Psychology and Neuroscience Faculty Database
Psychology and Neuroscience
Arts & Sciences
Duke University

 HOME > Arts & Sciences > pn > Faculty    Search Help Login pdf version printable version 

Publications of Aaron C. Kay    :chronological  alphabetical  combined listing:

%% Journal Articles   
@article{fds344887,
   Author = {Ma, A and Tang, S and Kay, AC},
   Title = {Psychological reactance as a function of thought versus
             behavioral control},
   Journal = {Journal of Experimental Social Psychology},
   Volume = {84},
   Year = {2019},
   Month = {September},
   url = {http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.jesp.2019.103825},
   Abstract = {© 2019 Elsevier Inc. How can people persuade and influence
             others? One option is to directly target others' behavior
             through rules and incentives. Another increasingly popular
             option, however, is to focus on modifying what others think
             rather than how they behave, and hoping behaviors will then
             change as a result. The assumption underlying this latter
             approach is that targeting thoughts and attitudes might be
             easier or more effective than targeting behaviors. Drawing
             from psychological reactance theory (Brehm, 1966), we
             investigate whether efforts targeted at controlling what
             people think, rather than how they behave, will indeed be
             met with differing levels of psychological reactance. Across
             four studies, we find that people experience greater
             psychological reactance towards efforts to control their
             thoughts compared to efforts to control their behaviors.
             Specifically, thought control, compared to behavioral
             control, led people to experience greater anger and
             negativity, and to report lowered motivation to engage in
             requested behaviors (Study 1). These effects occurred, at
             least in part, because people perceived that those who try
             to control their thoughts are likely to try to control their
             behaviors too, but not vice versa. As a result, thought
             control elicited greater reactance than behavioral control
             because the former was perceived as more restrictive than
             the latter (Studies 2 & 3). We also address other
             explanations for why thought control may elicit more
             reactance than behavioral control (Study
             4).},
   Doi = {10.1016/j.jesp.2019.103825},
   Key = {fds344887}
}

@article{fds344888,
   Author = {Ma, A and Axt, J and Kay, AC},
   Title = {A control-based account of stereotyping},
   Journal = {Journal of Experimental Social Psychology},
   Volume = {84},
   Year = {2019},
   Month = {September},
   url = {http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.jesp.2019.103819},
   Abstract = {© 2019 Elsevier Inc. Drawing from compensatory control
             theory, we propose that because stereotypes provide
             psychological assurance that the world is orderly and
             predictable, stereotyping should increase among those
             lacking control. Four studies support this control-based
             account of stereotyping: lower personal control, both
             measured (Studies 1 and 3) and manipulated (Study 2a and
             2b), was associated with greater gender (Studies 1, 2a, and
             2b) and occupational stereotyping (Study 3). Furthermore,
             the association between control and stereotyping was
             mediated by need for structure (Studies 2a, 2b, and 3). We
             also explore the moderating role of interdependent
             self-construal (Studies 1 to 3). These findings have
             implications for our understanding of when, why and to what
             end people stereotype others.},
   Doi = {10.1016/j.jesp.2019.103819},
   Key = {fds344888}
}

@article{fds344722,
   Author = {Shepherd, S and Kay, AC and Gray, K},
   Title = {Military veterans are morally typecast as agentic but
             unfeeling: Implications for veteran employment},
   Journal = {Organizational Behavior and Human Decision
             Processes},
   Volume = {153},
   Pages = {75-88},
   Year = {2019},
   Month = {July},
   url = {http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.obhdp.2019.06.003},
   Abstract = {© 2019 Elsevier Inc. What kind of “mind” do people
             assume those in the military have? This question has
             important implications for military veterans and provides an
             opportunity to test moral typecasting as a critical element
             of the theory of dyadic morality (TDM: Gray & Wegner, 2009;
             2011; Schein & Gray, 2017). Based on this theory, moral
             agents – even those we admire, such as veterans – will
             be seen as more agentic (ability to plan and act) but have
             less capacity for experience (ability feel emotion).
             Leveraging previous theorizing on mind perception,
             dehumanization, and career typology, the current research
             shows that veterans are seen as having a higher capacity for
             agency but less capacity for experience. As a result,
             veterans are seen as less (more) suited for careers that
             require a high (low) capacity for experience. Results are
             found across laypeople, managers, and employees.
             Implications for veteran well-being are discussed.},
   Doi = {10.1016/j.obhdp.2019.06.003},
   Key = {fds344722}
}

@article{fds340963,
   Author = {Shepherd, S and Kay, AC},
   Title = {‘Jesus, take the wheel’: the appeal of spiritual
             products in satiating concerns about randomness},
   Journal = {Journal of Marketing Management},
   Volume = {35},
   Number = {5-6},
   Pages = {467-490},
   Year = {2019},
   Month = {March},
   url = {http://dx.doi.org/10.1080/0267257X.2018.1556225},
   Abstract = {© 2018, © 2018 Westburn Publishers Ltd. Why are consumers
             drawn to spiritual products? Leveraging theorising regarding
             the psychological need to perceive the world as orderly and
             non-random, we posit that products imbued with
             religious/spiritual significance help manage concerns about
             randomness and uncontrollability (e.g. when a product is
             unreliable or exposes the consumer to random uncontrollable
             processes). When randomness concerns were salient, religious
             consumers showed increased desire to attach religious
             significance to secular objects (e.g. having item blessed,
             physically attaching a religious symbol). For spiritual
             consumers, spiritual products (vs. non-spiritual physically
             equivalent products) were seen as having (i) non-material
             efficacy (i.e. efficacy not bound to the purely material
             world) and (ii) unfalsifiable efficacy (i.e. efficacy that
             is immune to contrary evidence). Evidence is found across a
             variety of religious and spiritual contexts.},
   Doi = {10.1080/0267257X.2018.1556225},
   Key = {fds340963}
}

@article{fds342837,
   Author = {Kim, JY and Campbell, TH and Shepherd, S and Kay,
             AC},
   Title = {Understanding Contemporary Forms of Exploitation:
             Attributions of Passion Serve to Legitimize the Poor
             Treatment of Workers},
   Journal = {Journal of Personality and Social Psychology},
   Year = {2019},
   Month = {January},
   url = {http://dx.doi.org/10.1037/pspi0000190},
   Abstract = {© 2019 American Psychological Association. The pursuit of
             passion in one's work is touted in contemporary discourse.
             Although passion may indeed be beneficial in many ways, we
             suggest that the modern cultural emphasis may also serve to
             facilitate the legitimization of unfair and demeaning
             management practices-a phenomenon we term the legitimization
             of passion exploitation. Across 7 studies and a
             meta-analysis, we show that people do in fact deem poor
             worker treatment (e.g., asking employees to do demeaning
             tasks that are irrelevant to their job description, asking
             employees to work extra hours without pay) as more
             legitimate when workers are presumed to be "passionate"
             about their work. Of importance, we demonstrate 2 mediating
             mechanisms by which this process of legitimization occurs:
             (a) assumptions that passionate workers would have
             volunteered for this work if given the chance (Studies 1, 3,
             5, 6, and 8), and (b) beliefs that, for passionate workers,
             work itself is its own reward (Studies 3, 4, 5, 6, and 8).
             We also find support for the reverse direction of the
             legitimization process, in which people attribute passion to
             an exploited (vs. nonexploited) worker (Study 7). Finally,
             and consistent with the notion that this process is
             connected to justice motives, a test of moderated mediation
             shows this is most pronounced for participants high in
             belief in a just world (Study 8). Taken together, these
             studies suggest that although passion may seem like a
             positive attribute to assume in others, it can also license
             poor and exploitative worker treatment.},
   Doi = {10.1037/pspi0000190},
   Key = {fds342837}
}

@article{fds340501,
   Author = {Kim, JY and Fitzsimons, GM and Kay, AC},
   Title = {Lean in messages increase attributions of women's
             responsibility for gender inequality.},
   Journal = {Journal of Personality and Social Psychology},
   Volume = {115},
   Number = {6},
   Pages = {974-1001},
   Year = {2018},
   Month = {December},
   url = {http://dx.doi.org/10.1037/pspa0000129},
   Abstract = {Although women's underrepresentation in senior-level
             positions in the workplace has multiple causes, women's
             self-improvement or "empowerment" at work has recently
             attracted cultural attention as a solution. For example, the
             bestselling book Lean In states that women can tackle gender
             inequality themselves by overcoming the "internal barriers"
             (e.g., lack of confidence and ambition) that prevent
             success. We sought to explore the consequences of this type
             of women's empowerment ideology. Study 1 found that
             perceptions of women's ability to solve inequality were
             associated with attributions of women's responsibility to do
             so. Studies 2, 3, 5a, and 5b experimentally manipulated
             exposure to women's empowerment messages, finding that while
             such messages increase perceptions that women are empowered
             to solve workplace gender inequality, they also lead to
             attributions that women are more responsible both for
             creating and solving the problem. Study 4 found a similar
             pattern in the context of a specific workplace problem, and
             found that such messages also lead to a preference for
             interventions focused on changing women rather than changing
             the system. Studies 5a and 5b sought to replicate prior
             studies and document the weakened effects of messages that
             explicitly explain that women's "internal barriers" are the
             products of "external barriers" obstructing women's
             progress. This research suggests that self-improvement
             messages intended to empower women to take charge of gender
             inequality may also yield potentially harmful societal
             beliefs. (PsycINFO Database Record (c) 2018 APA, all rights
             reserved).},
   Doi = {10.1037/pspa0000129},
   Key = {fds340501}
}

@article{fds339668,
   Author = {Fath, S and Kay, AC},
   Title = {“If hierarchical, then corrupt”: Exploring people's
             tendency to associate hierarchy with corruption in
             organizations},
   Journal = {Organizational Behavior and Human Decision
             Processes},
   Volume = {149},
   Pages = {145-164},
   Publisher = {Elsevier BV},
   Year = {2018},
   Month = {November},
   url = {http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.obhdp.2018.10.004},
   Abstract = {© 2018 Elsevier Inc. We propose that people associate
             organizational hierarchy with corruption. Nine studies (N =
             1896) provide triangulating evidence for this tendency and
             its underlying mechanism. We find that people expect more
             corruption to manifest among the employees of relatively
             more hierarchical organizations, and judge an organization
             with a history of corruption more likely to be hierarchical
             than one without. Furthermore, we show that the lay belief
             that hierarchy and corruption are connected is driven by two
             related assumptions: (i) that the more hierarchical an
             organization is, the more likely it is that its employees
             are competitive with each other, and (ii) that the more
             competitive employees are with each other, the more likely
             they are to be corrupt. Finally, we connect these lay
             beliefs to behavioral outcomes involved in trusting people
             who work for very hierarchical organizations and those
             organizations themselves. Implications, limitations, and
             future directions are discussed.},
   Doi = {10.1016/j.obhdp.2018.10.004},
   Key = {fds339668}
}

@article{fds338574,
   Author = {Friesen, JP and Laurin, K and Shepherd, S and Gaucher, D and Kay,
             AC},
   Title = {System justification: Experimental evidence, its contextual
             nature, and implications for social change.},
   Journal = {The British Journal of Social Psychology},
   Year = {2018},
   Month = {September},
   url = {http://dx.doi.org/10.1111/bjso.12278},
   Abstract = {We review conceptual and empirical contributions to system
             justification theory over the last fifteen years,
             emphasizing the importance of an experimental approach and
             consideration of context. First, we review the indirect
             evidence of the system justification motive via
             complimentary stereotyping. Second, we describe
             injunctification as direct evidence of a tendency to view
             the extant status quo (the way things are) as the way things
             should be. Third, we elaborate on system justification's
             contextual nature and the circumstances, such as threat,
             dependence, inescapability, and system confidence, which are
             likely to elicit defensive bolstering of the status quo and
             motivated ignorance of critical social issues. Fourth, we
             describe how system justification theory can increase our
             understanding of both resistance to and acceptance of social
             change, as a change moves from proposed, to imminent, to
             established. Finally, we discuss how threatened systems
             shore up their authority by co-opting legitimacy from other
             sources, such as governments that draw on religious
             concepts, and the role of institutional-level factors in
             perpetuating the status quo.},
   Doi = {10.1111/bjso.12278},
   Key = {fds338574}
}

@article{fds333552,
   Author = {Proudfoot, D and Kay, AC},
   Title = {How perceptions of one's organization can affect perceptions
             of the self: Membership in a stable organization can sustain
             individuals' sense of control},
   Journal = {Journal of Experimental Social Psychology},
   Volume = {76},
   Pages = {104-115},
   Publisher = {Elsevier BV},
   Year = {2018},
   Month = {May},
   url = {http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.jesp.2018.01.004},
   Abstract = {© 2018 Elsevier Inc. Building on contemporary perspectives
             regarding the role that group identification can play in
             sustaining control motives, we propose that being a member
             of a stable organization—one experienced as predictable
             and consistent rather than changing and in flux—can
             maintain individuals' sense of control. Four studies test
             this prediction. We observe that higher social
             identification as an organizational member (as compared to
             lower identification) is associated with an increased
             generalized sense of personal efficacy in life specifically
             when one's organization is experienced as relatively stable
             (Study 1 and Study 2). Further, the perceived stability of
             one's organization moderates the extent to which those who
             recently experienced a threat to personal control—and are
             thereby motivated to reestablish feelings of control—seek
             increased social identification as an organizational member
             (Study 3 and Study 4). Results suggest that membership in a
             stable organization can provide a psychological buffer
             against threats to personal control encountered in daily
             life outside work. Contributions to understanding the ways
             in which people maintain feelings of personal control in the
             social world are discussed.},
   Doi = {10.1016/j.jesp.2018.01.004},
   Key = {fds333552}
}

@article{fds332999,
   Author = {Landau, MJ and Khenfer, J and Keefer, LA and Swanson, TJ and Kay,
             AC},
   Title = {When and why does belief in a controlling God strengthen
             goal commitment?},
   Journal = {Journal of Experimental Social Psychology},
   Volume = {75},
   Pages = {71-82},
   Publisher = {Elsevier BV},
   Year = {2018},
   Month = {March},
   url = {http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.jesp.2017.11.012},
   Abstract = {© 2017 Elsevier Inc. The perception that God controls one's
             life can bolster motivation to pursue personal goals, but it
             can also have no impact and even squelch motivation. To
             better understand how religious beliefs impact
             self-regulation, the current research built on Compensatory
             Control Theory's claim that perceiving the environment as
             predictable (vs. unpredictable) strengthens commitment to
             long-term goals. Perceiving God's intervention as following
             an understandable logic, which implies a predictable
             environment, increased self-reported and behavioral
             commitment to save money (Studies 1–3), excel academically
             (Study 4), and improve physical health (Study 5). In
             contrast, perceiving God as intervening in mysterious ways,
             which implies that worldly affairs are under control yet
             unpredictable, did not increase goal commitment. Exploratory
             mediational analyses focused on self-efficacy, response
             efficacy, and confidence in God's control. A meta-analysis
             (Study 6) yielded a reliable effect whereby belief in divine
             control supports goal pursuit specifically when it signals
             the predictability of one's environment.},
   Doi = {10.1016/j.jesp.2017.11.012},
   Key = {fds332999}
}

@article{fds333000,
   Author = {Tang, S and King, M and Kay, AC},
   Title = {Fate as a motivated (and de-motivating) belief: Evidence for
             a link from task importance to belief in fate to
             effort},
   Journal = {Organizational Behavior and Human Decision
             Processes},
   Volume = {144},
   Pages = {74-84},
   Publisher = {Elsevier BV},
   Year = {2018},
   Month = {January},
   url = {http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.obhdp.2017.08.003},
   Abstract = {© 2017 Elsevier Inc. The perception of whether one has
             personal control over a specific task or goal has been shown
             to be a crucial predictor of effort and persistence. Given
             this, one might expect people to perceive high personal
             control over tasks that are very important. However, drawing
             on emerging theories of motivated ideological belief, we
             suggest that, in some circumstances, the more a task or goal
             is perceived as important, the more likely people may be to
             believe that the outcome is “fated” – that the outcome
             of an event is predetermined and meant to be. Across four
             studies, employing diverse samples and contexts, we provide
             evidence for this basic phenomenon and the negative
             repercussions it can hold for effort expenditure.
             Implications and avenues for future research are
             discussed.},
   Doi = {10.1016/j.obhdp.2017.08.003},
   Key = {fds333000}
}

@article{fds333001,
   Author = {Fath, S and Proudfoot, D and Kay, AC},
   Title = {Effective to a fault: Organizational structure predicts
             attitudes toward minority organizations},
   Journal = {Journal of Experimental Social Psychology},
   Volume = {73},
   Pages = {290-297},
   Publisher = {Elsevier BV},
   Year = {2017},
   Month = {November},
   url = {http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.jesp.2017.10.003},
   Abstract = {© 2017 Elsevier Inc. We consider how the structure of
             groups seeking collective action on behalf of minorities
             impacts attitudes toward them. We predicted that
             hierarchical minority organizations are perceived as more
             effective social agents than non-hierarchical minority
             organizations and thus are particularly unlikely to be
             supported by those who prefer to maintain inequality. In a
             pretest, a hierarchical organization was judged more
             efficacious than a non-hierarchical organization. In two
             experiments (N = 814; N = 809), organizational structure
             (hierarchical vs. non-hierarchical) and membership (baseline
             vs. minority) were manipulated. Stronger preference for
             maintaining inequality was associated with increased desire
             to limit a minority organization's access to power,
             specifically when that organization was hierarchical.
             Findings suggest structure may signal the extent to which
             minority organizations pose a threat to the dominant social
             order and thus can drive responses to them. That is,
             minorities who organize may face unique pushback from those
             invested in maintaining inequality.},
   Doi = {10.1016/j.jesp.2017.10.003},
   Key = {fds333001}
}

