Negative Illusions_ Conceptual Clarifica - Jost_ Jhon T

7/29/2019 Negative Illusions_ Conceptual Clarifica - Jost_ Jhon T

1/29

Negative Illusions: Conceptual Clarification and Psychological Evidence concerning FalseConsciousnessAuthor(s): John T. JostReviewed work(s):Source: Political Psychology, Vol. 16, No. 2 (Jun., 1995), pp. 397-424

Published by: International Society of Political PsychologyStable URL: http://www.jstor.org/stable/3791837 .

Accessed: 15/09/2012 14:03

Your use of the JSTOR archive indicates your acceptance of the Terms & Conditions of Use, available at .http://www.jstor.org/page/info/about/policies/terms.jsp

.JSTOR is a not-for-profit service that helps scholars, researchers, and students discover, use, and build upon a wide range of

content in a trusted digital archive. We use information technology and tools to increase productivity and facilitate new forms

of scholarship. For more information about JSTOR, please contact [email protected].

.

International Society of Political Psychology is collaborating with JSTOR to digitize, preserve and extend

access to Political Psychology.

http://www.jstor.org
http://www.jstor.org/action/showPublisher?publisherCode=ispphttp://www.jstor.org/stable/3791837?origin=JSTOR-pdfhttp://www.jstor.org/page/info/about/policies/terms.jsphttp://www.jstor.org/page/info/about/policies/terms.jsphttp://www.jstor.org/stable/3791837?origin=JSTOR-pdfhttp://www.jstor.org/action/showPublisher?publisherCode=ispp


2/29

Political sychology,ol.16,No. 2, 1995

Negativellusions: onceptual larificationndPsychologicalvidence oncerningalseConsciousnessJohnT. JostDepartmentfPsychologyYaleUniversityNewHaven,CT 06520-8205Theconcept ffalse onsciousnesss reviewedrom historicalerspectivenddiscussedn ight frecentheoreticaldvancesnsocialistnd eministoliticalphilosophy.alseconsciousnesssdefineds theholding ffalse eliefshat recontraryo one's social interestnd which herebyontributeo thedisadvan-taged osition fthe elf rthe roup.t isargued hat onsiderablesychologi-cal evidenceor alseconsciousnessxistsndthat thoroughnderstandingfthephenomenonntegrateseveral inesofresearch nthe roblemfpoliticalacquiescence. ixbasictypes ffalse onsciousnessreproposed:1) Failure operceive njustice nd disadvantage,2) Fatalism,3) Justificationfsocialroles, 4) False attributionfblame, 5) Identificationith heoppressor,nd(6) Resistance ochange.Becausethe oncept f alseconsciousnesss likelyoarousesuspicion ecauseof tsMarxian rigins,everal heoreticalnd meth-odological bjectionsothe cientifictudyffalse onsciousnessre raised ndaddressed.KEY WORDS: deology,alse onsciousness,oliticalsychology,ystemustification,oliticalacquiescence,rouponsciousness-raising,eminism,nalyticalarxism

Is there ot n inconsistencyhen attributellusions oth o eatures f hesituation nd to thecognitive pparatusof thesubject? n theMarxisttheoryf deologies lasspositionscentral,ut ncognitivesychologyhestress s laid on the nternalsychicmechanismfthe ubject, nd so itmighteem trange o seek n the attermicro-foundationsorthe ormer.This,however,s an artificialpposition. or illusions ooccurboth heexternalituation ndthe nternalrocessingmust ome nto lay.-J. Elster1982, p. 137)397

0162-895X 1995 nternationalociety f Political sychologyPublished yBlackwell ublishers,38 MainStreet, ambridge, A 02142,USA, and 108CowleyRoad, Oxford, X4 IJF,UK.


3/29

398 JostThepurposefthis aper s todefinehe oncept ffalse onsciousnessndtoreview omepsychologicalvidence or tsoperation.he evidences orga-nized ntermsf a preliminaryaxonomyor he tudyffalse onsciousness.tis suggestedhatfalse consciousnesss a neglected utpotentiallymportanttopicfor ocial andpolitical sychology,rawing ogetherreviouslynrelatedlinesof work n theproblemfpoliticalcquiescence.MostMarxian ontribu-tions o thestudy fpsychologyave tended o be negativen form,hat s,criticalfparadigmaticsychologicalciencewithoutfferingmpiricalataforan alternativeheoreticalerspectiveBillig, 1982; Brown,1974;Plon, 1974;Sampson,1983; Wexler, 983), and the same can be said of most feministcritiquesfmainstreamsychologyFine,1992;Hare-Mustin Marecek, 988;

Riger,1992).Whilemany fthese ritical ontributionsrequiteuseful,myanalysis ffalse onsciousnesseeks lso tohighlighthepositive ontributionsthat nempiricalsychologyanmakewhen t s nformedyMarxian ndfeministsocialtheory.Marxian' ocialtheorys defineds thatwhich s influencedythemethod nd content fMarx's work ndthework f hisfollowers ithoutnecessarilydheringo the heoryrpracticeforthodox arxism;treflects,notherwords, a non-dogmaticpproach o Marxism"Roemer, 986,p. 2).A BRIEF HISTORY OF THE CONCEPT OF FALSE CONSCIOUSNESS

WhileMarx ndEngels 1846)wrotenformallybout heproblemffalseconsciousnessntheirarlywork n deology,hey idnotdo much odevelopt(Lewy,1982; Wood, 1988). The conceptwas used to describe heeffects fideological omination.t was suggestedhat hroughnstitutionalontrolvereducation,eligion,media, ulture,nd economicystems,ominantroupsnsocietywerecapableof spreadingdeas which erve o ustify nequalitiesfstatus ndpowerseeCarragee, 993,for recent iscussion). consequencefthishypothesiss that hose deas which avor ominantroups end oprevailnsociety. hus,MarxandEngels 1846) wrote hat The class whichhas themeans fmaterialroductiont tsdisposal, ascontroltthe ame ime ver hemeans fmental roduction"p. 64). Cognition,n this iew, s always ubjectto large-scaleocial,economic, ndpolitical orces uchas thedominationfsomegroups yotherscf. Shaw,1989).Thepolitical onsciousness fdisad-vantagedeopleswastheorizedobe "false" osomedegree,hats,reflectivefthedominantroup'snterestsatherhan heir wn nterests. arx ndEngelsargued hat n historyeople"haveconstantly adeup forthemselves alseconceptionsbout hemselves,boutwhat hey reand what hey ught obe,"andthecall was sounded o "liberate hem rom hechimeras,he deas,thedogmas, he maginaryeingsunder heyokeofwhich hey repining way"(1846, p. 37).Atthe ametime, owever, arx's ater iewsmayhavebeentoooptimis-


4/29

Psychologyf False Consciousness 399tic bout he bilitiesfoppressedeople orecognizend ake ction gainsthesourcesof their ppression. y predictinghat ubordinateroups n societywould soon recognize heillegitimacyf their ubordinationnd riseup tooverthrowhe ystem, arxmayhaveunderestimatedhe xtentowhichocial-psychologicalmechanisms llow peopleto adaptto political ystemswhichthwartheir wn nterests.hus, he onceptf"false onsciousness" asdevel-opedmore ully nly ater ysocialist cholarseekingoexplain,npart,whyrevolutionas not orthcomingseeGabel, 1975;Gramsci, 971;Lukaics, 971;Marcuse,1964;Meyerson, 991).Inrecent ears, he tudyffalse onsciousness asbeenrevitalizedythefruits fconceptualnalysis ndfeministheory. nalytichilosophersuch sCohen 1978), Eagleton1991), Elster1985), Miller 1984), Roemer1986),Wood 1988), andmany thers aveapplied heironceptual igor othecon-cepts fMarxism,which adformerlyeencriticizedor heirackofprecisionandunfalsifiabilityLewy,1982).As a result,Marxianccountsf deologyndfalseconsciousness aveattained ewstandardsfclarityndutilitynrecentphilosophicalwork Cunningham,987; Eagleton,1991; Meyerson,1991;Wood,1988).Theanalyticalpproachlsomakes xplicitonnectionso socio-logicaland psychologicalhenomenauchas biased or heuristicalhinking,defectionn theprisoner'silemmaituation,ndthe xpressionf"classcon-sciousness"see Elster, 982, 1985; Levine,Sober,& Wright,992;Wright,1985),providing philosophicalasisfor he ocial-psychologicaltudyffalseconsciousness.t is argued hat Marxismhould,withoutmbarrassment,ub-ject itselfothe onventionaltandardsf socialscience ndanalyticalhiloso-phy" Levineetal., 1992,p. 5). Theguidingssumptionsf"analyticalMarx-ism,"thatpropositionserived romMarx'smethod houldbe subjected oempiricalonfrontationndthatomplete xplanationshouldmake eferenceopsychologicaltates f ndividualctorsElster, 985;Roemer, 986),bringhework f Marxcloser ocontemporaryocial andpolitical sychologyhan verbefore.Feministcholars ave nvoked alse onsciousnessnorder ounderstandtheoreticalndpractical roblemsoncerninghepsychologicalffectsfrape,incest, omestic iolence,ndpornography.nparticular,hey ave ttemptedoexplainwhyt sso difficultor ictims f exual ndphysicalbusetoterminateabusiverelationshipsndto avoidblaming hemselvesor heabuse Collins,1991;Fine,1992;MacKinnon, 989)andwhywomen s a groupeemrelativelyunaware f their tatus s an oppressed roupCrosby, 982;Dworkin, 983;Gurin, 985).Theways n which irls ndwomen resocialized oreject heirown"natural"esponsesoeventsnvolvingexism nd nequalitynd toadoptinsteadhenorms f a patriarchalociety avebecome esearchopics or emi-nist ocialscience Brown& Gilligan, 992).A primaryoaloffeministoli-tics, herefore,s toawakenorreawaken) senseofself-respectndanaware-ness of injustice, herebyverridingarmfuleliefs earned hroughexist


