Positive complementary stereotypes actually increase support for the status quo

Evidence

Kay and Jost (2003) suggested that “poor but happy” and “poor but honest” stereotypes would serve to increase support for the status quo, insofar as such stereotypes maintain the belief that every group in society has some rewards, and no group has a monopoly on valued characteristics. The authors demonstrated in four experiments that exposure to “poor but happy,” “poor but honest,” “rich but miserable,” and “rich but dishonest” stereotype exemplars led people to score higher on a general, diffuse measure of system justification, compared to control conditions. — John F. Dovidio, Peter Glick, Laurie A. Rudman, On the Nature of Prejudice, 1410

Conway, Pizzamiglio, and Mount (1996) demonstrated in a variety of occupational and non-occupational settings that members of low-status groups in general were consistently stereotyped in more communal, socioemotional terms, whereas members of high-status groups were stereotyped in agentic, achievement-oriented terms. Jost and Kay (2005) found that exposure to communal stereotypes of women and agentic stereotypes of men leads people to show increased levels of support for the current state of gender relations as well as for the American political and economic system in general. These studies are among the first to demonstrate that a cause-and-effect relationship exists between exposure to specific stereotypical beliefs and support for the societal status quo (see also Kay & Jost, 2003). This work also suggests that the link between stereotypes and the status quo can be largely implicit, nonconscious, and unexamined (see also Jost et al., 2004). — , Rudman, Laurie A - On the Nature of…, 1407

Gender stereotypes are not unique in ascribing different but complementary characteristics to members of high-status and low-status groups (e.g., agentic and communal traits, respectively). This leads us to yet another important observation made by Allport, who wrote that: “Stereotypes are by no means always negative. They may exist together with a favorable attitude” (1954/1979, p. — John F. Dovidio, Peter Glick, Laurie A. Rudman, On the Nature of Prejudice, 1408

Categorization

• SEED: A possible essay angle: how the ‘poor but happy’ myth functions as ideological glue in modern economies, and why out-group ‘virtues’ can be more oppressive than vices.
• XREF: Connects to benevolent sexism research and Jost & Banaji’s system justification theory already in the reader’s knowledge base. — connects to: System justification theory attributes stereotype endorsement to status-quo legitimization — John T. Jost and Jim Sidanius, Political Psychology: Key Readings, 140; Subordinates’ positive self-stereotypes can reinforce the status quo. — John T. Jost and Jim Sidanius, Political Psychology: Key Readings, 2904; Positive stereotypes can justify subordination more effectively than negative ones — John T. Jost and Jim Sidanius, Political Psychology: Key Readings, 2956 (+1 more)
• corroborated: 8 independent passages support this claim — John F. Dovidio, Peter Glick, Laurie A. Rudman, On the Nature of Prejudice: Fifty Years…, 1410; , Rudman, Laurie A - On the Nature of…, 1407; John F. Dovidio, Peter Glick, Laurie A. Rudman, On the Nature of Prejudice: Fifty Years…, 1408