Testing the status‐legitimacy hypothesis: Predicting system justification using objective and subjective socioeconomic status in China and the United States.

The status‐legitimacy hypothesis proposes that those who are most disadvantaged by unequal social systems are even more likely than members of more advantaged groups to provide ideological support for the very social system that is responsible for their disadvantages. Li, Yang, Wu, and Kou (2020, Personality and Social Psychology Bulletin) sought to expand the generalizability of this hypothesis by testing it in China, addressing inconsistencies surrounding the empirical support for this hypothesis by postulating that the construct of status should be separated into an objective and subjective status marker. They reported that objective socioeconomic status (SES; income and education) negatively predicted system justification, while subjective SES positively predicted system justification. In the present study we attempt to replicate and extend the work of Li et al. in a cross‐cultural comparison of demographic stratified quota online samples in China and the United States. We test the status‐legitimacy hypothesis using objective and subjective SES to predict system justification using cross‐sectional and cross‐lagged regression analyses. We received partial support for Li et al.'s findings. Specifically, subjective SES positively predicted system justification for both societies during cross‐sectional and cross‐lagged longitudinal analyses. However, we failed to replicate Li et al.'s findings surrounding objective SES in China during cross‐sectional and cross‐lagged analyses. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]