5/29

400 Jostsocializationractices.t has evenbeen rguedhat eministheoryistinguishesitself romMarxism yplacing higherremiumn theroleofconsciousness-raisingMacKinnon, 989),althoughssuesof consciousness avebeen denti-fied s centraloWestern arxist heoryinceat leastWorldWar (Gottlieb,1992). In anycase, mergingf recent ocialist nd feministiewpoints asresultednrenewed ttentiono thesocial-psychologicalspects foppressionanddomination, ost specially heways n whichvictimsan be made"toinvestntheir wnunhappiness"Eagleton, 991,p. xiii).In someways, his ndeavor arks ackto earlier sychologicaliteratureson "identificationith heaggressor"Bettelheim,960; Freud,1946),"self-hatred" mongmembers f oppressed roupsAllport, 954a; Lewin, 1941;Sarnoff,951),and the authoritarianersonality"Adorno, renkel-Brunswik,Levinson, Sanford, 950).Becauseofthe trongnfluencefpsychoanalytictheorynthe 1940sand 1950s McGuire,1993),thesephenomena ereoftenconceptualizedn terms fdeep-seated ersonalitynd motivationalonflicts,rather han normal" ocialandcognitiveesponseso material nd deologicaldominationseeJost Banaji,1994).As a result,he tudyf false onscious-nessrarely ent eyondhe pplicationfFreudianmechanisms,uch s repres-sion, denial, ndprojection,o social andpolitical ituationsPochoda,1978).

FALSE CONSCIOUSNESS DEFINEDTheconcept ffalse onsciousnessnthepresentontextelps oidentifyinaccurateeliefs f ubordinateshich erve operpetuateheirocial, conom-ic, or sexual dominationCunningham,987; Eagleton,1991; Elster,1982;MacKinnon,1989). A consciousnesss "false"when t serves o perpetuateinequality y leadingmembersfa subordinateroup obelieve hat hey reinferior,eservingftheir light,r ncapablef akingction gainsthe ausesoftheirubordination.tthemost eneralevel,false onsciousnessefersothe"harbouringf falsebeliefs hat ustain ne's ownoppression"Cunningham,1987,p. 255). Specific xamples, s we shallsee,mightnclude enyinghatinjustice rdisadvantageccurs,believinghat ocialchange s impossiblerundesirable, akingalse ttributionsbout he ausesofpoliticaluffering,ndadoptinghenormsfone'soppressor.he clearestases offalse onsciousnessmustsatisfy, hroughmpirical bservation,wo independentriteriaCun-

ningham,987;Meyerson,991): i) Thebeliefmust irstf allbe "false" ntheepistemologicalenseofbeing ontraryofact. ii) Secondly,tmust e "false"in thesense offailingo reflectne's genuineocialinterests.aking hetwocomponentsogether,e define alseconsciousnesss theholding ffalse orinaccurate eliefs hat re contraryo one's own social interestnd whichtherebyontributeothemaintenancef he isadvantagedositionf he elf rthegroup.


6/29

Psychologyf alse onsciousness 401Ofcourse, he wodimensionsfepistemologicalin)validitynd in)con-gruencewith bjectiveocial nterestre nprinciplerthogonal.t ispossible,for xample, or ne topossessfalsebeliefs hat rehelpfuln terms fone'smental ealth rbyservingomeother ocial functionsee Taylor& Brown,1988,for review); hesehavebeendubbed positivellusions"Taylor, 989),andtheyre to be contrasted ith he ocially ndpoliticallyarmfuleliefswereview ere.Likewise,t s at east ogically ossible o hold rue eliefsbut eeMcGuire,1989,for "tragicheoryfknowledge"s misrepresentation),ndtheholding fthesebeliefsmaybe eitherontraryoone'sbest nterests,s inthe case of "depressive ealism"Alloy& Abramson, 979),or,undermorefortunateircumstances,n accordwithone's personal nd social interests.

Lukaics1971) referredo theholding ftruebeliefs hat re congruent ithobjectiventerestss the"ascribed onsciousness" f the owerclass, and hearguedthat: By relatingonsciousness o the wholeof society t becomespossible o nfer he houghtsndfeelings hichmenwouldhave n a particularsituationftheywereable to assess both t and the nterestsrising rom t"(p. 51).Beliefs ssociatedwith alse onsciousness aybethoughtf as social andpoliticalheuristics. ike thecognitive euristics ocumentedy Kahneman.Slovic,andTversky1982) and Nisbett nd Ross (1980),theymaybe based onuseful ssumptionsrprinciples,et heyreoften xtendedeyondontextsfutilityndresultn udgmentsrbehaviors hich re ostlyothe ndividualndto society. his is notto saythat ll instancesffalse onsciousnessriginatefrom "kernel ftruth,"nly hat normal"ognitiverocessesmaybe impli-cated ntheustificationfoppressiveocialrelationsseeJost Banaji,1994).It has been rgued, or xample, hat the ffectiveisseminationf deas sonlypossible...to he xtent hatthey]...do ave a sufficientegree feffectivenessboth nrenderingocialrealityntelligiblend nguiding racticewithintforthem obe apparentlycceptable"Mepham, 972,p. 12). Inthe ase ofsocio-political euristicsssociatedwith alse onsciousness,he osts re notneces-sarilymeasuredgainst ositive ognitiveutcomes uch s rationalityNisbett& Ross, 1980;cf.Abelson, 976), lthoughheymighte (Elster, 982,1985),butagainst ositive ocial andpolitical utcomes iketheachievementflifesatisfaction,quality fopportunity,reedom rom ppression,ecognitionfinjustice,ndparticipationnprogressiveocialchange. alseconsciousness,ycontrast,eads to thedevelopmentf"needswhich erpetuateoil,aggressive-ness,misery,nd njustice"Marcuse,1964,p. 5).The central hesis f thispaper s that here lready xists considerableamount f scientificvidenceforthepropositionhatpeoplewillholdfalsebeliefswhich ustify heir wn subordination,lthoughhisevidence s notordinarilyecognizeds supportivefa false onsciousnesspproach.With eryfew xceptionsBillig,1976,1982;Fine,1979;Jost Banaji,1994;Kluegel&Smith,1986;Tyler& McGraw,1986),social andpolitical sychologistsave


7/29

402 Jostignoredhephenomenonltogether,lthoughheyertainlyavenot hied wayfrom heneighboringopicof ideologyinter lia, Allport, 954b;Kinder&Sears, 1985;Lane, 1962;McGuire, 993;Rosenberg,988;Sniderman Tet-lock, 1986a). The concept fpolitical cquiescencecf. Edelman,1960) alsoplays significantole n Marxian ccounts f deologyndfalse onsciousness(Billig, 1982;Tyler& McGraw,1986), insofar s thefailure oparticipatencollective ctionmaybe linked oerrorsn socialcognition.t ishoped hat yclarifyingndextendinghe onceptffalse onsciousness,twillbepossible oattendo the ocialandcognitiveasesofpoliticalcquiescencend odeveloptheoreticalccount f thecauses andconsequencesffalsebelief ystemshatsustain ocialoppression.