@article{fds323320,
   Author = {Shepherd, S and Eibach, RP and Kay, AC},
   Title = {“One Nation Under God”: The System-Justifying Function
             of Symbolically Aligning God and Government},
   Journal = {Political Psychology},
   Volume = {38},
   Number = {5},
   Pages = {703-720},
   Publisher = {WILEY},
   Year = {2017},
   Month = {October},
   url = {http://dx.doi.org/10.1111/pops.12353},
   Abstract = {© 2016 International Society of Political Psychology Do
             references to God in political discourse increase confidence
             in the U.S. sociopolitical system? Using a system
             justification framework (Jost & Banaji,), five studies
             provide evidence that, (1) increasingly governments
             symbolically associate the nation with God when public
             confidence in the social system may be threatened and (2)
             associating the nation with God serves a system-justifying
             function by increasing public confidence in the system. In
             an analysis of U.S. presidential speeches, presidents were
             more likely to symbolically associate the nation with God
             during threatening times (Study 1). Among religious
             individuals, referencing God in political rhetoric increased
             the perceived trustworthiness of politicians, compared to
             patriotic secular rhetoric (Study 2) or simply priming the
             concept of God (Study 3). These effects were also unique to
             politicians from one's own sociopolitical system (Study 4).
             Finally, believing God has a plan for the United States
             attenuates the deleterious effect that perceptions of
             national decline have on system confidence (Study 5).
             Implications for the system-justifying function of religion
             are discussed.},
   Doi = {10.1111/pops.12353},
   Key = {fds323320}
}

@article{fds328086,
   Author = {Ma, A and Landau, MJ and Narayanan, J and Kay, AC},
   Title = {Thought-control difficulty motivates structure
             seeking.},
   Journal = {Journal of Experimental Psychology. General},
   Volume = {146},
   Number = {8},
   Pages = {1067-1072},
   Year = {2017},
   Month = {August},
   url = {http://dx.doi.org/10.1037/xge0000282},
   Abstract = {Struggling to control one's mind can change how the world
             appears. In prior studies testing the compensatory control
             theory, reduced control over the external environment
             motivated the search for perceptual patterns and other forms
             of structured knowledge, even in remote domains. Going
             further, the current studies test whether difficulty
             controlling thoughts similarly predicts structure seeking.
             As hypothesized, thought-control difficulty positively
             predicted perceptions of causal connections between remote
             events (Study 1a) and nonexistent objects in visual noise
             (Study 1b). This effect was mediated by aversive arousal
             (Study 2) and caused specifically by thought-control
             difficulty as distinct from general difficulty (Study 3).
             Study 4 replicated the effect with a sample of meditators
             learning to control their thoughts, showing that
             thought-control difficulty was a powerful predictor of
             structure seeking. These findings reveal a novel form of
             motivated perception. (PsycINFO Database
             Record},
   Doi = {10.1037/xge0000282},
   Key = {fds328086}
}

@article{fds326633,
   Author = {Ma, A and Kay, AC},
   Title = {Compensatory control and ambiguity intolerance},
   Journal = {Organizational Behavior and Human Decision
             Processes},
   Volume = {140},
   Pages = {46-61},
   Publisher = {Elsevier BV},
   Year = {2017},
   Month = {May},
   url = {http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.obhdp.2017.04.001},
   Abstract = {© 2017 Elsevier Inc. When do people find ambiguity
             intolerable, and how might this manifest in the workplace
             where roles, guidelines and expectations can be made to be
             more or less ambiguous? Compensatory Control Theory (CCT;
             Kay, Gaucher, Napier, Callan, & Laurin, 2008) suggests a
             potential driver: perceived control. Recent CCT theory
             (Landau, Kay, & Whitson, 2015) has posited that people with
             chronically lower levels of perceived control may be
             especially likely to seek coherent and structured
             environments. Given that ambiguous workplace situations –
             such as flexible roles and titles, or loose guidelines and
             expectations – necessarily represent a lack of structure,
             these types of situations may therefore be especially
             aversive to those lower in perceived control. Four studies
             support this prediction. Specifically, we observe that low
             perceived control (both measured or manipulated) predicts
             greater ambiguity intolerance as well as greater negative
             attitudes towards ambiguous situations (Studies 1, 2 and 3),
             but not other types of problematic workplace situations
             (Study 1), and that this process can exert important
             downstream consequences, ranging from behavioral intentions
             to perceived self-efficacy (Study 4).},
   Doi = {10.1016/j.obhdp.2017.04.001},
   Key = {fds326633}
}

@article{fds329823,
   Author = {Khenfer, J and Laurin, K and Tafani, E and Roux, E and Kay,
             AC},
   Title = {Interventionist external agents make specific advice less
             demotivating},
   Journal = {Journal of Experimental Social Psychology},
   Volume = {73},
   Pages = {189-196},
   Year = {2017},
   Month = {January},
   url = {http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.jesp.2017.07.003},
   Abstract = {© 2017 Across four experiments, we explored how reminders
             of powerful external agents—interventionist Gods and
             reliable corporate institutions—influence people's
             motivation in the realm of financial goals. We found
             evidence that when people receive specific financial advice,
             they feel demotivated by the overwhelming flow of concrete
             instructions for achieving success. We found further that,
             under these circumstances specifically, reminders of
             interventionist agents bolster motivation, but that these
             same agents under different circumstances (i.e., when people
             receive vague advice) instead undermine motivation. Our
             findings shed light on the effects of specific (versus
             vague) goal focus, and on the dynamics of compensatory
             control in consumer settings.},
   Doi = {10.1016/j.jesp.2017.07.003},
   Key = {fds329823}
}

@article{fds327057,
   Author = {Leander, NP and Kay, AC and Chartrand, TL and Payne,
             BK},
   Title = {An affect misattribution pathway to perceptions of Intrinsic
             reward},
   Journal = {Social Cognition},
   Volume = {35},
   Number = {2},
   Pages = {163-180},
   Publisher = {Guilford Publications},
   Year = {2017},
   Month = {January},
   url = {http://dx.doi.org/10.1521/soco.2017.35.2.163},
   Abstract = {© 2017 Guilford Publications, Inc. Intrinsic rewards are
             typically thought to stem from an activity's inherent
             properties and not from separable rewards one receives from
             it. Yet, people may not consciously notice or remember all
             the subtle external rewards that correspond with an activity
             and may misattribute some directly to the activity itself.
             We propose that perceptions of intrinsic reward can often be
             byproducts of misattributed causal inference, and present
             some initial evidence that perceptions of intrinsic reward
             can in fact increase when words pertaining to an activity
             are subtly paired with pleasant context cues. Importantly,
             these effects follow classic boundary conditions of both
             misattribution and intrinsic motivation, insofar as they
             were extinguished when participants could make a proper
             source attribution and/or when the activity became
             associated with a blatant external reward. We further
             propose a distinction can be made between authentically
             "intrinsic" rewards and the illusion of intrinsic rewards
             caused by misattributed positive affect.},
   Doi = {10.1521/soco.2017.35.2.163},
   Key = {fds327057}
}

@article{fds326064,
   Author = {Laurin, K and Kay, AC},
   Title = {The Motivational Underpinnings of Belief in
             God},
   Journal = {Advances in Experimental Social Psychology},
   Volume = {56},
   Pages = {201-257},
   Publisher = {Elsevier},
   Year = {2017},
   Month = {January},
   url = {http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/bs.aesp.2017.02.004},
   Abstract = {© 2017 Elsevier Inc. Beliefs in powerful Gods are prevalent
             across time and across societies. In this chapter, we
             explore the motivated underpinnings of this phenomenon.
             After describing two popular theories that help account for
             some of this prevalence—one focused on byproducts of
             normal human cognition and the other focused on the cultural
             benefit conferred by shared belief in powerful Gods—we
             propose that a third perspective may be needed to fully
             explain why so many people believe: that believing in God is
             one mechanism through which people fulfill their need to
             perceive the world as structured, orderly, and nonrandom. We
             then describe a model that outlines the causes and
             consequences of perceptions of structure, and leverage this
             model to organize the evidence connecting belief in God to
             people's need for structure. We then note the ways in which
             belief in a powerful God, though not the only form of belief
             that can satisfy the need for structure, may hold an
             advantage over most alternatives. Finally, we conclude by
             discussing the implications of this perspective for
             understanding the ongoing evolution of religious
             belief.},
   Doi = {10.1016/bs.aesp.2017.02.004},
   Key = {fds326064}
}

@article{fds323318,
   Author = {Kay, AC and Brandt, MJ},
   Title = {Ideology and intergroup inequality: emerging directions and
             trends},
   Journal = {Current Opinion in Psychology},
   Volume = {11},
   Pages = {110-114},
   Publisher = {Elsevier BV},
   Year = {2016},
   Month = {October},
   url = {http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.copsyc.2016.07.007},
   Abstract = {© 2016 The authors propose that two guiding frameworks
             characterize psychological research on the relation between
             ideology and inequality. The first, called the product
             approach, focuses on ideologies directly concerned with
             intergroup relations, in which beliefs about inequality can
             be considered a direct product of the relevant belief
             system. These ideologies focus on topics that are clearly
             and explicitly connected to inequality, such as hierarchy,
             dominance, the supremacy of the ingroup, or beliefs about
             the optimal social and/or economic order. The second
             approach focuses on the ways in which perceptions of
             inequality can be a byproduct of ideologies or worldviews
             that are not directly concerned with inequality, but can
             impact intergroup relations nonetheless. These ideologies
             tend to involve more abstract, epistemic content that can be
             applied broadly, but often manifest in beliefs that are
             relevant to intergroup relations and inequality. Examples
             are used to illustrate this distinction, and emerging areas
             are discussed.},
   Doi = {10.1016/j.copsyc.2016.07.007},
   Key = {fds323318}
}

@article{fds323319,
   Author = {Rahinel, R and Amaral, NB and Clarkson, JJ and Kay,
             AC},
   Title = {On incidental catalysts of elaboration: Reminders of
             environmental structure promote effortful
             thought},
   Journal = {Journal of Experimental Social Psychology},
   Volume = {64},
   Pages = {1-7},
   Publisher = {Elsevier BV},
   Year = {2016},
   Month = {May},
   url = {http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.jesp.2016.01.001},
   Abstract = {© 2016 Elsevier Inc. Life is filled with situations in
             which cognitive elaboration can powerfully sway outcomes,
             and yet our understanding of the contextual factors that
             impact elaboration are greatly limited to those entwined
             with the focal evaluation, judgment, or decision. In
             response, this research tests whether a more fundamental,
             incidental feature of the environment-structure-might
             influence the extent to which individuals engage in
             elaboration. Three studies demonstrate that incidental
             reminders of structure increase elaboration (Experiment 1),
             which in turn impacts individuals' confidence in their
             choice (Experiment 2) as well as the choice itself
             (Experiment 3). Collectively, the findings offer novel
             insight into the role of structure in promoting elaboration,
             and suggest that structure-seeking may be functional in part
             because it leads to more thoughtful, considered judgments
             and decisions.},
   Doi = {10.1016/j.jesp.2016.01.001},
   Key = {fds323319}
}

@article{fds323321,
   Author = {Proudfoot, D and Kay, AC and Koval, CZ},
   Title = {A Gender Bias in the Attribution of Creativity: Archival and
             Experimental Evidence for the Perceived Association Between
             Masculinity and Creative Thinking.},
   Journal = {Psychological Science},
   Volume = {26},
   Number = {11},
   Pages = {1751-1761},
   Year = {2015},
   Month = {November},
   url = {http://dx.doi.org/10.1177/0956797615598739},
   Abstract = {We propose that the propensity to think creatively tends to
             be associated with independence and self-direction-qualities
             generally ascribed to men-so that men are often perceived to
             be more creative than women. In two experiments, we found
             that "outside the box" creativity is more strongly
             associated with stereotypically masculine characteristics
             (e.g., daring and self-reliance) than with stereotypically
             feminine characteristics (e.g., cooperativeness and
             supportiveness; Study 1) and that a man is ascribed more
             creativity than a woman when they produce identical output
             (Study 2). Analyzing archival data, we found that men's
             ideas are evaluated as more ingenious than women's ideas
             (Study 3) and that female executives are stereotyped as less
             innovative than their male counterparts when evaluated by
             their supervisors (Study 4). Finally, we observed that
             stereotypically masculine behavior enhances a man's
             perceived creativity, whereas identical behavior does not
             enhance a woman's perceived creativity (Study 5). This boost
             in men's perceived creativity is mediated by attributions of
             agency, not competence, and predicts perceptions of reward
             deservingness.},
   Doi = {10.1177/0956797615598739},
   Key = {fds323321}
}

@article{fds323322,
   Author = {Proudfoot, D and Kay, AC and Mann, H},
   Title = {Motivated employee blindness: The impact of labor market
             instability on judgment of organizational
             inefficiencies},
   Journal = {Organizational Behavior and Human Decision
             Processes},
   Volume = {130},
   Pages = {108-122},
   Publisher = {Elsevier BV},
   Year = {2015},
   Month = {July},
   url = {http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.obhdp.2015.06.008},
   Abstract = {© 2015 Elsevier Inc. While employees might be expected to
             be especially vigilant to problems within their organization
             during times of economic instability, we build on
             motivational perspectives put forth by System Justification
             Theory to propose the opposite effect, namely that economic
             instability enhances employees' tendency to defensively
             ignore and diminish organizational problems. We
             experimentally manipulated perceptions of labor market
             trends and asked participants to report on problems within
             their own actual organization. As predicted, an ostensibly
             weak external labor market led employees to perceive their
             organization as less inefficient (Study 1), identify fewer
             organizational efficiency problems (Study 2), downplay the
             impact of organizational inefficiencies (Study 3), and
             generate a greater ratio of pros to cons regarding how their
             organization is run (Study 4), compared to employees exposed
             to relatively favorable labor market information. Results
             suggest an enhanced motivation to deny the existence of
             organizational flaws when employment alternatives are
             perceived to be scarce.},
   Doi = {10.1016/j.obhdp.2015.06.008},
   Key = {fds323322}
}

@article{fds323323,
   Author = {Czopp, AM and Kay, AC and Cheryan, S},
   Title = {Positive Stereotypes Are Pervasive and Powerful.},
   Journal = {Perspectives on Psychological Science : a Journal of the
             Association for Psychological Science},
   Volume = {10},
   Number = {4},
   Pages = {451-463},
   Year = {2015},
   Month = {July},
   url = {http://dx.doi.org/10.1177/1745691615588091},
   Abstract = {Stereotypes and their associated category-based processes
             have traditionally been considered largely within the
             context of the negativity of their content and consequences,
             both among the general public and the scientific community.
             This review summarizes and integrates extant research on
             positive stereotypes, which are subjectively favorable
             beliefs about social groups, and examines their implications
             for individuals and groups directly targeted by such
             stereotypes. Furthermore, we examine the beneficial and
             adverse implications of positive stereotypes for
             interpersonal and intergroup relations, as well as the ways
             in which positive stereotypes, more so than negative
             stereotypes, may contribute to and perpetuate systemic
             differences in power and privilege.},
   Doi = {10.1177/1745691615588091},
   Key = {fds323323}
}

@article{fds273218,
   Author = {Landau, MJ and Kay, AC and Whitson, JA},
   Title = {Compensatory control and the appeal of a structured
             world.},
   Journal = {Psychological Bulletin},
   Volume = {141},
   Number = {3},
   Pages = {694-722},
   Year = {2015},
   Month = {May},
   ISSN = {0033-2909},
   url = {http://dx.doi.org/10.1037/a0038703},
   Abstract = {People are motivated to perceive themselves as having
             control over their lives. Consequently, they respond to
             events and cognitions that reduce control with compensatory
             strategies for restoring perceived control to baseline
             levels. Prior theory and research have documented 3 such
             strategies: bolstering personal agency, affiliating with
             external systems perceived to be acting on the self's
             behalf, and affirming clear contingencies between actions
             and outcomes within the context of reduced control (here
             termed specific structure). We propose a 4th strategy:
             affirming nonspecific structure, or seeking out and
             preferring simple, clear, and consistent interpretations of
             the social and physical environments. Formulating this claim
             suggests that people will respond to reduced control by
             affirming structured interpretations that are unrelated to
             the control-reducing condition, and even those that entail
             otherwise adverse outcomes (e.g., pessimistic health
             prospects). Section 1 lays the conceptual foundation for our
             review, situating the proposed phenomenon in the literatures
             on control motivation and threat-compensation mechanisms.
             Section 2 reviews studies that have demonstrated that trait
             and state variations in perceived control predict a wide
             range of epistemic structuring tendencies, including pattern
             recognition and causal reasoning. We posit that these
             tendencies reflect a common desire for a structured
             understanding of one's environment. Accordingly, a new
             meta-analysis spanning the reviewed studies (k = 55)
             revealed that control reduction predicts nonspecific
             structure affirmation with a moderate effect size (r = .25).
             Section 3 reviews research on individual differences and
             situational moderators of this effect. The discussion
             addresses the interplay of compensatory control strategies
             and practical implications.},
   Doi = {10.1037/a0038703},
   Key = {fds273218}
}

@article{fds273238,
   Author = {Tullett, AM and Kay, AC and Inzlicht, M},
   Title = {Randomness increases self-reported anxiety and
             neurophysiological correlates of performance
             monitoring.},
   Journal = {Social Cognitive and Affective Neuroscience},
   Volume = {10},
   Number = {5},
   Pages = {628-635},
   Year = {2015},
   Month = {May},
   ISSN = {1749-5016},
   url = {http://dx.doi.org/10.1093/scan/nsu097},
   Abstract = {Several prominent theories spanning clinical, social and
             developmental psychology suggest that people are motivated
             to see the world as a sensible orderly place. These theories
             presuppose that randomness is aversive because it is
             associated with unpredictability. If this is the case,
             thinking that the world is random should lead to increased
             anxiety and heightened monitoring of one's actions and their
             consequences. Here, we conduct experimental tests of both of
             these ideas. Participants read one of three passages: (i)
             comprehensible order, (ii) incomprehensible order and (iii)
             randomness. In Study 1, we examined the effects of these
             passages on self-reported anxiety. In Study 2, we examined
             the effects of the same manipulation on the error-related
             negativity (ERN), an event-related brain potential
             associated with performance monitoring. We found that
             messages about randomness increased self-reported anxiety
             and ERN amplitude relative to comprehensible order, whereas
             incomprehensible order had intermediate effects. These
             results lend support to the theoretically important idea
             that randomness is unsettling because it implies that the
             world is unpredictable.},
   Doi = {10.1093/scan/nsu097},
   Key = {fds273238}
}

