Social position and economic system justification in Canada

Implications for advancing health equity and social justice from an exploratory study of factors shaping economic system justification

Bibliographic Data

ID22077965
AuthorsKiffer G Card (0000-0001-6545-1249, Simon Fraser University, corresponding author), Kirk Hepburn (0000-0002-2412-7845, Simon Fraser University)
Year2022
Volume10
Pages902374-902374
Publication date2022-10-20
Peer ReviewedYes
Open AccessYes
TypeARTICLE
VenueFrontiers in Public Health (JOURNAL)
Journal identifiersISSN: 2296-2565 • E-ISSN: 2296-2565
PublisherFrontiers Media SA (PUBLISHER • CH)
DOI10.3389/fpubh.2022.902374
PMID36339181
OpenAlexW4306874324
LanguageEN
Citations received1
References cited52

Objective: Many socio-economic reforms that could reduce health disparities are not implemented because people justify existing systems and fear changes thereto. This study aimed to identify socio-demographic factors associated with system justifying beliefs to better understand how they are maintained in Canada. In doing so, we hypothesized that (1) systems justification is a default cognitive position, buttressed by the palliative benefits of system-justification, (2) lack of success in a given system generally motivates people to doubt the legitimacy of that system, and (3) system-justifying beliefs are rejected only when the costs of doing so are low enough and/or the benefits are high enough to outweigh the innate needs-fulfillment benefits of system-justification. Methods: paid social media advertisements. Multivariable regression models identified factors associated with Economic System Justification Scale (ESJS) scores. Explanatory variables included demographic measures of social position, self-rated health, and patterns of social inclusion. Results: Among 2,619 participants, system-justifying beliefs were wide-spread, with the average level of support across ESJS scale items exceeding 50%. Lower ESJS scores were associated with worse health, more loneliness, and lower socioeconomic status. Despite the pattern that marginalization erodes system-justification, several historically marginalized characteristics (e.g., non-white ethnicity and non-binary gender) were associated with relatively high system-justification, compared to matching privileged characteristics (e.g., white ethnicity; masculine gender). Conclusion: Supporting our hypotheses, we identify a general trend that social marginalization is associated with less system-justification. Those benefitting from the status quo (e.g., healthier, wealthier, less lonely) were more likely to hold system-justifying beliefs. However, some groups who are disadvantaged within the existing system reported higher system-justification-suggesting that system oppression may be a key moderator of the effect of social position on system justification

Economic growth · Economics · Environmental health · Ethnic group · Health care · Health equity · Legitimacy · Political science · Population · Social determinants of health · Socioeconomic status · System Justification · Health disparities and outcomes · Health Systems, Economic Evaluations, Quality of Life · Healthcare Policy and Management · Law · Medicine · Psychology · Social Psychology

Tools

Open DOIOpen Access