A PRELIMINARY TAXONOMY FOR THE STUDYOF FALSE CONSCIOUSNESSThereare manyways in whichone might ttempto classify ifferentvarietiesf false onsciousness. o rigorousrconsensualaxonomyxists orthetypes f beliefswhich ualify orfalse onsciousness,ndwritingsn thesubject avetended obe ratheriecemeal nd ncomplete.unningham1987)suggestswomain ypes ffalse onsciousness,atalismndthe alse dentifica-tionofblame.While these seem to satisfyhedefinitionalriteria orfalseconsciousness,hey renot ikely o be exhaustive. more omplete ictureemerges y adding o these hecategoriesffailure operceive njusticenddisadvantage;ustificationf social roles and statuses;dentificationith heoppressor; ndresistance o change.Beliefsof these ypes, t is argued, repoliticallyarmfulor heirdherents,nsofars theyncrease hepossibilityfacquiescenceo otherwisenacceptableonditionsrcircumstances.fcourse,

these ypes renotmeanto bemutuallyxclusivenpractice. eopleoften enythat n injustice ccurs, nd thismaymakethemmore ikely oblamethem-selvesor to believe hat rotestsundesirable,nd o on.Nevertheless,t s use-ful odistinguishetween he ifferentypes f llusoryeliefshat recapable fstiflingonstructiveoliticalhange. turn owtoa brief eview fthepsycho-logicalevidence or achtype.Failure toperceive njustice nd disadvantage

Failure operceive njustice. growing odyofresearch nbeliefs boutdistributivendproceduralustice eads to the onclusionhat eoplefrequentlyperceive ituationsobe fair r ust, venwhen here regoodreasons osupposethat uch ituationsrenot Crosby, 982;Deutsch, 985;Fine, 1979;Jennings,1991; Lerner, 980; Lind& Tyler, 988;Major,1994;Martin, 986; Tyler,1990).Thedataresearchersite eemtosupportlster's1982) hypothesishat


8/29

Psychologyf False Consciousness 403theres "a tendencyfthe ppressedndexploitedlasses n a societyobelieveinthe usticeof the ocial order hat ppresseshem"p. 131).Almost urely,beliefs fthis ypewouldviolate ersonalndgroupnterestsycontributingopolitical cquiescence ven nthefaceofwidespreadnjustice.Much of the vidence hat eopleavoidperceivingnjustice as beencol-lectedbyLerner1980),whohypothesizeshat heres a motivationobelievethat heworld s a justplace, since t is only n sucha world hat ne's ownoutcomes re safeorunderontrol.f, ndeed, eople remotivatedomaintainthe llusion hat he world s just,then t is an illusionwhich omesat somepolitical ostto the ndividualndthegroup. or nstance,hebelief na justworldmay eadvictims f njusticeominimizehe xtentf thevictimizationand toblamethemselves or t Janoff-Bulman,992;Miller& Porter, 983).People who scorehighon the"justworld cale" have been found o protectexisting ocial institutionsnd political eaders believing, orexample, hatNixonwas lessguilty ftheWatergaterimes han idcontrol roups) ndtoderogatemembersfunderprivilegedroupsRubin& Peplau,1975).Thebeliefina justworld as beenfound ocorrelateegativelyithubjects' elf-reportedparticipationnsocialandpoliticalctivismndwith lobal elf-ratingsfsocialandpoliticalnvolvementRubin& Peplau,1973).Furnham1985)hasreportedthatwhites n SouthAfrica re moreikely o believe na justworld hanwhiteequivalentsn Great ritain,uggestingerhapshat erceptionsf njusticere,underomecircumstances,false" nthe enseofbeing nresponsiveoreality:just worldbeliefswerehigher hanusual in thecontext f a society hat sinfamous or tsracial njustice.Tylerndcolleagues ave oughtounderstandhy eoplemaintainoyaltyto egalandpoliticalnstitutionsvenwhen uch nstitutionsroduce nfavorableoutcomes or hemLind& Tyler, 988;Tyler, 990;Tyler McGraw, 986). thas beenfound epeatedlyhat eoplearesatisfied ith roceduralystemsslong s theyreprovided ith nopportunityoparticipatentheprocess, veniftheir articipationasno effectverrelevantutcomesnd even ftheout-comesarenegativeLind& Tyler, 988;Tyler, 990).A vast iteraturenthe"illusion fcontrol" oints o a similar onclusion: andom utcomesmaybeexperienceds chosen rcontrolled,o long s the ndividualeels hat e orsheplayed omeparthoweverrrelevant)nthedeterminingrocess see TaylorBrown,1988).Ofcourse, nstitutionaloyaltynand of tselfs notharmfulothe ndividual rthe ocialgroup; he ffectiverganizationand mprovement)ofsocial andpoliticalifemayrequireomedegree fallegiance othe xistingsystemTyler, 990). Nevertheless,senseofpoliticalmistrustasbeen denti-fied s essential ogroup onsciousness-raisingndthe chievementfprogres-sivesocialchangeGurin, 985;Piven& Cloward, 977;Shingles, 981).TylerandMcGraw1986) argue onvincinglyhathe endencyofocus nproceduralratherhan utcomessuesmaybe seenas a type f false onsciousnessecauseit eadstopolitical cquiescenceven nthe ace f njustice.hey oncludehat:


9/29

404 Jost...people'sviews boutproceduralustice redysfunctional.nparticular,itizens ocusheavily pontheextent o which heyhave an opportunityo presentvidencewhenevaluatinguthorities,ut hey ay ittle ttentionothe xtento whichhey ave ctuallyinfluencedecisions...theisadvantagedre led tofocusupon spects ftheir ituationthat re ineffectiven inducing senseof njusticend, hence, ead topolitical uies-cence. p. 126,emphasisdded)

Itseems, herefore,hat eoplemay cceptunsatisfactoryutcomesfthey anbe madeto believe evenfalsely) hat heproceduresed todeterminehemsfair r egitimate.nassessinghefairnessfpaydifferentialsetweenmen ndwomen, or xample,thas beenfound hatwomen ttendmore othe egitimacyofprocedureshatdetermineaymenthan o the egitimacyf thepaymentoutcomes hemselvesMajor,1994).One wayin whichvictims f injusticemayfail toperceive heir resentsituationss unjust s by comparinghem o pastsituationsf evengreaterinjustice,hats,by makingntrapersonalatherhannterpersonalr ntergroupjusticecomparisonsMajor,1994). It has also beendemonstratedhatwomentend ocompareheirwagesto those f otherwomen nd avoid omparinghemwith hewagesof men Crosby, 982;Major,1994).The result ffailing operceivehe njusticefone'scircumstancess a depressedenseofentitlement.Major,McFarlin,ndGagnon1984) found hatnthe bsence finformationaboutwhat thers ere eing aidwomen endedopay hemselves1% ofwhatmenpaidthemselvesor he ameamount f work. n a follow-upxperiment,men nd womenwereofferedqualpaymentnd askedto work or s longastheydeemed ppropriate; omenworkedmore han thirdonger nd madefewermistakes.Major 1994, p. 309) concludes romheseresults ndothersthatn"importantonsequencefsocial nequalitysthatt softenppraisedslegitimate"ndis thereforeikely o be perpetuatedcf.Jost Banaji, 1994).Failure operceive isadvantage. usts people ometimesail operceiveinjustices,heymayalso failto realize hat hey remateriallyeprivedom-pared o some absolute r relative tandardCrosby, 982;Guimond Dube-Simard, 983;Gurin, 985;Janoff-Bulman,992;Kluegel& Smith, 986;Ma-jor, 1994;Smith, pears,& Oyen,1994;Taylor,Wright, oghaddam, La-londe,1990).Denyinghat isadvantagexistsmaybreed sort fcontentmentwith ircumstanceshat therwise ighteem ntolerable.hisphenomenonasbeen ermedparadoxicalontentment"Crosby, 982;Major,1994). t hasbeenfound, or xample, hatwhilemostwives dmit operformingarmorehouse-work ndchildcare han heir usbandsevenwhen oth oldobsoutside fthehome), hey rofessatisfactionith heunequal rrangementBiernat Wort-man,1991).Major 1994)hasarguedhatwomen's olerancef nequalitynthedivision f labor tems rom diminishedenseofpersonal ntitlementnda(partial) cceptance fsocietalnormsustifyingomen's isadvantagedtatus.Crosby ndcolleagueshaveobtained onsiderablevidence or henotionthat venwhen eopleperceiveheir roup o be a targetfdiscrimination,hey