@article{fds273220,
   Author = {Friesen, JP and Campbell, TH and Kay, AC},
   Title = {The psychological advantage of unfalsifiability: the appeal
             of untestable religious and political ideologies.},
   Journal = {Journal of Personality and Social Psychology},
   Volume = {108},
   Number = {3},
   Pages = {515-529},
   Year = {2015},
   Month = {March},
   ISSN = {0022-3514},
   url = {http://dx.doi.org/10.1037/pspp0000018},
   Abstract = {We propose that people may gain certain "offensive" and
             "defensive" advantages for their cherished belief systems
             (e.g., religious and political views) by including aspects
             of unfalsifiability in those belief systems, such that some
             aspects of the beliefs cannot be tested empirically and
             conclusively refuted. This may seem peculiar, irrational, or
             at least undesirable to many people because it is assumed
             that the primary purpose of a belief is to know objective
             truth. However, past research suggests that accuracy is only
             one psychological motivation among many, and falsifiability
             or testability may be less important when the purpose of a
             belief serves other psychological motives (e.g., to maintain
             one's worldviews, serve an identity). In Experiments 1 and 2
             we demonstrate the "offensive" function of unfalsifiability:
             that it allows religious adherents to hold their beliefs
             with more conviction and political partisans to polarize and
             criticize their opponents more extremely. Next we
             demonstrate unfalsifiability's "defensive" function: When
             facts threaten their worldviews, religious participants
             frame specific reasons for their beliefs in more
             unfalsifiable terms (Experiment 3) and political partisans
             construe political issues as more unfalsifiable ("moral
             opinion") instead of falsifiable ("a matter of facts";
             Experiment 4). We conclude by discussing how in a world
             where beliefs and ideas are becoming more easily testable by
             data, unfalsifiability might be an attractive aspect to
             include in one's belief systems, and how unfalsifiability
             may contribute to polarization, intractability, and the
             marginalization of science in public discourse.},
   Doi = {10.1037/pspp0000018},
   Key = {fds273220}
}

@article{fds273219,
   Author = {van der Toorn, J and Feinberg, M and Jost, JT and Kay, AC and Tyler, TR and Willer, R and Wilmuth, C},
   Title = {A sense of powerlessness fosters system justification:
             Implications for the legitimation of authority, hierarchy,
             and government},
   Journal = {Political Psychology},
   Volume = {36},
   Number = {1},
   Pages = {93-110},
   Year = {2015},
   Month = {January},
   ISSN = {0162-895X},
   url = {http://dx.doi.org/10.1111/pops.12183},
   Abstract = {© 2014 International Society of Political Psychology. In an
             attempt to explain the stability of hierarchy, we focus on
             the perspective of the powerless and how a subjective sense
             of dependence leads them to imbue the system and its
             authorities with legitimacy. In Study 1, we found in a
             nationally representative sample of U.S. employees that
             financial dependence on one's job was positively associated
             with the perceived legitimacy of one's supervisor. In Study
             2, we observed that a general sense of powerlessness was
             positively correlated with the perceived legitimacy of the
             economic system. In Studies 3 and 4, priming experimental
             participants with feelings of powerlessness increased their
             justification of the social system, even when they were
             presented with system-challenging explanations for race,
             class, and gender disparities. In Study 5, we demonstrated
             that the experience of powerlessness increased legitimation
             of governmental authorities (relative to baseline
             conditions). The processes we identify are likely to
             perpetuate inequality insofar as the powerless justify
             rather than strive to change the hierarchical structures
             that disadvantage them.},
   Doi = {10.1111/pops.12183},
   Key = {fds273219}
}

@article{fds273236,
   Author = {Whitson, JA and Galinsky, AD and Kay, A},
   Title = {The emotional roots of conspiratorial perceptions, system
             justification, and belief in the paranormal},
   Journal = {Journal of Experimental Social Psychology},
   Volume = {56},
   Pages = {89-95},
   Publisher = {Elsevier BV},
   Year = {2015},
   Month = {January},
   ISSN = {0022-1031},
   url = {http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.jesp.2014.09.002},
   Abstract = {© 2014 Elsevier Inc. We predicted that experiencing
             emotions that reflect uncertainty about the world (e.g.,
             worry, surprise, fear, hope), compared to certain emotions
             (e.g., anger, happiness, disgust, contentment), would
             activate the need to imbue the world with order and
             structure across a wide range of compensatory measures. To
             test this hypothesis, three experiments orthogonally
             manipulated the uncertainty and the valence of emotions.
             Experiencing uncertain emotions increased defense of
             government (Experiment 1) and led people to embrace
             conspiracies and the paranormal (Experiment 2).
             Self-affirmation eliminated the effects of uncertain
             emotions on compensatory control (Experiment 3). Across all
             experiments, the valence of the emotions had no main effects
             on compensatory control and never interacted with the
             uncertainty of emotions. These studies establish a link
             between the experience of emotions and the desire for
             structure.},
   Doi = {10.1016/j.jesp.2014.09.002},
   Key = {fds273236}
}

@article{fds291328,
   Author = {Kay, A and Napier, J},
   Title = {The justice motive as a driver of religious
             experience},
   Journal = {Religion, Brain & Behavior},
   Volume = {5},
   Number = {3},
   Pages = {238-240},
   Publisher = {Informa UK Limited},
   Year = {2015},
   Month = {January},
   ISSN = {2153-599X},
   url = {http://dx.doi.org/10.1080/2153599X.2014.910262},
   Doi = {10.1080/2153599X.2014.910262},
   Key = {fds291328}
}

@article{fds326502,
   Author = {Brown-Iannuzzi, JL and Lundberg, KB and Kay, AC and Payne,
             BK},
   Title = {Subjective status shapes political preferences.},
   Journal = {Psychological Science},
   Volume = {26},
   Number = {1},
   Pages = {15-26},
   Year = {2015},
   Month = {January},
   url = {http://dx.doi.org/10.1177/0956797614553947},
   Abstract = {Economic inequality in America is at historically high
             levels. Although most Americans indicate that they would
             prefer greater equality, redistributive policies aimed at
             reducing inequality are frequently unpopular. Traditional
             accounts posit that attitudes toward redistribution are
             driven by economic self-interest or ideological principles.
             From a social psychological perspective, however, we
             expected that subjective comparisons with other people may
             be a more relevant basis for self-interest than is material
             wealth. We hypothesized that participants would support
             redistribution more when they felt low than when they felt
             high in subjective status, even when actual resources and
             self-interest were held constant. Moreover, we predicted
             that people would legitimize these shifts in policy
             attitudes by appealing selectively to ideological principles
             concerning fairness. In four studies, we found correlational
             (Study 1) and experimental (Studies 2-4) evidence that
             subjective status motivates shifts in support for
             redistributive policies along with the ideological
             principles that justify them.},
   Doi = {10.1177/0956797614553947},
   Key = {fds326502}
}

@article{fds273237,
   Author = {Campbell, TH and Kay, AC},
   Title = {Solution aversion: On the relation between ideology and
             motivated disbelief.},
   Journal = {Journal of Personality and Social Psychology},
   Volume = {107},
   Number = {5},
   Pages = {809-824},
   Year = {2014},
   Month = {November},
   ISSN = {0022-3514},
   url = {http://dx.doi.org/10.1037/a0037963},
   Abstract = {There is often a curious distinction between what the
             scientific community and the general population believe to
             be true of dire scientific issues, and this skepticism tends
             to vary markedly across groups. For instance, in the case of
             climate change, Republicans (conservatives) are especially
             skeptical of the relevant science, particularly when they
             are compared with Democrats (liberals). What causes such
             radical group differences? We suggest, as have previous
             accounts, that this phenomenon is often motivated. However,
             the source of this motivation is not necessarily an aversion
             to the problem, per se, but an aversion to the solutions
             associated with the problem. This difference in underlying
             process holds important implications for understanding,
             predicting, and influencing motivated skepticism. In 4
             studies, we tested this solution aversion explanation for
             why people are often so divided over evidence and why this
             divide often occurs so saliently across political party
             lines. Studies 1, 2, and 3-using correlational and
             experimental methodologies-demonstrated that Republicans'
             increased skepticism toward environmental sciences may be
             partly attributable to a conflict between specific
             ideological values and the most popularly discussed
             environmental solutions. Study 4 found that, in a different
             domain (crime), those holding a more liberal ideology
             (support for gun control) also show skepticism motivated by
             solution aversion.},
   Doi = {10.1037/a0037963},
   Key = {fds273237}
}

@article{fds312701,
   Author = {Proudfoot, D and Kay, AC},
   Title = {Reactance or Rationalization? Predicting Public Responses to
             Government Policy},
   Journal = {Policy Insights From the Behavioral and Brain
             Sciences},
   Volume = {1},
   Number = {1},
   Pages = {256-262},
   Editor = {Fiske, ST},
   Year = {2014},
   Month = {October},
   url = {http://dx.doi.org/10.1177/2372732214550489},
   Abstract = {© The Author(s) 2014. The public’s attitudes toward new
             governmental laws and regulations are frequently at the
             forefront of public policy debates. Will the public react
             negatively to a newly implemented public safety regulation
             or embrace the change? Does the public’s initial
             favorability toward a proposed environmental policy indicate
             public opinion and compliance if such a law passed? Social
             psychological research directly explores these questions and
             provides insight into how specific policy designs and
             implementations can shape public response to new
             regulations. People may exhibit one of two contrasting
             responses to policies: reactance or rationalization. When a
             rule is imposed, individuals often display
             reactance—exaggerating the value of the behavior being
             banned or restricted. However, individuals also frequently
             show an opposite, perhaps less conspicuous, tendency—They
             rationalize government policy; that is, they diminish
             alternatives and actively justify why the imposed
             regulations are favorable. In experiments, two
             factors—individuals’ attentional focus and a policy’s
             apparent absoluteness—determine whether people react
             against or rationalize policies that seek to restrict their
             behavior. In other evidence, people’s motivation to defend
             the status quo may hinder—but also facilitate—support
             for public policy changes. The implications can guide public
             policy design and implementation.},
   Doi = {10.1177/2372732214550489},
   Key = {fds312701}
}

@article{fds273240,
   Author = {Callan, MJ and Kay, AC and Dawtry, RJ},
   Title = {Making sense of misfortune: deservingness, self-esteem, and
             patterns of self-defeat.},
   Journal = {Journal of Personality and Social Psychology},
   Volume = {107},
   Number = {1},
   Pages = {142-162},
   Year = {2014},
   Month = {July},
   ISSN = {0022-3514},
   url = {http://dx.doi.org/10.1037/a0036640},
   Abstract = {Drawing on theorizing and research suggesting that people
             are motivated to view their world as an orderly and
             predictable place in which people get what they deserve, the
             authors proposed that (a) random and uncontrollable bad
             outcomes will lower self-esteem and (b) this, in turn, will
             lead to the adoption of self-defeating beliefs and
             behaviors. Four experiments demonstrated that participants
             who experienced or recalled bad (vs. good) breaks devalued
             their self-esteem (Studies 1a and 1b), and that decrements
             in self-esteem (whether arrived at through misfortune or
             failure experience) increase beliefs about deserving bad
             outcomes (Studies 1a, 1b, 2a, 2b). Five studies (Studies
             3-7) extended these findings by showing that this, in turn,
             can engender a wide array of self-defeating beliefs and
             behaviors, including claimed self-handicapping ahead of an
             ability test (Study 3), the preference for others to view
             the self less favorably (Studies 4-5), chronic
             self-handicapping and thoughts of physical self-harm (Study
             6), and choosing to receive negative feedback during an
             ability test (Study 7). The current findings highlight the
             important role that concerns about deservingness play in the
             link between lower self-esteem and patterns of
             self-defeating beliefs and behaviors. The theoretical and
             practical implications of these findings are
             discussed.},
   Doi = {10.1037/a0036640},
   Key = {fds273240}
}

@article{fds273243,
   Author = {Tang, S and Shepherd, S and Kay, AC},
   Title = {Do difficult decisions motivate belief in fate? A test in
             the context of the 2012 U.S. presidential
             election.},
   Journal = {Psychological Science},
   Volume = {25},
   Number = {4},
   Pages = {1046-1048},
   Year = {2014},
   Month = {April},
   ISSN = {0956-7976},
   url = {http://dx.doi.org/10.1177/0956797613519448},
   Doi = {10.1177/0956797613519448},
   Key = {fds273243}
}

@article{fds273244,
   Author = {Kay, AC and Jost, JT},
   Title = {Theoretical integration in motivational science: System
             justification as one of many "autonomous motivational
             structures".},
   Journal = {Behavioral and Brain Sciences},
   Volume = {37},
   Number = {2},
   Pages = {146-147},
   Year = {2014},
   Month = {April},
   ISSN = {0140-525X},
   url = {http://dx.doi.org/10.1017/s0140525x13002057},
   Abstract = {Recognizing that there is a multiplicity of motives - and
             that the accessibility and strength of each one varies
             chronically and temporarily - is essential if motivational
             scientists are to achieve genuine theoretical and empirical
             integration. We agree that system justification is a case of
             nonconscious goal pursuit and discuss implications of the
             fact that it conflicts with many other psychological
             goals.},
   Doi = {10.1017/s0140525x13002057},
   Key = {fds273244}
}

@article{fds273246,
   Author = {Kay, AC and Laurin, K and Fitzsimons, GM and Landau,
             MJ},
   Title = {A functional basis for structure-seeking: exposure to
             structure promotes willingness to engage in motivated
             action.},
   Journal = {Journal of Experimental Psychology. General},
   Volume = {143},
   Number = {2},
   Pages = {486-491},
   Year = {2014},
   Month = {April},
   ISSN = {0096-3445},
   url = {http://dx.doi.org/10.1037/a0034462},
   Abstract = {A recurring observation of experimental psychologists is
             that people prefer, seek out, and even selectively "see"
             structure in their social and natural environments.
             Structure-seeking has been observed across a wide range of
             phenomena--from the detection of patterns in random arrays
             to affinities for order-providing political, religious,
             social, and scientific worldviews--and is exacerbated under
             psychological threat. Why are people motivated for
             structure? An intriguing, but untested, explanation holds
             that perceiving structure, even in domains unrelated to
             one's current behavioral context, can facilitate willingness
             to take goal-directed actions. Supporting this, in 5
             studies, reminders of structure in nature or society
             increase willingness to engage in goal pursuit.},
   Doi = {10.1037/a0034462},
   Key = {fds273246}
}

@article{fds273247,
   Author = {Friesen, JP and Kay, AC and Eibach, RP and Galinsky,
             AD},
   Title = {Seeking structure in social organization: compensatory
             control and the psychological advantages of
             hierarchy.},
   Journal = {Journal of Personality and Social Psychology},
   Volume = {106},
   Number = {4},
   Pages = {590-609},
   Year = {2014},
   Month = {April},
   ISSN = {0022-3514},
   url = {http://dx.doi.org/10.1037/a0035620},
   Abstract = {Hierarchies are a ubiquitous form of human social
             organization. We hypothesized that 1 reason for the
             prevalence of hierarchies is that they offer structure and
             therefore satisfy the core motivational needs for order and
             control relative to less structured forms of social
             organization. This hypothesis is rooted in compensatory
             control theory, which posits that (a) individuals have a
             basic need to perceive the world as orderly and structured,
             and (b) personal and external sources of control are capable
             of satisfying this need because both serve the comforting
             belief that the world operates in an orderly fashion. Our
             first 2 studies confirmed that hierarchies were perceived as
             more structured and orderly relative to egalitarian
             arrangements (Study 1) and that working in a hierarchical
             workplace promotes a feeling of self-efficacy (Study 2). We
             threatened participants' sense of personal control and
             measured perceptions of and preferences for hierarchy in 5
             subsequent experiments. Participants who lacked control
             perceived more hierarchy occurring in ambiguous social
             situations (Study 3) and preferred hierarchy more strongly
             in workplace contexts (Studies 4-5). We also provide
             evidence that hierarchies are indeed appealing because of
             their structure: Preference for hierarchy was higher among
             individuals high in Personal Need for Structure and a
             control threat increased preference for hierarchy even among
             participants low in Personal Need for Structure (Study 5).
             Framing a hierarchy as unstructured reversed the effect of
             control threat on hierarchy (Study 6). Finally,
             hierarchy-enhancing jobs were more appealing after control
             threat, even when they were low in power and status (Study
             7).},
   Doi = {10.1037/a0035620},
   Key = {fds273247}
}

@article{fds273235,
   Author = {Proudfoot, D and Kay, AC},
   Title = {System justification in organizational contexts: How a
             Motivated preference for the status quo can affect
             organizational attitudes and behaviors},
   Journal = {Research in Organizational Behavior},
   Volume = {34},
   Pages = {173-187},
   Year = {2014},
   Month = {January},
   ISSN = {0191-3085},
   url = {http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.riob.2014.03.001},
   Abstract = {© 2014 Elsevier Ltd. In this chapter, we put forth the
             premise that people's motivated tendency to justify and
             defend their external systems has important, and largely
             unexplored, implications for the field of organizational
             behavior. Drawing on recent theoretical and empirical work
             emerging from System Justification Theory (Jost & Banaji,
             1994), we propose that people's desire to view prevailing
             structural arrangements in a positive light may uniquely
             contribute to our understanding of the psychology of people
             in organizational settings. We begin by specifically
             highlighting System Justification Theory's implications for:
             organizational change, employee citizenship behaviors, and
             integration of a diverse workforce. We then review empirical
             work on the situations in which people's
             system-justification motive is likely to be particularly
             pronounced and discuss how these situations may manifest in
             organizational contexts. Following this, we describe several
             streams of research on the consequences of the
             system-justification motive, with a focus on the
             implications of these findings for organizational members'
             perceptions, attitudes, and behaviors in the
             workplace.},
   Doi = {10.1016/j.riob.2014.03.001},
   Key = {fds273235}
}

