psychology Review serves as a platform for substantial reviews addressing pertinent topics in clinical psychology. Encompassing a spectrum of issues, from psychopathology to behavior therapy, cognition to cognitive therapies, behavioral medicine to community mental health, assessment, and child development, the journal seeks cutting-edge papers that significantly contribute to advancing the science and/or practice of clinical psychology. While maintaining a primary focus on topics directly related to clinical psychology, the journal occasionally features reviews on psychophysiology, learning therapy, experimental psychopathology, and social psychology, provided they demonstrate a clear connection to research or practice in clinical psychology. Integrative literature reviews and summaries of innovative ongoing clinical research programs find a place within its pages. However, reports on individual research studies and theoretical treatises or clinical guides lacking an empirical base are deemed inappropriate for publication.
期刊最新文献
What is fidelity? A systematic review of provider fidelity and its associations with engagement and outcomes in parenting programs. Prevalence of mental health conditions, substance use disorders, suicidal ideation and attempts, and experiences of homelessness among Veterans with criminal-legal involvement: A meta-analysis. System justification, subjective well-being, and mental health symptoms in members of disadvantaged minority groups. Addressing Gambling Harm to affected others: A scoping review (part II: Coping, assessment and treatment) Talking about trauma: A systematic review of young people's reactions to trauma-focused research
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
现在去查看 取消
×
提示
确定
0
微信
客服QQ
Book学术公众号 扫码关注我们
反馈
×
意见反馈
请填写您的意见或建议
请填写您的手机或邮箱
已复制链接
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
×
扫码分享
扫码分享
Book学术官方微信
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术
文献互助 智能选刊 最新文献 互助须知 联系我们:info@booksci.cn
Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。
Copyright © 2023 Book学术 All rights reserved.
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号 京ICP备2023020795号-1