10/29

Psychologyf False Consciousness 405stilldeny hat heyhemselvesredisadvantagedCrosby, 982;Crosby, ufall,Snyder, 'Connell,& Whalen, 989).Thisphenomenonas been hown oholdforwomenntheworkplaceCrosby, 982),politicallyctive esbiansCrosbytal., 1989), Francophonesn Quebec (Guimond& Dubd-Simard,983), andHaitian ndSouthAsian womennCanada Taylor tal., 1990).Crosby tal.(1989) conclude hat:

...we mustnotmeasure heneedfor ocial reformyhowupsetpeoplefeelwith heirpersonalituationsn ife.Karl Marxwasrightbout alseconsciousness:hosewho reoppressed r disadvantaged arely avea well-developedenseoftheir wndisadvan-tage. p. 94, emphasisdded)Whetherhedenialofdisadvantages a functionfmotivationalrcogni-tivebiasesorbothTaylortal., 1990), thasthepotentialor elayingffectivepolitical rotest.fpeopledo notrecognizehat hey redisadvantaged,hentheyreextremelynlikelyoengage npoliticalctivitiesimed teliminatingthedisadvantageCrosby tal., 1989;Major,1994).Even fpeoplerecognizehat heyhemselvesredisadvantaged,heywillnot ake ction gainst he ource f their isadvantagenless hey erceivehattheir ntire ocialgroups in a state f relative eprivationGuimond Dube-Simard, 983;Walker Mann,1987). n a particularlyramaticemonstration,perceptionsfgroup eprivationmong nemployedorkersnAustralia erefound o correlateignificantlyith n orientationoengage nsocialprotest,whileperceptionsf individual eprivationerefound o correlatenlywithself-reportedtressymptomsWalker Mann,1987).There remany easons,however,whypeoplewoulddeny hedisadvantagedtatus ftheir roup.Ac-cordingo social dentityheory,or xample,ow-statusroups ftenompen-satefor n inferiorocial dentityy ignoringrreinterpretingbjective tatusdifferencesTajfel& Turner, 986), ust as individualsfabricatend ignore

socialreality"norder opreserve positive elf-imageGoethals, 986).Whilesuch assessmentsmayprotectndividualrcollective elf-esteemn theshortrun, hey ould be socially rpoliticallyisastrousnthe ongrun fthey tifleattemptstpersonalrsocialchange.tmay eargued, or xample, hat heuseof "downward ocial comparison"rinciplesTaylor t al., 1983) results npolitical omplacencyyproviding constantmechanism or ll butthemostseverely eprivedo avoidperceivinghemselvess disadvantaged.Fatalism

Protest sfutile.The belief hat ffectiveocial organizations futile rimpossiblemounts o a resignedcceptance f thecurrentolitical ystem(Cunningham,987).Forexample, arkin1971) writes hat accommodationto materialnsecurityr deprivationetokens kindof fatalisticessimism"


11/29

406 Jost(p. 90), thepoliticalonsequencef which s almost ndoubtedlycquiescence.Certainlynewillnot ttempthangefone believes hathangesimpossible.thas been hown hat oliticalpathysgreatestmong ocialgroupshat remostseverelyeprivedShingles, 981;VanSnippenburg Scheepers, 991).Bag-guley 1992) has argued hat ncreasingolitical atalismmongunemployedworkersn Britainn the 1980swas related o historicalhanges uch as adecrease n thegovernment'sesponsivenesso socialprotestnd a lesseningforganizationalndcultural esourceswithin he workers'movementsee alsoPiven & Cloward,1977). Survey atareportedy Kluegeland Smith1986)indicate hat majorityf U.S. respondentsowperceive ualitativeocialchange o be virtuallympossible.Psychologistsavereferredo thephenomenonf"fatalisticessimism"resultingrom eprivations "learned elplessness"Seligman, 975), lthoughthe atter as usuallybeen seen as a purely ognitive-biologicalechanism,withoutmuch attentiono its social or political ontext.Nevertheless,t ispossible oapply he earned elplessness odel ofeelingsfapathy, assivity,andfutilitymong ictimsfsexual ndphysicalssaultPeterson Seligman,1983;Strube, 988).Tothe xtenthat eliefs bouthelplessness ay e seen sa causeas well as an effect fvictimization,heymayrepresentkind ffalseconsciousnessaughto thevictimn order oprolonghe buse and win hisorherresignation.Protests embarrassing.hephenomenonfpluralisticgnoranceMiller& McFarland,1991;Miller& Prentice, 994; Noelle-Neumann,984) mayreasonablyethoughtf as a kind ffalse onsciousness,ecause t nvolves nillusionwhichmayproveto be politically armful. ccordingo MillerandMcFarland1991), there re mportantasesofpluralisticgnorance hich relikethe toryf theEmperor's ewClothes: ach ndividualuppressesoubtshe or she has about hepresentituationndsimultaneouslynterpretsthers'silence s genuineatisfaction.onsequently,nundesirabletate faffairs aybeperpetuatedecause achgroupmembersembarrassedrafraid o voicehisorherowndissatisfaction,venthought s actuallyhared ythegroup s awhole. thas been shown hat naccurateerceptionsfsocial norms ave edentire ommunities,or xample, oprohibitheuse of alcohol,toengage nexcessive lcoholuse, to endorse acialsegregation,nd to express eligiousdevotionongafter hesebehaviors erefavoredrivatelyya majorityftheresidentssee Miller & Prentice, 994, for a review).Pluralisticgnorancemaybe thoughtf as a form f falseconsciousness; ecauseof a distortedunderstandingf socialreality,issatisfiedroupmembersrerenderedncapa-ble of collective rganization,nd political cquiescence esults.MillerandMcFarland1991) write:

At thegroupevel,pluralisticgnoranceanlead to theperpetuationfunpopularocialnorms. People will tolerateunjustsocial conditions,acquiesce toflawed decisions, and


12/29

Psychologyf False Consciousness 407desist romdvocating eeded eformsll because heyssume hemajorityftheireersdisagreewith hem nd believe hat othing,ther han mbarrassment,ould be gainedby revealingheir rue eliefs.pp. 304-305, emphasisdded).

Interestingly,hey dvocate ne strategyorovercomingluralisticgnorancethatMarxian nd feministcholars aveofferedor vercomingalse onscious-ness ingeneral: providingeoplewith vidence f thecommonnessf theirproblems"p. 307). By breakingheconspiracyf silence ndraising roupconsciousness,tmaybepossible o eliminatehefalsebelief hat ocialchangeis impossible ecause t s counternormative.Protestsexhausting.iven ndCloward1977)havenotedntheirtudyfthe fourmajorprotestmovementsf20th-century.S.A. that ven the mostsuccessfulhallenges o the status uo eventuallyollapsefrom he strain fprotest. he authorsuggesthat nceorganizationschieve omesuccess, hemass mobilization hichdrove themovement ends o subside, eaving heorganization'seadershipo continue opressfor ocialchange.Theorganiza-tionaleadership,nce nplace,tends opreoccupytselfwith elf-preservation,eventuallyurningo traditionallite nstitutionsor undingndsupport, hilebluntinghemovement's ilitancy.iven ndClowardrgue hat oliticalcqui-escence sthe ule ecausedissentingssocostlyothosenvolved,ndwhateverdisruptionso occur realways hort-lived.alse consciousnesslays promi-nent ole ntheirtory.heywrite hatPeoplewhose nlypossible ecoursenstruggles todefy hebeliefs nd ritualsaiddownbytheir ulersrdinarilyonot" p. 2). The belief hatustainedocialprotests impossibleurelyounts sa case of falseconsciousness,s itclearly erves he nterestsf thedominantand thwartshe nterestsf thedominated.