@article{fds273239,
   Author = {Shepherd, S and Kay, AC},
   Title = {When government confidence undermines public involvement in
             modern disasters},
   Journal = {Social Cognition},
   Volume = {32},
   Number = {3},
   Pages = {206-216},
   Publisher = {Guilford Publications},
   Year = {2014},
   Month = {January},
   ISSN = {0278-016X},
   url = {http://dx.doi.org/10.1521/soco.2014.32.3.206},
   Abstract = {As our global community increases in complexity, crises and
             disasters-such as global financial meltdowns and natural
             disasters-increasingly have the ability to impact millions
             of lives. Because of the scale and complexity of these
             issues, they are seemingly beyond comprehension and personal
             control. As such, people may rely on the government as a
             psychological crutch, thus undermining their own engagement
             with and understanding of crises and disasters. In the
             context of the present economic crisis (Study 1) and the
             2010 BP oil crisis in the Gulf of Mexico (Study 2) the
             current research provides evidence for the idea that when
             perceptions of government competency and agency are high,
             people become less inclined to learn about and become
             engaged in crises and disasters. © 2014 Guilford
             Publications, Inc.},
   Doi = {10.1521/soco.2014.32.3.206},
   Key = {fds273239}
}

@article{fds312702,
   Author = {Yeung, AWY and Kay, AC and Peach, JM},
   Title = {Anti-feminist backlash: The role of system justification in
             the rejection of feminism},
   Journal = {Group Processes & Intergroup Relations},
   Volume = {17},
   Number = {4},
   Pages = {474-484},
   Publisher = {SAGE Publications},
   Year = {2014},
   Month = {January},
   ISSN = {1368-4302},
   url = {http://dx.doi.org/10.1177/1368430213514121},
   Abstract = {System justification theory (SJT) posits that people are
             motivated to believe that the social system they live in is
             fair, desirable, and how it should be, especially in
             contexts that heighten the system justification motive. Past
             researchers have suggested that opposition to feminists may
             be motivated by the threat that feminism presents to the
             legitimacy of the status quo, but this hypothesis has not
             been tested empirically. In this article, we present three
             studies that directly test the idea that antifeminist
             backlash can be motivated by system justification. Studies 1
             and 2 experimentally manipulated the SJ motive and a female
             target's feminist identification (feminist vs. nonfeminist).
             Study 3 tested the hypothesis by measuring participants’
             SJ motivation via an individual difference measure.
             Participants disagreed more with identical statements about
             gender issues made by the feminist target than the
             nonfeminist target, but only when the system justification
             motive was heightened (Study 2) or chronically high (Study
             3). © 2013, SAGE Publications. All rights
             reserved.},
   Doi = {10.1177/1368430213514121},
   Key = {fds312702}
}

@article{fds273248,
   Author = {Kugler, MB and Funk, F and Braun, J and Gollwitzer, M and Kay, AC and Darley, JM},
   Title = {Differences in punitiveness across three cultures: A test of
             American exceptionalism in justice attitudes},
   Journal = {Journal of Criminal Law and Criminology},
   Volume = {103},
   Number = {4},
   Pages = {1071-1114},
   Year = {2013},
   Month = {December},
   ISSN = {0091-4169},
   url = {http://gateway.webofknowledge.com/gateway/Gateway.cgi?GWVersion=2&SrcApp=PARTNER_APP&SrcAuth=LinksAMR&KeyUT=WOS:000327673500002&DestLinkType=FullRecord&DestApp=ALL_WOS&UsrCustomerID=47d3190e77e5a3a53558812f597b0b92},
   Abstract = {The United States has the highest incarceration rate in the
             world and a more punitive approach to criminal justice
             issues than comparable Western democracies. One potential
             explanation for this distinctiveness is that Americans, as
             individuals, are uniquely punitive toward criminals. The
             present study explores the possibility of cultural
             differences in punitive attitudes. Census-representative
             samples of Americans, Canadians, and Germans were asked to
             assign sentences to a variety of people who had committed
             different offenses. Even though Canada has much more lenient
             sentencing policies than the United States in practice,
             Americans and Canadians generally did not differ from each
             other in sentencing attitudes. Both assigned slightly longer
             sentences than did Germans, however. Americans, therefore,
             do not appear to be uniquely punitive at the individual
             level. Also, people from all three cultures were in
             agreement about the moral wrongfulness of most baseline
             crimes, indicating that enhanced American and Canadian
             punitiveness is not due to an increased sense of moral
             outrage. Institutional explanations for American
             Exceptionalism in policies are discussed. © 2013 by
             Northwestern University School of Law.},
   Key = {fds273248}
}

@article{fds273250,
   Author = {Laurin, K and Kay, AC and Proudfoot, D and Fitzsimons,
             GJ},
   Title = {Response to restrictive policies: Reconciling system
             justification and psychological reactance},
   Journal = {Organizational Behavior and Human Decision
             Processes},
   Volume = {122},
   Number = {2},
   Pages = {152-162},
   Publisher = {Elsevier BV},
   Year = {2013},
   Month = {November},
   ISSN = {0749-5978},
   url = {http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.obhdp.2013.06.004},
   Abstract = {Here we propose a dual process model to reconcile two
             contradictory predictions about how people respond to
             restrictive policies imposed upon them by organizations and
             systems within which they operate. When participants'
             attention was not drawn to the restrictive nature of the
             policy, or when it was, but their cognitive resources were
             restricted, we found evidence supporting a prediction based
             on System Justification Theory: Participants reacted
             favorably to restrictive policies, endorsing them and
             downplaying the importance of the restricted freedom. Only
             when we cued participants to focus their undivided attention
             on the restrictive nature of the policy did we find evidence
             supporting a prediction based on psychological reactance:
             Only then did participants display reactance and respond
             negatively to the policies. © 2013 Elsevier
             Inc.},
   Doi = {10.1016/j.obhdp.2013.06.004},
   Key = {fds273250}
}

@article{fds273249,
   Author = {Kay, AC and Eibach, RP},
   Title = {Compensatory Control and Its Implications for Ideological
             Extremism},
   Journal = {Journal of Social Issues},
   Volume = {69},
   Number = {3},
   Pages = {564-585},
   Publisher = {WILEY},
   Year = {2013},
   Month = {September},
   ISSN = {0022-4537},
   url = {http://gateway.webofknowledge.com/gateway/Gateway.cgi?GWVersion=2&SrcApp=PARTNER_APP&SrcAuth=LinksAMR&KeyUT=WOS:000324059700009&DestLinkType=FullRecord&DestApp=ALL_WOS&UsrCustomerID=47d3190e77e5a3a53558812f597b0b92},
   Abstract = {This article outlines and reviews evidence for a model of
             compensatory control designed to account for the motivated
             belief in personal and external sources of control. In doing
             so, we attempt to shed light on the content and strength of
             ideologies, including extreme libertarian, nationalist,
             socialist, and religious fundamentalist ideologies. We
             suggest that although these ideologies differ in their
             content they commonly function to provide people with a
             sense of control over otherwise random events. We propose
             that extreme ideologies of personal control (e.g.,
             libertarianism) and external control (e.g., socialism,
             religious fundamentalism) are equifinal means of meeting a
             universal need to believe that things, in general, are under
             control-that is, that events do not unfold randomly or
             haphazardly. We use this model to explain how the adoption
             and strength of ideologies of personal and external control
             may vary across temporal and sociocultural contexts. © 2013
             The Society for the Psychological Study of Social
             Issues.},
   Doi = {10.1111/josi.12029},
   Key = {fds273249}
}

@article{fds273253,
   Author = {Zhu, LL and Kay, AC and Eibach, RP},
   Title = {A test of the flexible ideology hypothesis: System
             justification motives interact with ideological cueing to
             predict political judgments},
   Journal = {Journal of Experimental Social Psychology},
   Volume = {49},
   Number = {4},
   Pages = {755-758},
   Publisher = {Elsevier BV},
   Year = {2013},
   Month = {July},
   ISSN = {0022-1031},
   url = {http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.jesp.2013.03.007},
   Abstract = {We hypothesize that the system justification motive
             increases individuals' susceptibility to ideological priming
             effects. We tested this hypothesis in a sample of 308
             participants in which system justification, accessibility of
             meritocratic or egalitarian ideology, and judgment of a
             meritocratic or equal funding system were manipulated. As
             predicted, when the system justifying motive was activated,
             participants primed with meritocracy (egalitarianism) judged
             a meritocratic (equal) funding system as relatively more
             fair. The same pattern was not found when system
             justification motives were not activated. Theoretical
             implications are discussed. © 2013 Elsevier
             Inc.},
   Doi = {10.1016/j.jesp.2013.03.007},
   Key = {fds273253}
}

@article{fds273251,
   Author = {Laurin, K and Gaucher, D and Kay, A},
   Title = {Stability and the justification of social
             inequality},
   Journal = {European Journal of Social Psychology},
   Volume = {43},
   Number = {4},
   Pages = {246-254},
   Publisher = {WILEY},
   Year = {2013},
   Month = {June},
   ISSN = {0046-2772},
   url = {http://dx.doi.org/10.1002/ejsp.1949},
   Abstract = {Modern society is rife with inequality. People's
             interpretations of these inequalities, however, vary
             considerably: Different people can interpret, for example,
             the existing gender gap in wages as being the result of
             systemic discrimination, or as being the fair and natural
             result of genuine differences between men and women. Here,
             we examine one factor that may help explain differing
             interpretations of existing social inequalities: perceptions
             of system stability. System justification theory proposes
             that people are often motivated to rationalize and justify
             the systems within which they operate, legitimizing whatever
             social inequalities are present within them. We draw on
             theories and evidence of rationalization more broadly to
             predict that people should be most likely to legitimize
             inequalities in their systems when they perceive those
             systems as stable and unchanging. In one study, participants
             who witnessed stability, rather than change, in the domain
             of gender equality in business subsequently reported less
             willingness to support programs designed to redress
             inequalities in completely unrelated domains. In a second
             study, exposure to the mere concept of stability, via a
             standard priming procedure, led participants to
             spontaneously produce legitimizing, rather than blaming,
             explanations for existing gender inequality in their
             country. This effect, however, emerged only among
             politically liberal participants. These findings contribute
             to an emerging body of research that aims to identify the
             conditions that promote, and those which prevent,
             system-justifying tendencies. © 2013 John Wiley & Sons,
             Ltd.},
   Doi = {10.1002/ejsp.1949},
   Key = {fds273251}
}

@article{fds273290,
   Author = {Kay, AC and Day, MV and Zanna, MP and Nussbaum, AD},
   Title = {The insidious (and ironic) effects of positive
             stereotypes},
   Journal = {Journal of Experimental Social Psychology},
   Volume = {49},
   Number = {2},
   Pages = {287-291},
   Publisher = {Elsevier BV},
   Year = {2013},
   Month = {March},
   ISSN = {0022-1031},
   url = {http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.jesp.2012.11.003},
   Abstract = {The present research demonstrates that positive stereotypes
             - though often treated as harmless, flattering and innocuous
             - may represent an especially insidious means of promoting
             antiquated beliefs about social groups. Specifically, across
             four studies (and one replication), the authors demonstrate
             that exposure to positive stereotypes towards African
             Americans (i.e., they are superior athletes) are at once
             both especially unlikely to arouse skepticism and emotional
             vigilance while also especially likely to produce antiquated
             and harmful beliefs towards members of the target group
             (compared to both baseline conditions and exposure to
             negative stereotypes), including beliefs in the biological
             (or "natural") underpinnings of group differences and,
             ironically, the application of negative stereotypes. © 2012
             Elsevier Inc.},
   Doi = {10.1016/j.jesp.2012.11.003},
   Key = {fds273290}
}

@article{fds273254,
   Author = {Sullivan, D and Landau, MJ and Kay, AC and Rothschild,
             ZK},
   Title = {Collectivism and the meaning of suffering.},
   Journal = {Journal of Personality and Social Psychology},
   Volume = {103},
   Number = {6},
   Pages = {1023-1039},
   Year = {2012},
   Month = {December},
   ISSN = {0022-3514},
   url = {http://gateway.webofknowledge.com/gateway/Gateway.cgi?GWVersion=2&SrcApp=PARTNER_APP&SrcAuth=LinksAMR&KeyUT=WOS:000311769800008&DestLinkType=FullRecord&DestApp=ALL_WOS&UsrCustomerID=47d3190e77e5a3a53558812f597b0b92},
   Abstract = {People need to understand why an instance of suffering
             occurred and what purpose it might have. One widespread
             account of suffering is a repressive suffering construal
             (RSC): interpreting suffering as occurring because people
             deviate from social norms and as having the purpose of
             reinforcing the social order. Based on the theorizing of
             Emile Durkheim and others, we propose that RSC is associated
             with social morality-the belief that society dictates
             morality-and is encouraged by collectivist (as opposed to
             individualist) sentiments. Study 1 showed that dispositional
             collectivism predicts both social morality and RSC. Studies
             2-4 showed that priming collectivist (vs. individualist)
             self-construal increases RSC of various types of suffering
             and that this effect is mediated by increased social
             morality (Study 4). Study 5 examined behavioral intentions,
             demonstrating that parents primed with a collectivist
             self-construal interpreted children's suffering more
             repressively and showed greater support for corporal
             punishment of children.},
   Doi = {10.1037/a0030382},
   Key = {fds273254}
}

@article{fds273255,
   Author = {Sullivan, D and Landau, MJ and Kay, AC},
   Title = {Toward a comprehensive understanding of existential threat:
             Insights from paul tillich},
   Journal = {Social Cognition},
   Volume = {30},
   Number = {6},
   Pages = {734-757},
   Publisher = {Guilford Publications},
   Year = {2012},
   Month = {December},
   ISSN = {0278-016X},
   url = {http://gateway.webofknowledge.com/gateway/Gateway.cgi?GWVersion=2&SrcApp=PARTNER_APP&SrcAuth=LinksAMR&KeyUT=WOS:000312571100006&DestLinkType=FullRecord&DestApp=ALL_WOS&UsrCustomerID=47d3190e77e5a3a53558812f597b0b92},
   Abstract = {Experimental existential psychology (XXP) empirically
             investigates how people's motives for meaning and personal
             value influence their lives, and how symbolic self-awareness
             undergirds these motives and experienced threats to their
             fulfillment. The authors attempt to synthesize the insights
             that have already accumulated from XXP, and simultaneously
             point to a new direction for this field. Researchers have
             debated whether there is a "core threat" in human
             experience, but the authors propose that a more fruitful
             direction for research is to examine the simultaneous
             independence and interdependence of different existential
             threats. Paul Tillich's (1952) theory of existential threat
             is put forward as one model for understanding how a core
             threat to non-being (mortality) can nevertheless be
             experienced in proximally different forms, in terms of
             anxieties about meaninglessness or condemnation of the self.
             In addition to presenting Tillich's theory, the authors make
             several concrete suggestions for how future research in XXP
             should proceed. © 2012 Guilford Publications,
             Inc.},
   Doi = {10.1521/soco.2012.30.6.734},
   Key = {fds273255}
}

@article{fds273289,
   Author = {Laurin, K and Shariff, AF and Henrich, J and Kay,
             AC},
   Title = {Outsourcing punishment to God: beliefs in divine control
             reduce earthly punishment.},
   Journal = {Proceedings of the Royal Society B: Biological
             Sciences},
   Volume = {279},
   Number = {1741},
   Pages = {3272-3281},
   Year = {2012},
   Month = {August},
   ISSN = {0962-8452},
   url = {http://dx.doi.org/10.1098/rspb.2012.0615},
   Abstract = {The sanctioning of norm-transgressors is a necessary--though
             often costly--task for maintaining a well-functioning
             society. Prior to effective and reliable secular
             institutions for punishment, large-scale societies depended
             on individuals engaging in 'altruistic punishment'--bearing
             the costs of punishment individually, for the benefit of
             society. Evolutionary approaches to religion suggest that
             beliefs in powerful, moralizing Gods, who can distribute
             rewards and punishments, emerged as a way to augment earthly
             punishment in large societies that could not effectively
             monitor norm violations. In five studies, we investigate
             whether such beliefs in God can replace people's motivation
             to engage in altruistic punishment, and their support for
             state-sponsored punishment. Results show that, although
             religiosity generally predicts higher levels of punishment,
             the specific belief in powerful, intervening Gods reduces
             altruistic punishment and support for state-sponsored
             punishment. Moreover, these effects are specifically owing
             to differences in people's perceptions that humans are
             responsible for punishing wrongdoers.},
   Doi = {10.1098/rspb.2012.0615},
   Key = {fds273289}
}

@article{fds273288,
   Author = {Shepherd, S and Kay, AC},
   Title = {On the perpetuation of ignorance: system dependence, system
             justification, and the motivated avoidance of sociopolitical
             information.},
   Journal = {Journal of Personality and Social Psychology},
   Volume = {102},
   Number = {2},
   Pages = {264-280},
   Year = {2012},
   Month = {February},
   ISSN = {0022-3514},
   url = {http://dx.doi.org/10.1037/a0026272},
   Abstract = {How do people cope when they feel uninformed or unable to
             understand important social issues, such as the environment,
             energy concerns, or the economy? Do they seek out
             information, or do they simply ignore the threatening issue
             at hand? One would intuitively expect that a lack of
             knowledge would motivate an increased, unbiased search for
             information, thereby facilitating participation and
             engagement in these issues-especially when they are
             consequential, pressing, and self-relevant. However, there
             appears to be a discrepancy between the importance/self-relevance
             of social issues and people's willingness to engage with and
             learn about them. Leveraging the literature on system
             justification theory (Jost & Banaji, 1994), the authors
             hypothesized that, rather than motivating an increased
             search for information, a lack of knowledge about a specific
             sociopolitical issue will (a) foster feelings of dependence
             on the government, which will (b) increase system
             justification and government trust, which will (c) increase
             desires to avoid learning about the relevant issue when
             information is negative or when information valence is
             unknown. In other words, the authors suggest that
             ignorance-as a function of the system justifying tendencies
             it may activate-may, ironically, breed more ignorance. In
             the contexts of energy, environmental, and economic issues,
             the authors present 5 studies that (a) provide evidence for
             this specific psychological chain (i.e., ignorance about an
             issue → dependence → government trust → avoidance of
             information about that issue); (b) shed light on the role of
             threat and motivation in driving the second and third links
             in this chain; and (c) illustrate the unfortunate
             consequences of this process for individual action in those
             contexts that may need it most.},
   Doi = {10.1037/a0026272},
   Key = {fds273288}
}