JustificationfsocialrolesMcMurtry1978) writeshat ne ofthemain orms fsocialconsciousnesswhichmaybeput o deological se nvolveshepremisehatWhateverank sheldby ndividualsnthe ocialorder epresentsheirntrinsicorth." eliefs fthis ype erve o ustifyystemsfinequalitynd toconvince isadvantagedgroupsnd ndividualshatheyre ithereservingftheir laceor ncapable foccupyingnyother ank Cunningham,987;Jost& Banaji, 1994). At theinterpersonalevelofanalysis,hismeans hat erceivers illformmpressionsabout therswhich reconsonant ith hepositionsr roles hey ccupy; ocialinteractionhereforeends o reflectndreproducexistingnequalitiesAthayDarley,1985). At thegroup evel,thismeans hat tereotypesilldevelop oexplain, egitimate,ndperpetuatetatus ndpowerdifferencesetweenocialgroups.neitherase,onedevelops hefalse mpressionhat eople ucceed rfail olelybecauseof nherentharacteristicsbout hemselves.heestablishedtendencyofavorsychologicalxplanationshichmphasizenternalttributes


13/29

408 Jostofsocial actorsratherhan, or xample, heir xternalircumstances)asbeencalledthe norm f nternality,"nd thasbeen mplicatednpracticesfsocialevaluationnd themaintenancefthe status uo (Beauvois& Dubois, 1988;Ichheiser, 970;Nisbett Ross, 1980).Person erceptions justification. number fstudies avedemonstratedthat eoplewilldraw nferencesbout he ttributesfthe elf ndothers nthebasis of nformationbout tatus r wealthCherulnik Bayless,1986;Darley& Gross, 1983; Dittmar,992).Forexample,Darley ndGross 1983) foundthatpeople udgeda child's ntellectualbilities o be higherwhenshe wasportrayedn a middle-classnvironmenthanwhenshe was portrayedn aworking-classnvironment,nd thisdifference as magnified y presentingsubjectswith dditional ondiagnosticnformation,hich ubjects resumablyused to justify heir iased impressionscf. Yzerbyt, chadron, eyens,&Rocher, 994).Similarly,ittmar1992) reportedhatwealthyndividuals ereperceivedo be more ntelligenthan oor ndividuals,ndthiswasfound o betrue orpoorperceiverss well as wealthyerceivers. heevidencewas inter-preted s supporting"dominantdeology"modelof impression-formationsagainst "similarity-based"odel, ecause hepoorerubjectseemed oacceptsocialbeliefsustifyinghematerialuccessofothers.

Justs status ndwealthreoften sedas cues nperson erception,o tooare socialroles hat argetsccupy. or nstance, oss,Amabile, ndSteinmetz(1977) found hat eopleattributedreaternowledgeosubjects ssigned an-domly o theroleof"Questioner"han osubjects ssigned otheroleof"Con-testant"n a mockgameof"Jeopardy."his was due tothefact hat ontestantsbutnot uestioners,ecause fthe equirementsftheirocialroles,were orcedtoexpress he imitationsf their nowledgenresponse odifficultuestionsposedtothem.The authorsaketheir indingso indicate "social-perceptionbias,"andtheyoncludehat eople are pt ounderestimatehe xtentowhichseemingly ositive ttributesf thepowerfulimply eflect headvantagesfsocialcontrol"p. 494). Inferringersonal ttributesn thebasis of status rsocialrole s likely oengendercceptancefthe xistingocialorder,whetherornot hat rder sworthreserving.he belief hat eopleoccupy ertain olesin society ecausethey renaturallyuited or hem ontributesmisleadingsenseof egitimacynd nevitabilityo the ystemcf.Sidanius& Pratto, 993).Stereotypings justification.ostndBanaji 1994) reviewed heresearchliteraturenstereotypingrom false onsciousnesserspectivendfound on-siderableupportor henotionhat dvantagednddisadvantagedroups ub-scribe ostereotypiceliefs bout hemselvesnsuch waythat heirtatus rrole seems ustifiabler appropriate.his approach elpsto explain, mongother hings,whywomen ossess argelyhe amegender tereotypess men(Basow, 1986) and whyblackssubscribe o similar acialstereotypess dowhitesDovidio& Gaertner,986).Thespecificmechanismsfsocial nfluence


14/29

PsychologyfFalseConsciousness 409throughhich tereotypeservingominantroupsome obe shared y he estofsociety epresentpportunitiesor utureesearch.

In an experimentalemonstrationfstereotypings socialrationalization,Hoffmannd Hurst1990) reportedhat fictionalroup omprisedf"childraisers"was udged o bemore atient, ind, ndunderstandinghan group f"cityworkers," howereudged o be self-confidentnd forceful. he authorsargued hat uchstereotypeserve deological unctionsf ustifyinghe tatusquo andthat endertereotypesnparticularoriginatenanattempto rational-ize thedivision f aborbyattributingoeach sexthose ualities eemedneces-sary or erformancefthe ssigned unctions"pp. 206-207). To the xtenthatpeoplestereotypehemselvesndothersn role-consistentays, hen heymaybelievefalselyhat articularorms f nequalityndexploitationre ustifiable(see Jost Banaji, 1994).False attributionfblame

Theanalysis f falseblame, dentifiedy Cunningham1987) as a caseoffalseconsciousness,s particularlyell-suited or ocialpsychologicaltudy,because tdealswithhowpeople dentifyhe auses ofevents,n otherwords,howtheymake ttributionsor ccurrencesntheirocialandphysicalnviron-ment.The attributionf blame ndresponsibilityasbeena particularlyctivearea ofpsychologicalesearch,lthoughhe ink o false onsciousness as notbeen made. Nevertheless,here re severalways in whichfalse blame canperpetuateppression.fthevictimsfoppressionan be made oblame hem-selves for heirmisfortune,hen heywillnever hink ochallengehe ystem.Thenext est hing,romhe tandpointfthe ominant,sthat he ubordinatedgroupswill blameeach other rsomeone lse andthereforeail to attach nyblame to those who benefit he most.Piven and Cloward 1977) write hat"Ordinarily,henpeoplesuffer...hardships,heyblameGod, or theyblamethemselves"p. 12). Ineitherase, it s unlikelyhat isadvantagedroupsndindividuals illengage n activitieso eliminate he ources f their isadvan-tage.Self-blame. s we haveseen,Lerner1980) argues hat eopleare moti-vated o subscribeoa "beliefna justworld" n which eople"getwhat heydeserve,"for t is only n sucha worldthatpeople can have control veroutcomes. hetheoryas been pplied o thephenomenonfself-blamemongvictims fviolenceMiller& Porter,983).Researchuggestshat eoplewouldprefero acceptresponsibilityortrauma ather han cknowledgehat omeevents rebeyond heir ersonal ontrolJanoff-Bulman,992;Lerner, 980;Miller& Porter,983).Evenwhen ictims fsexual ndphysicalssault o notengage n general characterologicalelf-blame,"hey requentlyttributehe


15/29

410 Jostvictimizationo theirwn pecific ehaviorsrioro the vent r eventsJanoff-Bulman,1992). Evidenceof self-blamemongunemployed orkers as alsobeen documentedBreakwell,1986; Guimond,Begin,& Palmer,1989). Ingeneral,elf-blame aybeexpectedo havevery egative sychologicalswellas political onsequencesor ppressed roups nd ndividuals.False other lame. fdisadvantagedroupsan bemade o blame hewrongsource ftheirmisfortune,henheymay ail o dentifyhemost seful oliticalsolutions vailable othem. or nstance,acist r sexist ttributionsmong heworkinglassesmayserve odistracthem rommeaningfulollective ction(Cunningham,987;Lipset,1960; Okami,1992;Willhelm, 980). Social psy-chologistsavereferredothis henomenons "scape-goating"Allport, 954a).Cunningham1987,p. 254)writeshat Maleworkershinkhatwomen's ncur-sion nto raditionallyale-dominatedork s theroot auseof ob insecurity.This, oo, s aninstanceffalse onsciousnessnsofars thebelief elps okeepthe abour orce ivided."Consistent ith hepossibilityffalse onsciousness,Tajfel 1978) has collected xperimentalnd fieldevidencethat ow-statusgroupsremoreikelyocompetewith ne anotherhanwith igh-statusroups.Long ago, Marx 1869) wrote bout herelationshipetween heEnglish ndIrishworkinglasses that:

Theaverage nglishworkerates he rish s a competitorho owers iswages nd evelof iving.He feelsnationalndreligiousntagonismowards im.He appears o him nmuch he ame ights the lack laves ppear othe oorwhitesnthe outherntates fNorth merica. hisantagonismetween heproletariansfEnglands artificiallyulti-vated nd maintainedythebourgeoisie.tknows hat n this ntagonismies therealsecret f maintainingtspower. p. 196)The conspiratorialmplicationsf remarks uch as thesehaveoften oundedimplausibleo social scientists hodoubt he existence f a "ruling lass."However,t s importanto realize hat he preadingf falseblame ndothertypes f false onsciousness eednotbea conscious rdeliberatetrategyn thepart f dominantroups rindividualsEagleton,1991; Elster, 982). Itmayhappen athernintentionallyhroughheusual venues fsocial nfluenceachtimepowerfulources xpress he nterests,erceptions,ndabilities hat rederived rom heir ocialroles cf.Ross,Amabile, Steinmetz,977).Gramsci(1971), for xample,writes f the"'spontaneous' onsent ivenbythegreatmassesofthepopulationothegeneral irectionmposed n sociallifebythedominant undamentalroup" ndproposes hat this onsent s 'historically'causedbytheprestigeandconsequentonfidence) hich hedominantroupenjoys" p. 12). Becausepowerfulources repaidmore ttentionhan ower-less sourcesFiske, 1993),because heyre more killed tmanipulatingocialinteractionsAthay& Darley, 985),andbecausethey remorepersuasivengeneralMcGuire, 985), t should otbetoosurprisinghat deasreflectinghe


16/29

PsychologyfFalse Consciousness 411interestsfpowerfulndividualsndgroups rewidespread,venamong hepowerless.