@article{fds273297,
   Author = {Laurin, K and Kay, AC and Fitzsimons, GJ},
   Title = {Reactance versus rationalization: divergent responses to
             policies that constrain freedom.},
   Journal = {Psychological Science},
   Volume = {23},
   Number = {2},
   Pages = {205-209},
   Year = {2012},
   Month = {February},
   url = {http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/22241813},
   Abstract = {How do people respond to government policies and work
             environments that place restrictions on their personal
             freedoms? The psychological literature offers two
             contradictory answers to this question. Here, we attempt to
             resolve this apparent discrepancy. Specifically, we identify
             the absoluteness of a restriction as one factor that
             determines how people respond to it. Across two studies,
             participants responded to absolute restrictions (i.e.,
             restrictions that were sure to come into effect) with
             rationalization: They viewed the restrictions more
             favorably, and valued the restricted freedoms less, compared
             with control participants. Participants responded in the
             opposite way to identical restrictions that were described
             as nonabsolute (i.e., as having a small chance of not coming
             into effect): In this case, participants displayed
             reactance, viewing the restrictions less favorably, and
             valuing the restricted freedoms more, compared with control
             participants. We end by discussing future research
             directions.},
   Doi = {10.1177/0956797611429468},
   Key = {fds273297}
}

@article{fds273294,
   Author = {Laurin, K and Kay, AC and Fitzsimons, GM},
   Title = {Divergent effects of activating thoughts of God on
             self-regulation.},
   Journal = {Journal of Personality and Social Psychology},
   Volume = {102},
   Number = {1},
   Pages = {4-21},
   Year = {2012},
   Month = {January},
   ISSN = {0022-3514},
   url = {http://dx.doi.org/10.1037/a0025971},
   Abstract = {Despite the cultural ubiquity of ideas and images related to
             God, relatively little is known about the effects of
             exposure to God representations on behavior. Specific
             depictions of God differ across religions, but common to
             most is that God is (a) an omnipotent, controlling force and
             (b) an omniscient, all-knowing being. Given these 2
             characteristic features, how might exposure to the concept
             of God influence behavior? Leveraging classic and recent
             theorizing on self-regulation and social cognition, we
             predict and test for 2 divergent effects of exposure to
             notions of God on self-regulatory processes. Specifically,
             we show that participants reminded of God (vs. neutral or
             positive concepts) demonstrate both decreased active goal
             pursuit (Studies 1, 2, and 5) and increased temptation
             resistance (Studies 3, 4, and 5). These findings provide the
             first experimental evidence that exposure to God influences
             goal pursuit and suggest that the ever-present cultural
             reminders of God can be both burden and benefit for
             self-regulation.},
   Doi = {10.1037/a0025971},
   Key = {fds273294}
}

@article{fds273287,
   Author = {Kay, AC and Friesen, J},
   Title = {On social stability and social change: Understanding when
             system justification does and does not occur},
   Journal = {Current Directions in Psychological Science},
   Volume = {20},
   Number = {6},
   Pages = {360-364},
   Publisher = {SAGE Publications},
   Year = {2011},
   Month = {December},
   ISSN = {0963-7214},
   url = {http://dx.doi.org/10.1177/0963721411422059},
   Abstract = {More than a decade of research from the perspective of
             system-justification theory (Jost & Banaji, 1994) has
             demonstrated that people engage in motivated psychological
             processes that bolster and support the status quo. We
             propose that this motive is highly contextual: People do not
             justify their social systems at all times but are more
             likely to do so under certain circumstances. We describe
             four contexts in which people are prone to engage in
             system-justifying processes: (a) system threat, (b) system
             dependence, (c) system inescapability, and (d) low personal
             control. We describe how and why, in these contexts, people
             who wish to promote social change might expect resistance.
             © Association for Psychological Science
             2011.},
   Doi = {10.1177/0963721411422059},
   Key = {fds273287}
}

@article{fds273284,
   Author = {Shepherd, S and Kay, AC and Landau, MJ and Keefer,
             LA},
   Title = {Evidence for the specificity of control motivations in
             worldview defense: Distinguishing compensatory control from
             uncertainty management and terror management
             processes},
   Journal = {Journal of Experimental Social Psychology},
   Volume = {47},
   Number = {5},
   Pages = {949-958},
   Publisher = {Elsevier BV},
   Year = {2011},
   Month = {September},
   ISSN = {0022-1031},
   url = {http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.jesp.2011.03.026},
   Abstract = {Research inspired by the compensatory control model (CCM)
             shows that people compensate for personal control threats by
             bolstering aspects of the cultural worldview that afford
             external control. According to the CCM these effects stem
             from the motivation to maintain perceived order, but it is
             alternatively possible that they represent indirect efforts
             to bolster distally related psychological structures
             described by uncertainty management theory (self-relevant
             certainty) and terror management theory (death-transcendence).
             To assess whether compensatory control processes play a
             unique role in worldview defense, we hypothesized that
             personal control threats would increase affirmation of
             cultural constructs that specifically bolster order more so
             than constructs that bolster distally related structures.
             The results of 5 studies provide converging support for this
             hypothesis in the context of attitudes toward diverse
             cultural constructs (Study 1: national culture; Studies 2
             and 3: consumer products; Studies 4a and 4b: political
             candidates). Also supporting hypotheses, uncertainty
             salience and mortality salience elicited greater affirmation
             of identity- and immortality-conferring targets,
             respectively, compared to order-conferring constructs.
             Discussion focuses on the value of different perspectives on
             existential motivation for predicting specific forms of
             worldview defense. © 2011 Elsevier Inc.},
   Doi = {10.1016/j.jesp.2011.03.026},
   Key = {fds273284}
}

@article{fds273295,
   Author = {Banfield, JC and Kay, AC and Cutright, KM and Wu, EC and Fitzsimons,
             GJ},
   Title = {A person by situation account of motivated system
             defense},
   Journal = {Social Psychological and Personality Science},
   Volume = {2},
   Number = {2},
   Pages = {212-219},
   Publisher = {SAGE Publications},
   Year = {2011},
   Month = {August},
   ISSN = {1948-5506},
   url = {http://dx.doi.org/10.1177/1948550610386809},
   Abstract = {Three studies demonstrate how individual differences in
             confidence in the sociopolitical system interact with
             threats that engage the system justification motive to
             produce system defense. Following threat, participants low,
             but not high, in system confidence increasingly defended the
             system, by rejecting system change (Study 1) and preferring
             domestic over international products (Studies 2 and 3).
             These findings contribute to the literature on system
             justification theory in two ways: First, they expand
             scholars' understanding of when and for whom system-level
             threats instigate motivational processes of system defense,
             and, second, they demonstrate that the system justification
             motive is not merely another example of worldview
             verification phenomena but instead involves a specific goal
             to defend the status quo. © The Author(s)
             2011.},
   Doi = {10.1177/1948550610386809},
   Key = {fds273295}
}

@article{fds273285,
   Author = {Day, MV and Kay, AC and Holmes, JG and Napier, JL},
   Title = {System justification and the defense of committed
             relationship ideology.},
   Journal = {Journal of Personality and Social Psychology},
   Volume = {101},
   Number = {2},
   Pages = {291-306},
   Year = {2011},
   Month = {August},
   ISSN = {0022-3514},
   url = {http://dx.doi.org/10.1037/a0023197},
   Abstract = {A consequential ideology in Western society is the
             uncontested belief that a committed relationship is the most
             important adult relationship and that almost all people want
             to marry or seriously couple (DePaulo & Morris, 2005). In
             the present article, we investigated the extent to which the
             system justification motive may contribute to the adoption
             of this ideology. In Studies 1 and 2, we examined whether a
             heightened motive to maintain the status quo would increase
             defense of committed relationship values. In Study 3, we
             examined the reverse association, that is, whether a threat
             to committed relationship ideology would also affect
             sociopolitical system endorsement. As past research has
             found that the justification of political systems depends
             upon how much these systems are perceived as controlling, in
             Study 4 we tested whether the defense of the system of
             committed relationships would also increase when framed as
             controlling. Results from Studies 1-4 were consistent with
             our hypotheses, but only for men. In Study 5, using
             cross-cultural data, we sought to replicate these findings
             correlationally and probe for a cause of the gender effect.
             Results from more than 33,000 respondents indicated a
             relationship (for men) between defense of the sociopolitical
             system and defense of marriage in countries where the
             traditional advantages of men over women were most
             threatened. In Studies 6 and 7, we investigated when this
             gender difference disappears. Results revealed that when we
             measured (Study 6) or manipulated (Study 7) personal
             relationship identity rather than relationship ideology,
             effects also emerge for women.},
   Doi = {10.1037/a0023197},
   Key = {fds273285}
}

@article{fds273282,
   Author = {Laurin, K and Kay, AC and Shepherd, S},
   Title = {Self-stereotyping as a route to system justification},
   Journal = {Social Cognition},
   Volume = {29},
   Number = {3},
   Pages = {360-375},
   Publisher = {Guilford Publications},
   Year = {2011},
   Month = {July},
   ISSN = {0278-016X},
   url = {http://dx.doi.org/10.1521/soco.2011.29.3.360},
   Abstract = {Endorsing complementary stereotypes about others (i.e.,
             stereotypes consisting of a balance of positive and negative
             characteristics) can function to satisfy the need to
             perceive one's social system as fair and balanced. To what
             extent might this also apply to self-perception, or
             self-stereotyping? The present research aimed to investigate
             the links between perceiving oneself in terms of a
             complementary stereotype, and the system justification
             motivation. In one study, we experimentally activated this
             motivation by threatening men's and women's perceptions of
             the fairness of gender relations and examined the impact on
             complementary self-stereotyping. In a second study, we
             manipulated men's and women's self-perceptions either in the
             direction of or away from their gender's complementary
             stereotype, and examined the impact of these
             self-perceptions on their beliefs about system fairness.
             Results support the notion that self-stereotyping is a
             viable strategy for satisfying the system justification
             goal. Implications for theories of the self-concept and the
             maintenance of intergroup inequalities are discussed © 2011
             Guilford Publications, Inc.},
   Doi = {10.1521/soco.2011.29.3.360},
   Key = {fds273282}
}

@article{fds273283,
   Author = {Wheeler, SC and Smeesters, D and Kay, AC},
   Title = {Culture modifies the operation of prime-to-behavior
             effects},
   Journal = {Journal of Experimental Social Psychology},
   Volume = {47},
   Number = {4},
   Pages = {824-829},
   Publisher = {Elsevier BV},
   Year = {2011},
   Month = {July},
   ISSN = {0022-1031},
   url = {http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.jesp.2011.02.018},
   Abstract = {Culture affects the extent to which people focus on other
             people or on the situation in drawing inferences. Building
             on recent research showing that perceptions of others and
             situations can mediate prime-to-behavior effects, we tested
             whether culture would modify both the mechanism and the
             outcome of primed constructs on behavior. Easterners and
             Westerners were primed with competitiveness or
             cooperativeness before playing a social dilemma game with an
             ambiguously or unambiguously competitive player. Results
             indicated that the primes had different effects on the
             social dilemma decisions of Easterners and Westerners and
             that these effects were due to the different consequences
             the primes had for Easterners' and Westerners' perceptions
             of the other player and construals of the situation. © 2011
             Elsevier Inc.},
   Doi = {10.1016/j.jesp.2011.02.018},
   Key = {fds273283}
}

@article{fds273286,
   Author = {Gaucher, D and Friesen, J and Kay, AC},
   Title = {Evidence that gendered wording in job advertisements exists
             and sustains gender inequality.},
   Journal = {Journal of Personality and Social Psychology},
   Volume = {101},
   Number = {1},
   Pages = {109-128},
   Year = {2011},
   Month = {July},
   ISSN = {0022-3514},
   url = {http://dx.doi.org/10.1037/a0022530},
   Abstract = {Social dominance theory (Sidanius & Pratto, 1999) contends
             that institutional-level mechanisms exist that reinforce and
             perpetuate existing group-based inequalities, but very few
             such mechanisms have been empirically demonstrated. We
             propose that gendered wording (i.e., masculine- and
             feminine-themed words, such as those associated with gender
             stereotypes) may be a heretofore unacknowledged,
             institutional-level mechanism of inequality maintenance.
             Employing both archival and experimental analyses, the
             present research demonstrates that gendered wording commonly
             employed in job recruitment materials can maintain gender
             inequality in traditionally male-dominated occupations.
             Studies 1 and 2 demonstrated the existence of subtle but
             systematic wording differences within a randomly sampled set
             of job advertisements. Results indicated that job
             advertisements for male-dominated areas employed greater
             masculine wording (i.e., words associated with male
             stereotypes, such as leader, competitive, dominant) than
             advertisements within female-dominated areas. No difference
             in the presence of feminine wording (i.e., words associated
             with female stereotypes, such as support, understand,
             interpersonal) emerged across male- and female-dominated
             areas. Next, the consequences of highly masculine wording
             were tested across 3 experimental studies. When job
             advertisements were constructed to include more masculine
             than feminine wording, participants perceived more men
             within these occupations (Study 3), and importantly, women
             found these jobs less appealing (Studies 4 and 5). Results
             confirmed that perceptions of belongingness (but not
             perceived skills) mediated the effect of gendered wording on
             job appeal (Study 5). The function of gendered wording in
             maintaining traditional gender divisions, implications for
             gender parity, and theoretical models of inequality are
             discussed.},
   Doi = {10.1037/a0022530},
   Key = {fds273286}
}

@article{fds273296,
   Author = {Cutright, KM and Wu, EC and Banfield, JC and Kay, AC and Fitzsimons,
             GJ},
   Title = {When your world must be defended: Choosing products to
             justify the system},
   Journal = {Journal of Consumer Research},
   Volume = {38},
   Number = {1},
   Pages = {62-77},
   Publisher = {Oxford University Press (OUP)},
   Year = {2011},
   Month = {June},
   ISSN = {0093-5301},
   url = {http://dx.doi.org/10.1086/658469},
   Abstract = {Consumers are often strongly motivated to view themselves as
             part of a legitimate and fair external system. Our research
             focuses on how individuals adopt distinct ways of defending
             their system when it is threatened and, in particular, how
             this is revealed in their consumption choices. We find that
             although individuals differ in how confident they are in the
             legitimacy of their system, they do not differ in their
             motivation to defend the system when it is threatened.
             Instead, they simply adopt different methods of defense.
             Specifically, when an important system is (verbally)
             attacked, individuals who are the least confident in the
             legitimacy of the system seek and appreciate consumption
             choices that allow them to indirectly and subtly defend the
             system. Conversely, individuals who are highly confident in
             the system reject indirect opportunities of defense and seek
             consumption choices that allow them to defend the system in
             direct and explicit ways. © 2010 by JOURNAL OF CONSUMER
             RESEARCH, Inc.},
   Doi = {10.1086/658469},
   Key = {fds273296}
}

@article{fds273293,
   Author = {Laurin, K and Fitzsimons, GM and Kay, AC},
   Title = {Social disadvantage and the self-regulatory function of
             justice beliefs.},
   Journal = {Journal of Personality and Social Psychology},
   Volume = {100},
   Number = {1},
   Pages = {149-171},
   Year = {2011},
   Month = {January},
   ISSN = {0022-3514},
   url = {http://dx.doi.org/10.1037/a0021343},
   Abstract = {Five studies support the hypothesis that beliefs in societal
             fairness offer a self-regulatory benefit for members of
             socially disadvantaged groups. Specifically, members of
             disadvantaged groups are more likely than members of
             advantaged groups to calibrate their pursuit of long-term
             goals to their beliefs about societal fairness. In Study 1,
             low socioeconomic status (SES) undergraduate students who
             believed more strongly in societal fairness showed greater
             intentions to persist in the face of poor performance on a
             midterm examination. In Study 2, low SES participants who
             believed more strongly in fairness reported more willingness
             to invest time and effort to achieve desirable career
             outcomes. In Study 3, ethnic minority participants exposed
             to a manipulation suggesting that fairness conditions in
             their country were improving reported more willingness to
             invest resources in pursuit of long-term goals, relative to
             ethnic minority participants in a control condition. Study 4
             replicated Study 3 using an implicit priming procedure,
             demonstrating that perceptions of the personal relevance of
             societal fairness mediate these effects. Across these 4
             studies, no link between fairness beliefs and
             self-regulation emerged for members of advantaged (high SES,
             ethnic majority) groups. Study 5 contributed evidence from
             the World Values Survey and a representative sample
             (Inglehart, Basañez, Diez-Medrano, Halman, & Luijkx, 2004).
             Respondents reported more motivation to work hard to the
             extent that they believed that rewards were distributed
             fairly; this effect emerged more strongly for members of
             lower SES groups than for members of higher SES groups, as
             indicated by both self-identified social class and
             ethnicity.},
   Doi = {10.1037/a0021343},
   Key = {fds273293}
}

@article{fds273216,
   Author = {Bobocel, DR and Kay, AC and Zanna, MP and Olson, JM},
   Title = {The psychology of justice and legitimacy: The Ontario
             symposium},
   Journal = {The Psychology of Justice and Legitimacy},
   Volume = {11},
   Pages = {1-350},
   Year = {2011},
   url = {http://dx.doi.org/10.4324/9780203837658},
   Abstract = {© 2010 by Taylor and Francis Group, LLC.In response to the
             international turmoil, violence, and increasing ideological
             polarization, social psychological interest in the topics of
             legitimacy and social justice has blossomed considerably.
             Social psychologists have explored the psychological
             underpinnings of people’s reactions to injustice and
             illegitimacy, including the behavioral and psychological
             consequences of the motivation to view individual outcomes
             and governmental systems as just and legitimate.Although
             injustice and illegitimacy are clearly related at conceptual
             and theoretical levels, these two rich literatures are
             rarely integrated. Social justice researchers have focused
             on how people make sense of particular instances of
             injustice, whereas legitimacy researchers have tended to
             focus primarily on people’s reactions to unfair systems of
             intergroup relations.This 11th volume of the Ontario
             Symposium series brings together the work of leading
             researchers in fields of social justice and legitimacy to
             facilitate the cross-pollination and integration of these
             fields. The contributions address broad theoretical issues
             and cutting-edge empirical advances, while illustrating the
             diversity and richness of research in the two fields. By
             uniting these two domains, this volume will stimulate new
             directions in theory and research that seek to explain how
             and why people make sense of injustice at all levels of
             analysis.},
   Doi = {10.4324/9780203837658},
   Key = {fds273216}
}

@article{fds273281,
   Author = {Kay, AC and Shepherd, S and Blatz, CW and Chua, SN and Galinsky,
             AD},
   Title = {For God (or) country: the hydraulic relation between
             government instability and belief in religious sources of
             control.},
   Journal = {Journal of Personality and Social Psychology},
   Volume = {99},
   Number = {5},
   Pages = {725-739},
   Year = {2010},
   Month = {November},
   url = {http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/20954784},
   Abstract = {It has been recently proposed that people can flexibly rely
             on sources of control that are both internal and external to
             the self to satisfy the need to believe that their world is
             under control (i.e., that events do not unfold randomly or
             haphazardly). Consistent with this, past research
             demonstrates that, when personal control is threatened,
             people defend external systems of control, such as God and
             government. This theoretical perspective also suggests that
             belief in God and support for governmental systems, although
             seemingly disparate, will exhibit a hydraulic relationship
             with one another. Using both experimental and longitudinal
             designs in Eastern and Western cultures, the authors
             demonstrate that experimental manipulations or naturally
             occurring events (e.g., electoral instability) that lower
             faith in one of these external systems (e.g., the
             government) lead to subsequent increases in faith in the
             other (e.g., God). In addition, mediation and moderation
             analyses suggest that specific concerns with order and
             structure underlie these hydraulic effects. Implications for
             the psychological, sociocultural, and sociopolitical
             underpinnings of religious faith, as well as system
             justification theory, are discussed.},
   Doi = {10.1037/a0021140},
   Key = {fds273281}
}

@article{fds273292,
   Author = {Anderson, JE and Kay, AC and Fitzsimons, GM},
   Title = {In search of the silver lining: the justice motive fosters
             perceptions of benefits in the later lives of tragedy
             victims.},
   Journal = {Psychological Science},
   Volume = {21},
   Number = {11},
   Pages = {1599-1604},
   Year = {2010},
   Month = {November},
   ISSN = {1467-9280},
   url = {http://dx.doi.org/10.1177/0956797610386620},
   Abstract = {Past research has demonstrated that people's need to
             perceive the world as fair and just leads them to blame and
             derogate victims of tragedy. The research reported here
             shows that a positive reaction--bestowing additional meaning
             on the lives of individuals who have suffered--can also
             serve people's need to believe that the world is just. In
             two studies, participants whose justice motive was
             temporarily heightened or who strongly endorsed the belief
             that reward and punishment are fairly distributed in the
             world perceived more meaning and enjoyment in the life of
             someone who had experienced a tragedy than in the life of
             someone who had not experienced tragedy, but this pattern
             was not found for participants whose justice motive was not
             heightened or who did not strongly endorse a justice belief.
             These results suggest that being motivated to see the world
             as just--a motivation traditionally associated with victim
             derogation--also leads people to perceive a "silver lining"
             to tragic events.},
   Doi = {10.1177/0956797610386620},
   Key = {fds273292}
}

@article{fds273280,
   Author = {Laurin, K and Shepherd, S and Kay, AC},
   Title = {Restricted emigration, system inescapability, and defense of
             the status quo: system-justifying consequences of restricted
             exit opportunities.},
   Journal = {Psychological Science},
   Volume = {21},
   Number = {8},
   Pages = {1075-1082},
   Year = {2010},
   Month = {August},
   ISSN = {0956-7976},
   url = {http://dx.doi.org/10.1177/0956797610375448},
   Abstract = {The freedom to emigrate at will from a geographic location
             is an internationally recognized human right. However, this
             right is systematically violated by restrictive migration
             policies. In three experiments, we explored the
             psychological consequences of violating the right to
             mobility. Our results suggest that, ironically, restricted
             freedom of movement can lead to increased system
             justification (i.e., increased support of the status quo).
             In Study 1, we found that participants who read that their
             country was difficult to leave became stronger defenders of
             their system's legitimacy than before, even in domains
             unrelated to emigration policy (e.g., gender relations). In
             Study 2, we demonstrated that this increased system defense
             was the result of a motivated process. In Study 3, we
             broadened the scope of this psychological phenomenon by
             conceptually replicating it using a different system
             (participants' university) and measure of system defense.
             The importance of these two findings-the first experimental
             demonstration of the psychological consequences of
             restrictive emigration policies and the introduction of a
             novel psychological phenomenon-is discussed.},
   Doi = {10.1177/0956797610375448},
   Key = {fds273280}
}

@article{fds273279,
   Author = {Callan, MJ and Kay, AC and Olson, JM and Brar, N and Whitefield,
             N},
   Title = {The effects of priming legal concepts on perceived trust and
             competitiveness, self-interested attitudes, and competitive
             behavior},
   Journal = {Journal of Experimental Social Psychology},
   Volume = {46},
   Number = {2},
   Pages = {325-335},
   Publisher = {Elsevier BV},
   Year = {2010},
   Month = {March},
   ISSN = {0022-1031},
   url = {http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.jesp.2009.12.005},
   Abstract = {Socio-legal scholars have suggested that, as a ubiquitous
             social system, law shapes social reality and provides
             interpretive frameworks for social relations. Across five
             studies, we tested the idea that the law shapes social
             reality by fostering the assumptions that people are
             self-interested, untrustworthy, and competitive. In Studies
             1 and 2, we found that people implicitly associated legal
             concepts with competitiveness. Studies 3-5 showed that these
             associations had implications for social perceptions,
             self-interested attitudes, and competitive behavior. After
             being primed with constructs related to the law,
             participants perceived social actors as less trustworthy and
             the situation as more competitive (Study 3), became more
             against a political issue when it conflicted with their
             normative self-interest (Study 4), and made more competitive
             choices during a prisoner's dilemma game when they believed
             that social relations were basically zero-sum in nature
             (Study 5). The implications and applications of these
             results are discussed. © 2009 Elsevier Inc. All rights
             reserved.},
   Doi = {10.1016/j.jesp.2009.12.005},
   Key = {fds273279}
}

@article{fds273277,
   Author = {Kay, AC and Moscovitch, DA and Laurin, K},
   Title = {Randomness, attributions of arousal, and belief in
             god.},
   Journal = {Psychological Science},
   Volume = {21},
   Number = {2},
   Pages = {216-218},
   Year = {2010},
   Month = {February},
   ISSN = {0956-7976},
   url = {http://dx.doi.org/10.1177/0956797609357750},
   Doi = {10.1177/0956797609357750},
   Key = {fds273277}
}

@article{fds273278,
   Author = {Kay, AC and Gaucher, D and McGregor, I and Nash, K},
   Title = {Religious belief as compensatory control.},
   Journal = {Personality and Social Psychology Review : an Official
             Journal of the Society for Personality and Social
             Psychology, Inc},
   Volume = {14},
   Number = {1},
   Pages = {37-48},
   Year = {2010},
   Month = {February},
   ISSN = {1088-8683},
   url = {http://dx.doi.org/10.1177/1088868309353750},
   Abstract = {The authors review experimental evidence that religious
             conviction can be a defensive source of compensatory control
             when personal or external sources of control are low. They
             show evidence that (a) belief in religious deities and
             secular institutions can serve as external forms of control
             that can compensate for manipulations that lower personal
             control and (b) religious conviction can also serve as
             compensatory personal control after experimental
             manipulations that lower other forms of personal or external
             control. The authors review dispositional factors that
             differentially orient individuals toward external or
             personal varieties of compensatory control and conclude that
             compensatory religious conviction can be a flexible source
             of personal and external control for relief from the anxiety
             associated with random and uncertain experiences.},
   Doi = {10.1177/1088868309353750},
   Key = {fds273278}
}

@article{fds273275,
   Author = {Gaucher, D and Hafer, CL and Kay, AC and Davidenko,
             N},
   Title = {Compensatory rationalizations and the resolution of everyday
             undeserved outcomes.},
   Journal = {Personality & Social Psychology Bulletin},
   Volume = {36},
   Number = {1},
   Pages = {109-118},
   Year = {2010},
   Month = {January},
   ISSN = {0146-1672},
   url = {http://dx.doi.org/10.1177/0146167209351701},
   Abstract = {People prefer to perceive the world as just; however, the
             everyday experience of undeserved events challenges this
             perception.The authors suggest that one way people
             rationalize these daily experiences of unfairness is by
             means of a compensatory bias. People make undeserved events
             more palatable by endorsing the notion that outcomes
             naturally balance out in the end--good, yet undeserved,
             outcomes will balance out bad outcomes, and bad undeserved
             outcomes will balance out good outcomes.The authors propose
             that compensatory biases manifest in people's interpretive
             processes (Study 1) and memory (Study 2). Furthermore, they
             provide evidence that people have a natural tendency to
             anticipate compensatory outcomes in the future, which,
             ironically, might lead them to perceive a current situation
             as relatively more fair (Study 3).These studies highlight an
             understudied means of justifying unfairness and elucidate
             the justice motive's power to affect people's construal of
             their social world.},
   Doi = {10.1177/0146167209351701},
   Key = {fds273275}
}

@article{fds273276,
   Author = {Smeesters, D and Wheeler, SC and Kay, AC},
   Title = {Chapter Five: Indirect prime-to-behavior effects: The role
             of perceptions of the self, others, and situations in
             connecting primed constructs to social behavior},
   Journal = {Advances in Experimental Social Psychology},
   Volume = {42},
   Pages = {259-317},
   Publisher = {Elsevier},
   Year = {2010},
   Month = {January},
   ISSN = {0065-2601},
   url = {http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/S0065-2601(10)42005-5},
   Abstract = {For more than a decade, researchers have convincingly shown
             that people's social behavior can be affected by primed
             constructs without people having any awareness of their
             influence. Earlier research proposed direct priming accounts
             for these effects, suggesting that primed constructs exert
             their effect on behavior in a relatively direct fashion
             without an intervening role for perceptual processes. In
             this chapter, we review evidence in favor of an indirect
             priming account for behavioral priming effects. In these
             indirect priming effects, a primed construct affects
             behavior via shifts in perceptions of a perceptual target.
             We review three types of indirect priming mechanisms: a
             self-perception, person-perception, and situation-perception
             mechanism. We also present various moderators that affect
             the direction and magnitude of each of the indirect priming
             effects. In addition, we identify factors, related to the
             attentional focus of the prime recipient, that indicate when
             each of the different mechanisms operates. Understanding the
             role of perceptual processes in the prime-to-behavior
             pathway can unravel more mysteries about the rich and
             complex nature of social behavior. © 2010 Elsevier
             Inc.},
   Doi = {10.1016/S0065-2601(10)42005-5},
   Key = {fds273276}
}

@article{fds273268,
   Author = {Kay, AC and Whitson, JA and Gaucher, D and Galinsky,
             AD},
   Title = {Compensatory control: Achieving order through the mind, our
             institutions, and the heavens},
   Journal = {Current Directions in Psychological Science},
   Volume = {18},
   Number = {5},
   Pages = {264-268},
   Publisher = {SAGE Publications},
   Year = {2009},
   Month = {December},
   ISSN = {0963-7214},
   url = {http://dx.doi.org/10.1111/j.1467-8721.2009.01649.x},
   Abstract = {We propose that people protect the belief in a controlled,
             nonrandom world by imbuing their social, physical, and
             metaphysical environments with order and structure when
             their sense of personal control is threatened. We
             demonstrate that when personal control is threatened, people
             can preserve a sense of order by (a) perceiving patterns in
             noise or adhering to superstitions and conspiracies, (b)
             defending the legitimacy of the sociopolitical institutions
             that offer control, or (c) believing in an interventionist
             God. We also present evidence that these processes of
             compensatory control help people cope with the anxiety and
             discomfort that lacking personal control fuels, that it is
             lack of personal control specifically and not general threat
             or negativity that drives these processes, and that these
             various forms of compensatory control are ultimately
             substitutable for one another. Our model of compensatory
             control offers insight into a wide variety of phenomena,
             from prejudice to the idiosyncratic rituals of professional
             athletes to societal rituals around weddings, graduations,
             and funerals. © 2009 Association for Psychological
             Science.},
   Doi = {10.1111/j.1467-8721.2009.01649.x},
   Key = {fds273268}
}

@article{fds273273,
   Author = {Kay, AC and Gaucher, D and Peach, JM and Laurin, K and Friesen, J and Zanna, MP and Spencer, SJ},
   Title = {Inequality, discrimination, and the power of the status quo:
             Direct evidence for a motivation to see the way things are
             as the way they should be.},
   Journal = {Journal of Personality and Social Psychology},
   Volume = {97},
   Number = {3},
   Pages = {421-434},
   Year = {2009},
   Month = {September},
   ISSN = {0022-3514},
   url = {http://dx.doi.org/10.1037/a0015997},
   Abstract = {How powerful is the status quo in determining people's
             social ideals? The authors propose (a) that people engage in
             injunctification, that is, a motivated tendency to construe
             the current status quo as the most desirable and reasonable
             state of affairs (i.e., as the most representative of how
             things should be); (b) that this tendency is driven, at
             least in part, by people's desire to justify their
             sociopolitical systems; and (c) that injunctification has
             profound implications for the maintenance of inequality and
             societal change. Four studies, across a variety of domains,
             provided supportive evidence. When the motivation to justify
             the sociopolitical system was experimentally heightened,
             participants injunctified extant (a) political power (Study
             1), (b) public funding policies (Study 2), and (c) unequal
             gender demographics in the political and business spheres
             (Studies 3 and 4, respectively). It was also demonstrated
             that this motivated phenomenon increased derogation of those
             who act counter to the status quo (Study 4). Theoretical
             implications for system justification theory, stereotype
             formation, affirmative action, and the maintenance of
             inequality are discussed.},
   Doi = {10.1037/a0015997},
   Key = {fds273273}
}

@article{fds273272,
   Author = {Callan, MJ and Kay, AC and Davidenko, N and Ellard,
             JH},
   Title = {The effects of justice motivation on memory for self- and
             other-relevant events},
   Journal = {Journal of Experimental Social Psychology},
   Volume = {45},
   Number = {4},
   Pages = {614-623},
   Publisher = {Elsevier BV},
   Year = {2009},
   Month = {July},
   ISSN = {0022-1031},
   url = {http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.jesp.2009.02.013},
   Abstract = {We examined whether people might distort and selectively
             remember the past in ways that enable them to sustain a
             belief in a just world (BJW; Lerner, M. J. (1980). The
             belief in a just world: A fundamental delusion. New York:
             Plenum Press). In Study 1, recall of a lottery prize
             reflected participants' justice concerns, such that the
             average lottery amount recalled was lowest when a "bad"
             versus "good" person won. In Study 2, an unrelated
             experience of just world threat (versus affirmation)
             enhanced biased recall of the lottery prize when the winner
             was undeserving. In Study 3, participants who experienced a
             fortuitous bad break selectively remembered more bad deeds
             from their recent past, whereas participants who experienced
             a good break selectively remembered more good deeds. Study 4
             demonstrates that such selective memory biases specifically
             serve to portray chance outcomes as more fair. Taken
             together, these findings offer support for the notion that
             reconstructing and selectively recalling the past can serve
             to sustain a BJW. © 2009 Elsevier Inc. All rights
             reserved.},
   Doi = {10.1016/j.jesp.2009.02.013},
   Key = {fds273272}
}

@article{fds273274,
   Author = {Bryan, CJ and Dweck, CS and Ross, L and Kay, AC and Mislavsky,
             NO},
   Title = {Political mindset: Effects of schema priming on
             liberal-conservative political positions},
   Journal = {Journal of Experimental Social Psychology},
   Volume = {45},
   Number = {4},
   Pages = {890-895},
   Publisher = {Elsevier BV},
   Year = {2009},
   Month = {July},
   ISSN = {0022-1031},
   url = {http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.jesp.2009.04.007},
   Abstract = {Although stable factors play an important role in
             determining people's political positions, most Americans
             also hold a mix of values and beliefs some congruent with
             political conservatism and some congruent with political
             liberalism. To investigate this more dynamic component of
             political thinking, two studies manipulated the relative
             salience of schemas about personal merit vs. good fortune as
             explanations for success in life. In Study 1, students at a
             highly selective university were asked to explain their
             academic success focusing either on the role of hard work,
             self-discipline and wise decision-making (Personal Merit
             condition) or that of chance, opportunity, and help from
             others (Good Fortune condition). In Study 2, personal merit
             vs. good fortune was primed through prior exposure to
             relevant questionnaire items. In both studies, participants
             in the Good Fortune condition subsequently indicated more
             support for liberal policies than did those in the Personal
             Merit condition. © 2009 Elsevier Inc. All rights
             reserved.},
   Doi = {10.1016/j.jesp.2009.04.007},
   Key = {fds273274}
}