Identification ith heoppressorPsychological ependence.Mason 1971) suggestshat psychologicale-pendence" ften esults rom he relations f dominationnd subordination.Based upona review f thehistoricalndanthropologicalata,Masonarguesthat ominantroups requentlyonvince thers oprotecthem romnternalandexternalhreatso theirupremacy.his sachieved yfosteringependenceamong ubordinates,reating sense hatociety equireshe xistencefrulersandtheruled; n thisway, ubjectsmaybe ledunwittinglyoprotect ystemswhichplace them t a disadvantagecf. Sidanius,1993).Mason(1971) evenclaims hat ubordinatesillnot feel ecure nless heyregrouped ogethernclansor castes orguilds,withinwhich heyhave a recognized art oplay,known ositionn thehierarchyndknown bligationso fulfil"p. 10).Thus,peoplemaycome to dependupontheir ulers orpurpose nd directioncf.Bettelheim, 960; Lifton, 961;Schein,1956).A furthertep n theprocess f social andpolitical ependences providedbya cognitiveissonancenalysis fthe ffectf nitiationites ncommitment(see Cialdini,1988,for review). t is theorizedhat eople attempto ustifytheir articipationnpainful rhumiliatingctivitiesy increasingather handecreasingheir ommitmento thegroup r nstitution.hus, hemosthorrificsystemsmayproducehehighest egrees f oyaltynddependenceBrickman,1987).Thisanalysishasbeenapplied o victims fabusiverelationshipsnaneffortounderstandheir ontinuedommitmentotheir busersStrube, 988).

Thus, nferringelf-commitmentn thebasisof busemaybe oneamong everaltypes ffalsebeliefsnvolvednthedecision ostaynan abusive elationship.Preferenceortheoutgroup. ccordingo receivedwisdom nthefield fintergroupelations, roupmembers re motivatedomaintainheevaluativesuperiorityf the ngroup y favoringimilar thers nddiscriminatinggainstdissimilar thersTajfel& Turner,986).However, here avebeennumerousreportsver heyears foutgroupreferencesmong isadvantagedroupmem-bers inter lia, Allport, 954a;Clark& Clark, 1947;Fine& Bowers,1984;Giles & Powesland, 975;Vaughan, 978).Experimentalvidence foutgroupfavoritismmonggroups f owstatus rpowerhas beengrowingSachdev&Bourhis,1985, 1987; see Hinkle& Brown,1990,for review). t has beenargued hat utgroupavoritismerves operpetuatenequalityy eadingmem-bersof subordinateroups o believe hat hey reinferior,eservingftheirplight, r incapable ftaking ction gainst hecauses oftheir ubordination


17/29

412 Jost(Jost& Banaji, 1994; Sidanius,1993; Sidanius& Pratto, 993). D6pret ndFiske 1993) have found hatmembers fpowerless roups reaptto identifywith heoutgroupnless here re reasons osuspecthat conspiracys under-way (see also Crocker, roadnax, uhtanen, Blaine, 1993,on theroleofconspiracyheoriesngroup onsciousness-raising).s Eagleton aswrittennhis recent tudy f ideology nd falseconsciousness,themost fficientp-pressors the newhopersuades isunderlingso ove,desire nd dentifyithhispower" p. xiii).

ResistanceochangeCognitiveonservatism.esearchers ave ongnoted hetendencyo as-sume preexistingtate faffairsndmakeminordjustmentso it ratherhanintroducingholesale hange.Thephenomenonasbeenreferredo as "anchor-ing" Kahneman tal., 1982).Whilemost f this esearch ashad ittle odowith olitical ystems, zzi andJost1994) found na studyfpeople'sprefer-ences for roceduralustice hat ubjectswere tronglynchoredythe xperi-mentaltatus uo. Whengiven free hoice o mplementirtuallynytype f

decision-makingrocedure,ubjects' esponses ere tronglyonstrainedytheexperimentalonditionowhich heywererandomlyssigned.Related o thismaybe a "statusuoeffect," herebyecision-makersxhibit clearpreferencefor he xistingtate faffairslthoughew ptionswouldbringbout utcomesthat re betterhan rthe ame as oldones Quattrone Tversky,988;Sam-uelson& Zeckhauser,987).Greenwald1980) introducedhe ermcognitiveonservatism"orefer othetendencyo adhere o thoughtsrbeliefswhich reno longer daptive rfunctional.n thedomain fpoliticalognition,his ropensityouldcontributeto thepreservationf undesirabledeasandcircumstancesimply ecausetheyrequire ochange oattitudesr beliefssee alsoJanoff-Bulman,992).Cogni-tiveconservatisms similar ofatalismn itsconsequences,ut t nvolves hebelief hat hange, nitself,s aversive, otustdifficultoachieve.Behavioral onservatism.n a fashionnalogous otheproblemfcogni-tive onservatism,eoplemay tick isproportionatelyith astpracticesimplybecausethey refamiliarrhabitual.Hackman ndOldham1980), for xam-ple,havedocumentedheways nwhichmployeesend oreproducenefficientwork rrangementsimply opreserve ast organizationalractices.Undoubt-edly, ringingbout ubstantialocialorpoliticalhangewould equireonsider-ablerevision fone'sbehavior,nd thismaybe costly rdifficultnder omecircumstances.owever, elievinghat hat ehaviors bestwhich equiresheleastamount fchange anresultn a spiralingfdisadvantage,imilar otheproblemf sunk osts" cf.Strube, 988). fonecontinuesoengagenharmful


18/29

PsychologyfFalse Consciousness 413behaviors,ither utof habit r in order o ustify astefforts,hen nemayperpetuate systemrrelationshipo thedetrimentf the elfor thegroupcf.Brickman,987;Janoff-Bulman,992).

FALSE CONSCIOUSNESS AS A TOPIC FORPOLITICAL PSYCHOLOGYJust s socialpsychologistsrequentlyaveurged heir ield o"socialize"theirubjectmatterinter lia, Carlson,1984; srael& Tajfel,1972;Pepitone,1981;Steiner, 974), propose hat t s time o"politicize" mpirical sycholo-gy byaddressinghepolitical ontextfdominationndsubordinationhichsurrounds ost fourthinkingndbehavingn the ocial world. hephenome-nonof false consciousness rovidesust suchan opportunity.ffectivendcognitiveasesof human rrorre now wellunderstood;irtuallyoattention,however, as beengiven o social andpolitical ircumstancessuchas status,power, nequality,njustice,xploitation,ndabuse)that oster egativellu-sions.Unlikefalse onsciousness,deology as been a favoriteopic fpolitical

psychologistsrom he moment heir ieldwas foundedLane, 1962; Sears,1969). t continuesooccupy ride fplaceas one ofthedefiningonstructsfthedisciplineKinder& Sears, 1985; Sniderman Tetlock,1986a). In theMarxian radition,s we haveseen,theconcepts f ideology nd false con-sciousness re ntertwinedAbercrombie,ill,& Turner,980;Eagleton, 991;Gabel, 1975;Gramsci, 971;Mepham, 972).Because ofrulinglassideology(defineds a systemf ideasorbeliefs hat erve hedominantroup's ocialinterestst the xpense fother roups),Marxistsave rguedhatmost eople'sunderstandingsf social andpolitical ealityredistorted,nverted,nd false(Eagleton,1991; Wood,1988). Significantly,owever,mainstreamocialsci-ence cametodrop henegativevaluation ssociatedwithdeological hinking(Allport, 954b; Mannheim, 936),andthe search or deology ecamenotasearchforfalseor distortedonceptionsf thepoliticalworld theeffectsfideology), utthe earch or oherent,onsistentelief ystemsnthepart fpoliticallymotivatedndividualsBell, 1960; Converse,1964). By urgingreturn o the evaluative onceptionf ideology,hat s, to thestudy ffalseconsciousness, amnot imply xpressing preferenceor he erminologyfMarxoverBell,Converse,nd others. have rguedhat here s considerable,butneglected,vidence or he mpirical ropositionhat eople'sresponsesosocial andpolitical ystemsrevery ftennaccuratendmaladaptiveor hem.Of course, hequestion f whetherome or most)peopledo indeedpossesshighly ophisticatednd integratedystemsfpolitical eliefs s a valid anduseful mpirical uestionBell, 1960; Converse, 964;Kinder& Sears,1985;


19/29

414 JostMcGuire,1985),but t s importantlso torecognizeheopposite, amelyhedegree owhich rrorsn socialcognitionerve s an mpedimentoaccurate nduseful epresentationfthepoliticalworld.