@article{fds273214,
   Author = {Jost, JT and Kay, AC and Thorisdottir, H},
   Title = {Social and Psychological Bases of Ideology and System
             Justification},
   Journal = {Social and Psychological Bases of Ideology and System
             Justification},
   Pages = {1-552},
   Publisher = {Oxford University Press},
   Year = {2009},
   Month = {May},
   url = {http://dx.doi.org/10.1093/acprof:oso/9780195320916.001.0001},
   Abstract = {© 2009 by Oxford University Press, Inc. All rights
             reserved. This volume both reflects and exemplifies the
             recent resurgence of interest in the social and
             psychological characteristics and processes that give rise
             to ideological forms. Ideology is an elusive, multifaceted
             construct that can usefully be analyzed in terms of
             "top-down" processes related to the social construction and
             dissemination of ideology, as well as to "bottom-up"
             processes, including dispositional and situational factors,
             that make certain ideological outcomes more likely than
             others. The twenty chapters of this volume focus on the
             cognitive and motivational antecedents and consequences of
             adopting specific ideologies, the functions served by those
             ideologies, and the myriad ways in which people accept and
             justify (versus reject) aspects of the social and political
             worlds they inhabit. Current challenges and future
             directions for the study of ideology and system
             justification are also discussed in several chapters. The
             volume represents a wide variety of research traditions
             bearing on the social and psychological bases of ideology
             and system justification. These traditions include (a) the
             study of attitudes, social cognition, and information
             processing at both conscious and nonconscious levels of
             awareness, (b) theories of motivated reasoning and
             goal-directed cognition, (c) research on personality and
             dispositional correlates of political orientation, (d) work
             on social justice and the origins of moral values, (e) the
             myriad ways in which social and political opinions are
             shaped by local situations and environments, and (f) studies
             of stereotyping, prejudice, and the ideological correlates
             of intergroup attitudes.},
   Doi = {10.1093/acprof:oso/9780195320916.001.0001},
   Key = {fds273214}
}

@article{fds273215,
   Author = {Kay, AC and Zanna, MP},
   Title = {A Contextual Analysis of the System Justification Motive and
             Its Societal Consequences},
   Pages = {158-182},
   Publisher = {Oxford University Press},
   Year = {2009},
   Month = {May},
   url = {http://dx.doi.org/10.1093/acprof:oso/9780195320916.003.007},
   Abstract = {© 2009 by Oxford University Press, Inc. All rights
             reserved. This chapter reviews recent theory and empirical
             evidence demonstrating the effects of the system
             justification motive on consequential social and
             psychological phenomena, as well as the conditions under
             which these effects are likely to be most pronounced. A
             review is presented of the theory and evidence demonstrating
             three conditions that increase the activation of the system
             justification motive: system threat, perceived system
             inevitability, and perceptions of personal and system
             control. A description is made of how, in these conditions,
             the system justification motive manifests itself in
             processes of explicit system defense, interpersonal and
             intergroup perception, and resistance to social change.
             Throughout, the emphasis is on the contextual nature of
             these effects, as well as their consequences for the
             maintenance of social inequality.},
   Doi = {10.1093/acprof:oso/9780195320916.003.007},
   Key = {fds273215}
}

@article{fds273271,
   Author = {Kay, AC and Czapliński, S and Jost, JT},
   Title = {Left-right ideological differences in system Justification
             following exposure to complementary versus noncomplementary
             stereotype exemplars},
   Journal = {European Journal of Social Psychology},
   Volume = {39},
   Number = {2},
   Pages = {290-298},
   Publisher = {WILEY},
   Year = {2009},
   Month = {March},
   ISSN = {0046-2772},
   url = {http://dx.doi.org/10.1002/ejsp.500},
   Abstract = {The capacity for victim-derogating stereotypes and
             attributions to justify social inequality and maintain the
             status quo is well known among social scientists and other
             observers. Research conducted from the perspective of system
             justification theory suggests that an alternative to
             derogation is to justify inequality through the use of
             complementary stereotypes that ascribe compensating benefits
             and burdens to disadvantaged and advantaged groups,
             respectively. In two experimental studies conducted in
             Poland we investigated the hypothesis that preferences for
             these two routes to system justification would depend upon
             one's political orientation. That is, we predicted that the
             system-justifying potential of complementary versus
             noncomplementary stereotype exemplars would be moderated by
             individual differences in left-right ideology, such that
             left-wingers would exhibit stronger support for the societal
             status quo following exposure to complementary (e.g., "poor
             but happy," "rich but miserable") representations, whereas
             right-wingers would exhibit stronger support for the status
             quo following exposure to noncomplementary (e.g., "poor and
             dishonest," "rich and honest") representations. Results were
             supportive of these predictions. Implications for theory and
             practice concerning stereotyping, ideology, and system
             justification are discussed. ©2008 John Wiley & Sons,
             Ltd.},
   Doi = {10.1002/ejsp.500},
   Key = {fds273271}
}

@article{fds273270,
   Author = {Smeesters, D and Wheeler, SC and Kay, AC},
   Title = {The role of interpersonal perceptions in the
             prime-to-behavior pathway.},
   Journal = {Journal of Personality and Social Psychology},
   Volume = {96},
   Number = {2},
   Pages = {395-414},
   Year = {2009},
   Month = {February},
   ISSN = {0022-3514},
   url = {http://dx.doi.org/10.1037/a0012959},
   Abstract = {The present research suggests that biased interpersonal
             perceptions can mediate prime-to-behavior effects and
             introduces a new moderator for when such mediation will
             occur. Across 5 experiments, the authors provide evidence
             that priming effects on behavior in interpersonal contexts
             are mediated by social perceptions, but only when
             participants are focused on the other person. These effects
             occur when other-focus is primed (Experiment 1), when
             other-focus is high owing to the decision-making situation
             (Experiment 2), and when other-focus is dispositionally high
             (Experiment 3). Experiments 4 and 5 bring additional support
             for a biased perception account by ruling out an alternative
             behavior-perception link and showing that other-focus can
             moderate not only the mediating mechanism of
             prime-to-behavior effects but also the behavioral effects
             themselves. The implications of these results for increasing
             understanding of behavioral priming effects in rich social
             contexts are discussed.},
   Doi = {10.1037/a0012959},
   Key = {fds273270}
}

@article{fds273269,
   Author = {Laurin, K and Kay, AC and Moscovitch, DA},
   Title = {On the belief in God: Towards an understanding of the
             emotional substrates of compensatory control},
   Journal = {Journal of Experimental Social Psychology},
   Volume = {44},
   Number = {6},
   Pages = {1559-1562},
   Publisher = {Elsevier BV},
   Year = {2008},
   Month = {November},
   ISSN = {0022-1031},
   url = {http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.jesp.2008.07.007},
   Abstract = {We suggest that beliefs in a controlling God originate, at
             least in part, from the desire to avoid the emotionally
             uncomfortable experience of perceiving the world as random
             and chaotic. Forty-seven participants engaged in an
             anxiety-provoking visualization procedure. For half, the
             procedure included a manipulation designed to temporarily
             lower beliefs in personal control. As predicted, it was only
             among those participants whose sense of personal control was
             threatened-i.e., participants in need of an alternate means
             for protecting their belief in a non-random world-that
             subjective anxiety led to increased subsequent beliefs in
             the existence of a controlling God. Wide-ranging
             implications are discussed. © 2008 Elsevier Inc. All rights
             reserved.},
   Doi = {10.1016/j.jesp.2008.07.007},
   Key = {fds273269}
}

@article{fds273267,
   Author = {Kay, AC and Gaucher, D and Napier, JL and Callan, MJ and Laurin,
             K},
   Title = {God and the government: testing a compensatory control
             mechanism for the support of external systems.},
   Journal = {Journal of Personality and Social Psychology},
   Volume = {95},
   Number = {1},
   Pages = {18-35},
   Year = {2008},
   Month = {July},
   ISSN = {0022-3514},
   url = {http://dx.doi.org/10.1037/0022-3514.95.1.18},
   Abstract = {The authors propose that the high levels of support often
             observed for governmental and religious systems can be
             explained, in part, as a means of coping with the threat
             posed by chronically or situationally fluctuating levels of
             perceived personal control. Three experiments demonstrated a
             causal relation between lowered perceptions of personal
             control and the defense of external systems, including
             increased beliefs in the existence of a controlling God
             (Studies 1 and 2) and defense of the overarching
             socio-political system (Study 4). A 4th experiment (Study 5)
             showed the converse to be true: A challenge to the
             usefulness of external systems of control led to increased
             illusory perceptions of personal control. In addition, a
             cross-national data set demonstrated that lower levels of
             personal control are associated with higher support for
             governmental control (across 67 nations; Study 3). Each
             study identified theoretically consistent moderators and
             mediators of these effects. The implications of these
             results for understanding why a high percentage of the
             population believes in the existence of God, and why people
             so often endorse and justify their socio-political systems,
             are discussed.},
   Doi = {10.1037/0022-3514.95.1.18},
   Key = {fds273267}
}

@article{fds273266,
   Author = {Kay, AC and Wheeler, SC and Smeesters, D},
   Title = {The situated person: Effects of construct accessibility on
             situation construals and interpersonal perception},
   Journal = {Journal of Experimental Social Psychology},
   Volume = {44},
   Number = {2},
   Pages = {275-291},
   Publisher = {Elsevier BV},
   Year = {2008},
   Month = {March},
   ISSN = {0022-1031},
   url = {http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.jesp.2007.05.005},
   Abstract = {Three studies examined the interrelationship between primed
             constructs, situation construal, and person perception.
             Previous research on priming and person perception has
             generally neglected the situational context. We predicted
             that when rich situational information is included, primed
             constructs can lead to assimilation effects on situation
             construals, which can in turn lead to contrast effects in
             person perceptions. Study 1 demonstrated that when situation
             information is included in the experimental context, primes
             lead to contrast in person perceptions. Study 2, employing a
             subliminal methodology, demonstrated that these effects
             could not be accounted for via previous explanations of
             contrast effects, such as correction-based mechanisms, that
             require overt recognition of the priming stimuli by the
             participants. Study 3 demonstrated that the contrastive
             effects of the priming stimuli on person perception obtained
             in Studies 1 and 2 are in fact due to the intervening
             assimilative effects of the priming stimuli on situation
             construal-that is, the primed constructs led to contrast
             effects on perceptions of the actor via their assimilative
             effects on perceptions of the situation in which that actor
             was embedded. Additionally, moderator variables demonstrated
             that this effect is most pronounced when the target actor's
             behavior is described as relatively unambiguous or situation
             focus is increased. © 2007 Elsevier Inc. All rights
             reserved.},
   Doi = {10.1016/j.jesp.2007.05.005},
   Key = {fds273266}
}

@article{fds273265,
   Author = {Lau, GP and Kay, AC and Spencer, SJ},
   Title = {Loving those who justify inequality: the effects of system
             threat on attraction to women who embody benevolent sexist
             ideals.},
   Journal = {Psychological Science},
   Volume = {19},
   Number = {1},
   Pages = {20-21},
   Year = {2008},
   Month = {January},
   ISSN = {0956-7976},
   url = {http://dx.doi.org/10.1111/j.1467-9280.2008.02040.x},
   Doi = {10.1111/j.1467-9280.2008.02040.x},
   Key = {fds273265}
}

@article{fds273264,
   Author = {Kay, AC and Jost, JT and Mandisodza, AN and Sherman, SJ and Petrocelli,
             JV and Johnson, AL},
   Title = {Panglossian Ideology In The Service Of System Justification:
             How Complementary Stereotypes Help Us To Rationalize
             Inequality},
   Journal = {Advances in Experimental Social Psychology},
   Volume = {39},
   Pages = {305-358},
   Publisher = {Elsevier},
   Year = {2007},
   Month = {April},
   ISSN = {0065-2601},
   url = {http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/S0065-2601(06)39006-5},
   Abstract = {According to system justification theory, there is a general
             social psychological tendency to rationalize the status quo,
             that is, to see it as good, fair, legitimate, and desirable.
             This tendency is reminiscent of the dispositional outlook of
             Voltaire's famous character, Dr. Pangloss, who believed that
             he was "living in the best of all possible worlds." One of
             the means by which people idealize existing social
             arrangements is by relying on complementary (or
             compensatory) stereotypes, which ascribe compensating
             virtues to the disadvantaged and corresponding vices to the
             advantaged, thereby creating an "illusion of equality." In
             this chapter, we summarize a program of research
             demonstrating that (1) incidental exposure to complementary
             gender and status stereotypes leads people to show enhanced
             ideological support for the status quo and (2) when the
             legitimacy or stability of the system is threatened, people
             often respond by using complementary stereotypes to bolster
             the system. We also show that (noncomplementary)
             victim-blaming and (complementary) victim-enhancement
             represent alternate routes to system justification. In
             addition, we consider a number of situational and
             dispositional moderating variables that affect the use and
             effectiveness of complementary and noncomplementary
             representations, and we discuss the broader implications of
             stereotyping and other forms of rationalization that are
             adopted in the service of system justification. From time to
             time, Pangloss would say to Candide:There is a chain of
             events in this best of all possible worlds; for if you had
             not been turned out of a beautiful mansion at the point of a
             jackboot for love of Lady Cunégonde, if you had not been
             clamped into the Inquisition, if you had not wandered about
             America on foot, and had not struck the Baron with your
             sword, and lost all those sheep you brought from Eldorado,
             you would not be here eating candied fruit and pistachio
             nuts. "That's true enough," said Candide; "but we must go
             and work in the garden."-Voltaire, 1758/1947, Candide or
             Optimism, p. 144. © 2006 Elsevier Inc. All rights
             reserved.},
   Doi = {10.1016/S0065-2601(06)39006-5},
   Key = {fds273264}
}

@article{fds273262,
   Author = {Jost, JT and Kay, AC},
   Title = {Exposure to benevolent sexism and complementary gender
             stereotypes: consequences for specific and diffuse forms of
             system justification.},
   Journal = {Journal of Personality and Social Psychology},
   Volume = {88},
   Number = {3},
   Pages = {498-509},
   Year = {2005},
   Month = {March},
   ISSN = {0022-3514},
   url = {http://dx.doi.org/10.1037/0022-3514.88.3.498},
   Abstract = {Many have suggested that complementary gender stereotypes of
             men as agentic (but not communal) and women as communal (but
             not agentic) serve to increase system justification, but
             direct experimental support has been lacking. The authors
             exposed people to specific types of gender-related beliefs
             and subsequently asked them to complete measures of
             gender-specific or diffuse system justification. In Studies
             1 and 2, activating (a) communal or complementary (communal
             + agentic) gender stereotypes or (b) benevolent or
             complementary (benevolent + hostile) sexist items increased
             support for the status quo among women. In Study 3,
             activating stereotypes of men as agentic also increased
             system justification among men and women, but only when
             women's characteristics were associated with higher status.
             Results suggest that complementary stereotypes
             psychologically offset the one-sided advantage of any single
             group and contribute to an image of society in which
             everyone benefits through a balanced dispersion of
             benefits.},
   Doi = {10.1037/0022-3514.88.3.498},
   Key = {fds273262}
}

@article{fds273263,
   Author = {Kay, AC and Jost, JT and Young, S},
   Title = {Victim derogation and victim enhancement as alternate routes
             to system justification.},
   Journal = {Psychological Science},
   Volume = {16},
   Number = {3},
   Pages = {240-246},
   Year = {2005},
   Month = {March},
   ISSN = {0956-7976},
   url = {http://dx.doi.org/10.1111/j.0956-7976.2005.00810.x},
   Abstract = {Abstract-Numerous studies have documented the potential for
             victim-blaming attributions to justify the status quo.
             Recent work suggests that complementary, victim-enhancing
             stereotypes may also increase support for existing social
             arrangements. We seek to reconcile these seemingly
             contradictory findings by proposing that victim derogation
             and victim enhancement are alternate routes to system
             justification, with the preferred route depending on the
             perception of a causal link between trait and outcome.
             Derogating "losers" (and lionizing "winners") on traits
             (e.g., intelligence) that are causally related to outcomes
             (e.g., wealth vs. poverty) serves to increase system
             justification, as does compensating "losers" (and
             downgrading "winners") on traits (e.g., physical
             attractiveness) that are causally unrelated to those
             outcomes. We provide converging evidence using system-threat
             and stereotype-activation paradigms.},
   Doi = {10.1111/j.0956-7976.2005.00810.x},
   Key = {fds273263}
}

@article{fds273261,
   Author = {Kay, AC and Wheeler, SC and Bargh, JA and Ross, L},
   Title = {Material priming: The influence of mundane physical objects
             on situational construal and competitive behavioral
             choice},
   Journal = {Organizational Behavior and Human Decision
             Processes},
   Volume = {95},
   Number = {1},
   Pages = {83-96},
   Publisher = {Elsevier BV},
   Year = {2004},
   Month = {September},
   url = {http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.obhdp.2004.06.003},
   Abstract = {Inspired by potential theoretical linkages between
             nonconscious priming work in psychology and the
             anthropological emphasis on the impact of material culture,
             five studies were conducted to investigate the role of
             implicitly presented material objects and automatic
             processes in interpersonal and organizational contexts.
             These studies showed that exposure to objects common to the
             domain of business (e.g., boardroom tables and briefcases)
             increased the cognitive accessibility of the construct of
             competition (Study 1), the likelihood that an ambiguous
             social interaction would be perceived as less cooperative
             (Study 2), and the amount of money that participants
             proposed to retain for themselves in the "Ultimatum Game"
             (Studies 3 and 4). A fifth study, in which the ambiguity of
             the governing social situation was manipulated, demonstrated
             that these types of effects are most likely to occur in
             contexts that are ambiguous and/or lacking in explicit
             normative demands. The importance of these
             situation-specific "material priming" effects (all of which
             occurred without the participants' awareness of the relevant
             influence) to judgment and behavioral choice in specific
             contexts, as well as to the fostering of less competitive
             organizational settings, is discussed. © 2004 Elsevier Inc.
             All rights reserved.},
   Doi = {10.1016/j.obhdp.2004.06.003},
   Key = {fds273261}
}

@article{fds273291,
   Author = {Fitzsimons, GM and Kay, AC},
   Title = {Language and interpersonal cognition: causal effects of
             variations in pronoun usage on perceptions of
             closeness.},
   Journal = {Personality & Social Psychology Bulletin},
   Volume = {30},
   Number = {5},
   Pages = {547-557},
   Year = {2004},
   Month = {May},
   ISSN = {0146-1672},
   url = {http://dx.doi.org/10.1177/0146167203262852},
   Abstract = {Four studies examined the hypothesis that subtle language
             variations can have a causal impact on perceptions of
             relationships. In interpersonal interactions, language can
             function implicitly to reflect, perpetuate, and communicate
             relationship perceptions. Previous research has shown that
             interpersonal closeness and plural pronoun use are
             correlated; the current research demonstrates that
             manipulating pronoun use can lead people to perceive their
             own and other relationships as closer and higher in quality.
             In Study 1, participants who read about a relationship that
             was described using the pronoun we versus she and I
             perceived the relationship to be closer and of higher
             quality. Study 2 showed that pronoun variations similarly
             affected perceptions of participants' own ongoing
             relationships; Study 3 showed similar effects for
             perceptions of an actual interpersonal interaction. Study 4
             examined potential mechanisms of this effect.},
   Doi = {10.1177/0146167203262852},
   Key = {fds273291}
}

@article{fds273260,
   Author = {Kay, AC and Jost, JT},
   Title = {Complementary justice: effects of "poor but happy" and "poor
             but honest" stereotype exemplars on system justification and
             implicit activation of the justice motive.},
   Journal = {Journal of Personality and Social Psychology},
   Volume = {85},
   Number = {5},
   Pages = {823-837},
   Year = {2003},
   Month = {November},
   url = {http://dx.doi.org/10.1037/0022-3514.85.5.823},
   Abstract = {It was hypothesized that exposure to complementary
             representations of the poor as happier and more honest than
             the rich would lead to increased support for the status quo.
             In Study 1, exposure to "poor but happy" and "rich but
             miserable" stereotype exemplars led people to score higher
             on a general measure of system justification, compared with
             people who were exposed to noncomplementary exemplars. Study
             2 replicated this effect with "poor but honest" and "rich
             but dishonest" complementary stereotypes. In Studies 3 and
             4, exposure to noncomplementary stereotype exemplars
             implicitly activated justice concerns, as indicated by
             faster reaction times to justice-related than neutral words
             in a lexical decision task. Evidence also suggested that the
             Protestant work ethic may moderate the effects of stereotype
             exposure on explicit system justification (but not implicit
             activation).},
   Doi = {10.1037/0022-3514.85.5.823},
   Key = {fds273260}
}

@article{fds273259,
   Author = {Baldwin, MW and Kay, AC},
   Title = {Adult attachment and the inhibition of rejection},
   Journal = {Journal of Social and Clinical Psychology},
   Volume = {22},
   Number = {3},
   Pages = {275-293},
   Publisher = {Guilford Publications},
   Year = {2003},
   Month = {June},
   url = {http://dx.doi.org/10.1521/jscp.22.3.275.22890},
   Abstract = {Recent research has identified the inhibition of negative
             interpersonal information as a critical social cognitive
             mechanism associated with adult attachment orientations.
             Sixty undergraduate participants were conditioned to
             associate one computer tone with interpersonal rejection,
             and another with acceptance. The tones were played again
             while the participants performed a lexical decision task
             that assessed the activation of rejection information. To
             the extent that individuals were low on attachment anxiety,
             the conditioned tones led to slower reaction times to
             rejection target words, indicating the inhibition of
             rejection expectations. The implications of such inhibitory
             processing are discussed.},
   Doi = {10.1521/jscp.22.3.275.22890},
   Key = {fds273259}
}

@article{fds273256,
   Author = {Mendelson, MJ and Kay, AC},
   Title = {Positive feelings in friendship: Does imbalance in the
             relationship matter?},
   Journal = {Journal of Social and Personal Relationships},
   Volume = {20},
   Number = {1},
   Pages = {101-116},
   Publisher = {SAGE Publications},
   Year = {2003},
   Month = {February},
   url = {http://dx.doi.org/10.1177/0265407503020001190},
   Abstract = {We examined predictors of positive feelings in friendship.
             Pairs of same-sex (female - female) and cross-sex (female -
             male) friends completed questionnaires about each other.
             Positive feelings covaried directly with friendship level
             (e.g., best versus good) and with benefits from the
             relationship (i.e., the degree to which friendship functions
             were fulfilled); but various measures of imbalance in the
             relationship - net benefit, unsigned net benefit, and
             inequality - did not improve prediction. Nonetheless, there
             was limited evidence that, independent of other predictors,
             positive feelings covaried inversely with inequity (i.e.,
             with the degree to which the net benefit-to-contribution
             ratios of the two friends differed). Because positive
             feelings mainly reflect the degree to which friendship
             functions are fulfilled, the data support a functional view
             of friendship. However, if imbalance in a friendship is at
             all important, it appears to be imbalance measured in terms
             of inequity.},
   Doi = {10.1177/0265407503020001190},
   Key = {fds273256}
}

@article{fds273258,
   Author = {Kay, AC and Ross, L},
   Title = {The perceptual push: The interplay of implicit cues and
             explicit situational construals on behavioral intentions in
             the prisoner's dilemma},
   Journal = {Journal of Experimental Social Psychology},
   Volume = {39},
   Number = {6},
   Pages = {634-643},
   Publisher = {Elsevier BV},
   Year = {2003},
   Month = {January},
   url = {http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/S0022-1031(03)00057-X},
   Abstract = {Although it is clear that nonconscious primes can affect
             behavioral decisions, the extent to which the
             prime-to-behavior link is mediated by intervening
             interpretative processes is still unknown. The present
             research examined the mediational role of "situational
             construals" by assessing the effects of cooperative versus
             competitive primes on participants' construals of, and
             responses to, the prisoner's dilemma. As predicted, this
             priming manipulation influenced participants' construals of
             the game (assessed by the participants' ratings of the
             appropriateness of different "names for the game" and their
             estimates of how random others would play), and their own
             expressed willingness to cooperate versus defect. Most
             crucially, a mediational analysis and a manipulation of the
             order in which these dependent variables were measured
             established that the prime-to-behavior link can be
             strengthened by an intervening task calling for explicit
             construal of the situation. The interplay of situational
             construal and implicit primes in producing deliberative
             behavior is discussed. © 2003 Elsevier Science (USA). All
             rights reserved.},
   Doi = {10.1016/S0022-1031(03)00057-X},
   Key = {fds273258}
}

@article{fds273257,
   Author = {Kay, AC and Jimenez, MC and Jost, JT},
   Title = {Sour grapes, sweet lemons, and the anticipatory
             rationalization of the status quo},
   Journal = {Personality & Social Psychology Bulletin},
   Volume = {28},
   Number = {9},
   Pages = {1300-1312},
   Publisher = {SAGE Publications},
   Year = {2002},
   Month = {January},
   ISSN = {0146-1672},
   url = {http://dx.doi.org/10.1177/01461672022812014},
   Abstract = {Integrating theories of cognitive dissonance, system
             justification, and dynamic thought systems, the authors
             hypothesized that people would engage in anticipatory
             rationalization of sociopolitical outcomes for which they
             were not responsible. In two studies, the authors found that
             people adjusted their judgments of the desirability of a
             future event to make them congruent with its perceived
             likelihood, but only when the event triggered motivational
             involvement. In Study 1, a political survey administered to
             288 Democrats, Republicans, and nonpartisans prior to the
             Bush-Gore presidential election manipulated the perceived
             likelihood that each candidate would win and measured the
             subjective desirability of each outcome. In Study 2, 203
             undergraduate students rated the desirability of a large or
             small tuition increase or decrease that was low, medium, or
             high in likelihood. Under conditions evoking high
             motivational involvement, unfavorable as well as favorable
             outcomes were judged to be more desirable as their perceived
             likelihood increased. © 2002 by the Society for Personality
             and Social Psychology, Inc.},
   Doi = {10.1177/01461672022812014},
   Key = {fds273257}
}


%% Books   
@book{fds273217,
   Author = {Gaucher, D and Kay, AC and Laurin, K},
   Title = {The Power of the status quo: Consequences for maintaining
             and perpetuating inequality},
   Pages = {151-172},
   Publisher = {PSYCHOLOGY PRESS},
   Year = {2011},
   Month = {January},
   ISBN = {9780203837658},
   url = {http://dx.doi.org/10.4324/9780203837658},
   Doi = {10.4324/9780203837658},
   Key = {fds273217}
}

@book{fds273232,
   Author = {Ramona Bobocel and D and Kay, AC and Zanna, MP and Olson,
             JM},
   Title = {The psychology of justice and legitimacy: The Ontario
             symposium},
   Volume = {11},
   Pages = {1-350},
   Year = {2011},
   Month = {January},
   ISBN = {9780203837658},
   url = {http://dx.doi.org/10.4324/9780203837658},
   Abstract = {© 2010 by Taylor and Francis Group, LLC. In response to the
             international turmoil, violence, and increasing ideological
             polarization, social psychological interest in the topics of
             legitimacy and social justice has blossomed considerably.
             Social psychologists have explored the psychological
             underpinnings of people’s reactions to injustice and
             illegitimacy, including the behavioral and psychological
             consequences of the motivation to view individual outcomes
             and governmental systems as just and legitimate.Although
             injustice and illegitimacy are clearly related at conceptual
             and theoretical levels, these two rich literatures are
             rarely integrated. Social justice researchers have focused
             on how people make sense of particular instances of
             injustice, whereas legitimacy researchers have tended to
             focus primarily on people’s reactions to unfair systems of
             intergroup relations.This 11th volume of the Ontario
             Symposium series brings together the work of leading
             researchers in fields of social justice and legitimacy to
             facilitate the cross-pollination and integration of these
             fields. The contributions address broad theoretical issues
             and cutting-edge empirical advances, while illustrating the
             diversity and richness of research in the two fields. By
             uniting these two domains, this volume will stimulate new
             directions in theory and research that seek to explain how
             and why people make sense of injustice at all levels of
             analysis.},
   Doi = {10.4324/9780203837658},
   Key = {fds273232}
}

@book{fds273231,
   Author = {Thorisdottir, H and Jost, JT and Kay, AC},
   Title = {On the Social and Psychological Bases of Ideology and System
             Justification},
   Pages = {3-24},
   Publisher = {Oxford University Press},
   Year = {2009},
   Month = {May},
   ISBN = {9780195320916},
   url = {http://dx.doi.org/10.1093/acprof:oso/9780195320916.003.001},
   Abstract = {© 2009 by Oxford University Press, Inc. All rights
             reserved. This chapter summarizes research that both
             reflects and exemplifies the recent resurgence of interest
             in the social and psychological characteristics and
             processes that give rise to ideological forms. Ideology is
             an elusive, multifaceted construct that can usefully be
             analyzed in terms of "top-down" processes related to the
             social construction and dissemination of ideology as well as
             "bottom-up" processes, including dispositional and
             situational factors, that make certain ideological outcomes
             more likely than others. The chapter briefly summarizes the
             contents of this volume, focusing especially on the
             cognitive and motivational antecedents and consequences of
             adopting specific ideologies, the functions served by those
             ideologies, and the myriad ways in which people accept and
             justify (versus reject) aspects of the social and political
             worlds they inhabit. Current challenges and future
             directions for the study of ideology and system
             justification are also discussed.},
   Doi = {10.1093/acprof:oso/9780195320916.003.001},
   Key = {fds273231}
}


%% Chapters in Books   
@misc{fds328087,
   Author = {Rutjens, BT and Kay, AC},
   Title = {Compensatory control theory and the psychological importance
             of perceiving order},
   Pages = {83-96},
   Booktitle = {Coping with Lack of Control in a Social World},
   Publisher = {Routledge},
   Year = {2016},
   Month = {November},
   ISBN = {9781138957923},
   url = {http://dx.doi.org/10.4324/9781315661452},
   Doi = {10.4324/9781315661452},
   Key = {fds328087}
}

@misc{fds273229,
   Author = {Kay, AC and Anderson, JE and Fitzsimons, GM},
   Title = {The motivated process of making meaning from negative
             experiences},
   Booktitle = {The Psychology of Meaning},
   Publisher = {American Psychological Association},
   Year = {2014},
   Key = {fds273229}
}

@misc{fds273230,
   Author = {Kay, AC and Landau, MJ and Sullivan, DL},
   Title = {Agency and Control},
   Booktitle = {APA Handbook of Personality and Social Psychology: Attitudes
             and Social Cognition},
   Publisher = {American Psychological Association},
   Editor = {Bargh, J and Borgida, E},
   Year = {2014},
   Key = {fds273230}
}

@misc{fds273234,
   Author = {Banfield, JC and Shepherd, S and Kay, AC},
   Title = {Consequences of system defense motivations for
             individuals’ willingness to act sustainably},
   Pages = {111-124},
   Booktitle = {Encouraging Sustainable Behavior: Psychology and the
             Environment},
   Publisher = {PSYCHOLOGY PRESS},
   Year = {2013},
   Month = {January},
   ISBN = {9780203141182},
   url = {http://dx.doi.org/10.4324/9780203141182},
   Doi = {10.4324/9780203141182},
   Key = {fds273234}
}

@misc{fds273228,
   Author = {Kay, AC and Sullivan, DL},
   Title = {Cultural unity and diversity in compensatory
             control},
   Booktitle = {Advances in Culture and Psychology},
   Publisher = {Oxford University Press},
   Editor = {Gelfand, M and Yue, C and Hong, Y},
   Year = {2013},
   Key = {fds273228}
}

@misc{fds273226,
   Author = {Callan, MJ and Kay, AC},
   Title = {Associations Between Law, Competitiveness, and the Pursuit
             of Self-Interest},
   Pages = {193-218},
   Booktitle = {Ideology, Psychology, and Law},
   Publisher = {Oxford University Press},
   Year = {2012},
   Month = {May},
   ISBN = {9780199737512},
   url = {http://dx.doi.org/10.1093/acprof:oso/9780199737512.003.0007},
   Abstract = {© 2012 by Oxford University Press, Inc. All rights
             reserved. This chapter will discuss and provide evidence for
             the idea that the law's existence shapes social reality by
             implicitly fostering the sense that people are, and perhaps
             should be, competitive and untrustworthy. Drawing on
             research from social cognition and legal studies, it will
             argue that people tend to associate the law with
             self-interestedness due to their encounter with the legal
             system. Through legal socialization-the acquisition of legal
             knowledge through direct instruction, experience and popular
             media-people come to mentally associate the law with
             competitiveness. This chapter will argue that this is
             precisely due to the way the legal system operates, at least
             in societies adopting an adversarial legal
             system.},
   Doi = {10.1093/acprof:oso/9780199737512.003.0007},
   Key = {fds273226}
}

@misc{fds273233,
   Author = {Jost, JT and Kay, AC},
   Title = {System justification as an obstacle to the attainment of
             social justice},
   Pages = {277-296},
   Booktitle = {Social Thinking and Interpersonal Behavior},
   Publisher = {PSYCHOLOGY PRESS},
   Year = {2012},
   Month = {January},
   ISBN = {9780203139677},
   url = {http://dx.doi.org/10.4324/9780203139677},
   Doi = {10.4324/9780203139677},
   Key = {fds273233}
}

@misc{fds329824,
   Author = {Kay, AC and Eibach, RP},
   Title = {The ideological toolbox: Ideologies as tools of motivated
             social cognition},
   Pages = {495-515},
   Booktitle = {The SAGE Handbook of Social Cognition},
   Publisher = {SAGE PUBLICATIONS LTD},
   Year = {2012},
   Month = {January},
   ISBN = {9780857024817},
   url = {http://dx.doi.org/10.4135/9781446247631.n25},
   Doi = {10.4135/9781446247631.n25},
   Key = {fds329824}
}

@misc{fds273227,
   Author = {Kay, AC and Eibach, RP},
   Title = {Ideological Processes},
   Booktitle = {The Handbook of Social Cognition},
   Publisher = {Oxford University Press},
   Editor = {Fiske, S and MaCrae, N},
   Year = {2012},
   Key = {fds273227}
}

@misc{fds322760,
   Author = {Ramona Bobocel and D and Kay, AC and Zanna, MP and Olson,
             JM},
   Title = {Preface},
   Pages = {vii-xiv},
   Year = {2011},
   Month = {January},
   ISBN = {9780203837658},
   url = {http://dx.doi.org/10.4324/9780203837658},
   Doi = {10.4324/9780203837658},
   Key = {fds322760}
}

@misc{fds273223,
   Author = {Kay, AC and Jost, JT},
   Title = {Social Justice: History, Theory, and Research},
   Booktitle = {Handbook of Social Psychology},
   Publisher = {John Wiley and Sons},
   Year = {2010},
   Key = {fds273223}
}

@misc{fds273224,
   Author = {Kay, AC and Gaucher, D and Laurin, K},
   Title = {The power of the status quo: Consequences for maintaining
             and perpetuating inequality},
   Pages = {109-118},
   Booktitle = {The Psychology of Justice and Legitimacy: The Ontario
             Symposium (Vol. 11)},
   Publisher = {PSYCHOLOGY PRESS},
   Editor = {Bobocel, R and Kay, M and Zanna, P and Olson, JM},
   Year = {2010},
   Key = {fds273224}
}

@misc{fds273225,
   Author = {Kay, AC and Banfield, J and Laurin, K},
   Title = {Ideology and power},
   Booktitle = {The Social Psychology of Power},
   Publisher = {Guilford Press},
   Editor = {Vescio, T and Guinote, A},
   Year = {2010},
   Key = {fds273225}
}

@misc{fds273222,
   Author = {Kay, AC and Zanna, MP},
   Title = {A contextual analysis of the social and psychological
             consequences of system justification},
   Booktitle = {Social & Psychological Bases of Ideology and System
             Justification},
   Publisher = {Oxford University Press},
   Editor = {Jost, JT and Thoristtodor, H},
   Year = {2009},
   Key = {fds273222}
}

@misc{fds273221,
   Author = {Kay, AC and Jost, JT and Fitzsimons, GM},
   Title = {The Ideological Animal: On the Epistemic and Existential
             Bases of System Justification},
   Booktitle = {Handbook of Experimental Existential Psychology},
   Publisher = {Guilford Press},
   Editor = {Greenberg, J and Koole, SL and Pyszczynsk, T},
   Year = {2004},
   Key = {fds273221}
}


Duke University * Arts & Sciences * Faculty * Staff * Grad * Postdocs * Reload * Login