POTENTIAL OBJECTIONS TO THE PSYCHOLOGICAL STUDYOF FALSE CONSCIOUSNESSTheconcept f falseconsciousnesss onewhich s bound obe metwithsubstantialesistancen thepartof contemporaryesternocial scientists,perhapswith oodreason. tmaybe seen as a vestige fcommunistoctrine,political hilosophyhatswidely ssumed o havebeendisprovenyhistoricaldevelopments.hepurpose f this aper s not o advance doctrinaireonceptto be adhered odespite vidence o thecontrary,uttosalvagean important,perhaps venessential,nsight orpolitical sychology,amely hat rrors ncognition roduce evels ofpolitical cquiescence hatmaybe harmfulo theindividual,hegroup, ndthe ociety. herefore,tseemsworthwhileo raiseand defend gainst omeof the most ikely bjections o thestudy f falseconsciousnessforother efensesn thephilosophicaliterature,ee Cunning-

ham, 1987;Meyerson, 991;Runciman, 969). Six mainobjectionswillbeconsidered ere: a) the term false consciousness"s too evaluative;b) itdiscountseople'ssubjectiveccounts f their wnsituations;c) it blames hevictim;d) it s unfalsifiable;e) itpostulatesnternalizationhere ompliancewilldo; and f) it s toopolitical.Theobjectionhat he onceptffalse onsciousnessstoo evaluativen tsconnotationsfairlyasilydismissedyappealingo some xamples fpsychol-ogy'smost ommonlytudied henomena.orexample, ognitivendsocialpsychologistsave ong poken f"illusions"r "biases"or"errors"nthinkingorperceiving ithout ndueworryhat heterms reexcessively egative.Acomputerizedearch fpsychologicalrticlesndexed yPsycINFO eveals hatthe ermillusion"ppearsmore han ,200times s a keyword uringheyears1967-1993.SomeMarxists averegardedalse onsciousnesss a type f errorin nformation-processingseeElster, 982,1985), ndMarxhimself rew nal-ogiesbetween erceptualllusionsnd false onsciousnessWood, 1988).As arule,psychologistsave not been afraid o use evaluativeabels such as thefundamentalttributionrror, orrespondenceias, andpluralisticgnorance.Manypsychologistsaveusedwhat s likelyo be themost bjectionablespectofthe erm false onsciousness,"amelyheword false," s indiscussions f"false onsensus"Marks& Miller, 987), falseuniqueness"Goethals, 986),and thedoubly valuativefalsefamebias" (Banaji& Greenwald, 994).A second bjection ollows s a consequencefemployingvaluativean-guage. It is that n ascribingtrue" nd "false"consciousness o people,one


20/29

Psychologyf False Consciousness 415encountershe isk fprivilegingome ocialorpolitical iewpointsverothers(Lewy,1982),possiblyvenrepeatingastpracticesf discriminationy gnor-ingoppressed roupmembers'ccountsf their wnexperiencesRiger, 992).MacKinnon1989, p. 39), for xample, sksof critical eminism:How cananythingnywoman hinks e calledfalse n a theoryhat urportso validate llwomen's xperience?"n general, hefalse onsciousnesserspectiveoes in-deedsuggesthat eople'sown accounts f their ircumstancesaybe untrust-worthynder omecircumstances.arcuse1964) resolved his roblemn thefollowing ay.He wrote hat:

Inthe ast nalysis,he uestionf what retrue ndfalseneedsmust e answeredytheindividualshemselves,ut nly nthe ast nalysis; hats, if nd when heyre free ogivetheir wn nswer. s long s theyrekept ncapablefbeing utonomous,s long sthey re ndoctrinatedndmanipulateddown otheir erynstincts),heir nswer o thisquestion annot e taken s their wn. p. 6)Indeed, tis a noncontroversialssumptionfsocialpsychologyince atleastNisbett nd Wilson 1977) that t will not do to simply akepeople'sopinionsbout heir eliefs nddesires t facevalue.Motivationaliases, ogni-tive imitations,nd nformationalomplexitiesaveallbeen hown oproducedistortionsnpeople's perceptionsfthemselvesnd of the ocialworldinter

alia, Greenwald, 980;Kahnemantal., 1982;Kunda, 1990;Nisbett Ross,1980;Quattrone Tversky,988).Theconceptffalse onsciousnessighlightspolitical s well as psychologicalontributorso the naccuracyffirst-personaccounts.There s a methodologicalersion fthe claimthat eople'saccounts ftheir wnsituationshouldbe trusted. uch anobjectionwouldholdthat t isbeyond hemeansofpsychologyo determineheaccuracy r inaccuracyfdifferentccounts,nd so first-personccounts houldnotbe disputed. ocialscientistsften avebeenunwillingo decidewhich fthebeliefsheytudyretrue nd which re false.Berger nd Luckmann1967), for xample,declinetomake "assertions bouttheontologicaltatus f thephenomenanalyzed"(p. 20). Evenpolitical sychologistsave rgued hat he ttributionfpoliticalmotives nd nterestsrebeyondhemethodologicalapabilitiesfthe iscipline(Sniderman Tetlock, 986b).Marx ndEngels 1846)criticizedheunwilling-nessofhistoriansnd ocial cientistsfhis getodowhat veryrdinaryersondoesregularly,amely,odistinguishetweenrue ndfalse:Whilstnordinaryifeevery hopkeepers verywellable todistinguishetweenwhatsomebody rofesseso be and what ereallys,ourhistoriansavenotyetwon ven histrivialnsight.p. 23)

Togiveupthepossibilityf ocatingeliefs ndimensionsfevaluationuch saccuracy,elf-interestedness,daptiveness,nd so on is torelinquishhe laimofpsychologyo be a science.There reseveral easonswhy sychologistsustmake uch valuations,ut hief mong hem s that therwiseheywould ack


21/29

416 Jostcriteria orudging hevalidityf alternativenterpretationsf their ata;theirconclusions r beliefs bout he vidence ouldnot laim o be more ccurate ruseful han hebeliefs f aypersons. point fexperimentalontrols to ruleout an alternativeossible ccount s incompleter inaccurate.hus,Nisbettand Wilson 1977) were bletoconclude hat ubjects' eliefs bout heir wndecision-makingtrategieserenot ccurate-peopledid not dentifyhe real"or"true" asis for heirwnpreferences.A third otentialbjection o thestudy f false consciousnesss that tblamesvictimsor heirppressiony mplyinghat t s theirwnweakness rignorancehat reateshe ituationfoppression. ictimsffalse onsciousnessmaybe seenas stupid rfoolhardyorharboringeliefswhich recontraryotheir wn nterests. hileworriesuch s these hould e taken ery eriouslybythe tudentf false onsciousness,t s certainlyot hepurpose fsuchananalysis o locateresponsibilityr blame within he victim.As thepoetYev-tushenkowrote, No one blames an old nail slidingnto a wall, it's beinghammered iththe butt f an axe." This is not to imply hatmembers fsubordinateroups re incapable frejectinghe dominantdeology..ndeed,consciousness-raisingnd"freedomfthewill"play mportantoles n someversions f Marxian ocialtheory,articularlyhose ssociatedwithhework fGramsci1971).Nevertheless,he imof dentifyingalsebeliefshat erpetuateoppressions not to fault ictims ut to empowerhemCollins, 1991;Cun-ningham,987;MacKinnon, 989).A fourthriticismf false onsciousnesss that t susedbyMarxists s an"escapehatch" o save theirheoryromheweight fdisconfirmingvidence(Lewy,1982). Thus, t has been claimed hat alse onsciousness as invokedunfairlyo rationalizehe pparentailure f Marx'spredictionfa worldwiderevolution.ndeed, here s a danger fmakingMarxismrrefutabley alwaysseekingefugen the henomenonffalse onsciousness,xplainingwaypeople'saversion o revolutionnd communism.or thisreason,falseconsciousnessneedsto be subjectedorigorousmpiricalonfrontationith learcriteria ordisconfirmation.nterestingly,ukaics,ne oftheMarxist cholarsmost ssoci-atedwith he onceptffalse onsciousness, ade his oint irectly,nd tmayhave ontributedohis xileby he talinistegimeGabel,1975).Lukaics rote:The dialecticalmethod oes notpermit s simply o proclaim he falseness' f thisconsciousnessndpersistnan inflexibleonfrontationftrue ndfalse.On the ontrary,itrequires s toinvestigatehisfalseconsciousness'oncretely....1971, p. 58)A centralontentionfthis aper s that he cientifictudyffalse onscious-ness s a psychologicalndeavor,s wellas a sociological, olitical,conomic,historical,ndphilosophicalne. Thecontrolffordedythe sychologyxperi-mentmayprovidehe learestoncretevidence or ndagainsthe perationfsocial andpoliticalllusions, s researchersoundwith egardocognitivendperceptualllusions.A fifthbjections tobe foundnthework fScott1990),who rgues hat


22/29

PsychologyfFalseConsciousness 417what ooks ike falseconsciousnessdeferenceoauthority,olerance finjus-tice, cceptancefabuse, tc.) sreally public isplayhat iffersonsiderablyfrom hepolitical esistancehat isadvantagedroups ndindividualsxpressprivately.cott itespsychologicalesearchn ngratiationo upportisconten-tion hat ppressed roups o not nternalizehebeliefs f theirppressorsutratherlay tonthick"nordero avoidpunishment.hile wouldnotdeny hatpressuresocomply ubliclywith hewishes fthepowerful laya significantrole n the ctionsifnotbeliefs) fthepowerless,he tory oes not ndthere.Inmost f the xperimentalituationsiscussedbove, ubjects' esponses erecollected rivatelynd under onditionshat uaranteednonymityCrosby tal., 1989; Dittmar,992;Hoffman Hurst, 990;Majoretal., 1984;Rossetal., 1977;Sachdev& Bourhis, 985,1987;Vaughan, 978).Nevertheless,herewasconsiderablevidence or hefailure operceive isadvantage,heustifica-tion of unequalsocial roles,outgroupavoritism,ndother arieties f falseconsciousness.A sixth ndfinal bjectiono the sychologicaltudyffalse onsciousnessis thatt s too"political,"meaninghat t mplicates nonnormativecientificdisciplinenthemaking fprescriptionsor ocialchange.However,f twerefound hatwidespread alsebeliefs uch as thosepostulated ythe falsecon-sciousness erspectiveaddeleteriousffectsnpeople for xample,t ompro-mised heir pportunities,imitedheirspirationsnlife, rreduced heir elf-esteem), henwe should ully xpect hat ocialscientists ould eek tounder-minetheseself-defeatingalse beliefs.The notion hatharmful r irrationalbeliefsmaybe identifiedndchangeds a familiarssumptionfboth ocialandclinicalpsychology.orexample,Nisbett'swork nthedeficienciesf humanreasoningNisbett Ross,1980) edhim ndhiscollaboratorso nvestigatehepossibilitiesf educating eopleto makebetterypes f decisionsNisbett,Krantz, epson, Fong,1982).Similarly,teele'sresearchnhighly-achievingfemale ndminoritytudents hohadnegativexpectationshat heywouldfailinschool esultedna successfulnterventionrogram herebyuchfalse eliefswere hallengedndsupplantedSteele,1992). nthefield fclinical sycholo-gy, herapeuticpproachess diverse s those dvocatedypsychodynamicndcognitive-behavioralheorieshare he ssumptionhatndividualsoldbeliefswhich refundamentallynhealthyor hem, nd that art ftherapynvolvesthe eliminationf suchbeliefs.There s no a priori easonwhypsychologyshould im to be any ess useful o socialandpoliticalife han o otherreasofhuman xistenceDewey,1900;Miller, 969).

CONCLUSIONIt has beenargued hat heproblem f falseconsciousnessepresentspotentiallymportantutneglected ieldof study orsocial, cognitive,nd


23/29

418 Jostespecially olitical sychologists.n general, alseconsciousness efers o theholdingffalse eliefs hatustain ne's owndisadvantage.t wassuggestedhatthere re at least sixmain ypes f false onsciousnessnd that here xists tleast somepsychologicalvidenceforeach of thesetypes.After selectivereview f the vailable vidence, omepotentialbjectionsothe tudyf falseconsciousness ereraised ndaddressed. y focusingheoreticalndempiricalattentionn theroleof false onsciousnessn theproblemfpolitical cquies-cence, t shoped hat more ophisticatednderstandingfsocialandpoliticalrealitywillemerge.

ACKNOWLEDGMENTSI thank obert . Abelson,Mahzarin . Banaji,Jenniferrocker,usanT.Fiske,DonaldPhilipGreen,Anthony. Greenwald,WilliamJ.McGuire, aleT. Miller, nd TomR. Tyler or heir enerousommentsn an earlier raftfthismanuscript.amindebtedlsotoTheresaClaire,CurtisHardin,nd Law-renceJost or heirmany ontributionso thedevelopmentfthese deas. Thisworkwas supportednpart ya Graduate ellowshiprom aleUniversityndNIMH Grant#5R01-MH32588 o WilliamJ.McGuire.

REFERENCESAbelson,R. P. (1976). Socialpsychology'sationalman. nS. I. Benn& G. W.MortimoreEds.),Rationalitynd the ocial sciences pp. 58-89). London:Routledge.Abercrombie, ., Hill, S., & Turner,. S. (1980). Thedominantdeologyhesis. ondon:Allen&Unwin.Adorno, . W.,Frenkel-Brunswik,., Levinson, . J.,& Sanford, . N. (1950). The uthoritarianpersonality.ew York:Harper.Alloy, . B., & Abramson,. Y. (1979).Judgmentsfcontingencyndepressedndnondepressedstudents:adderbutwiser?JournalfExperimentalsychology: eneral,108,441-485.Allport, . W. (1954a). The nature fprejudice. ambridge, A: AddisonWesley.Allport,G. W. (1954b). The historicalackgroundfmodern ocialpsychology.n G. Lindzey(Ed.), Thehandbook fsocialpsychologypp. 3-56). Reading,MA: Addison-Wesley.Athay,M., & Darley, .M. (1985).The role fpowernsocial-exchangeelationships.n M. Friese& J.Sabini Eds.),Goaldirected ehavior: he oncept f ction npsychologypp. 230-247).Hillsdale,NJ:Erlbaum.Azzi,A., & Jost, .T. (1994). Voteswithoutower:Proceduralustice s mutual ontrolnmajority-minorityelations. npublished anuscript,aleUniversity.Bagguley, . (1992). Protest,cquiescence nd theunemployed: comparativenalysis f the1930's and 1980's.British ournalfSociology,3, 443-461.Banaji,M. R., & Greenwald, . G. (1994). Implicittereotypingndprejudice.n M. P. Zanna&J. M. Olson Eds.), Thepsychologyfprejudice: heOntarioymposium/VolumeII pp. 55-76). Hillsdale,NJ:Erlbaum.


24/29

PsychologyfFalse Consciousness 419Basow,S. A. (1986). Gender tereotypes:raditionsnd alternatives. onterey,A: Brooks/Cole.Beauvois,J.L., & Dubois,N. (1988). Thenorm f nternalitynthe xplanationfpsychologicalevents. uropeanJournalfSocialPsychology,8, 299-316.Bell, D. (1960). Theendof deology. ambridge, A: Harvard niversityress.Berger, . L., & Luckmann,. (1967). The ocial constructionfreality. arden ity,NY: AnchorBooks.Bettelheim,. (1960). The nformedeart.New York:Avon.Biernat,M., & Wortman,. B. (1991). Sharing f homeresponsibilitiesetween rofessionallyemployedwomen ndtheir usbands. ournalfPersonalityndSocialPsychology,0, 844-860.Billig,M. (1976). Socialpsychologyndintergroupelations. ondon:Academic ress.Billig,M. (1982). Ideology nd socialpsychology.xford: asil Blackwell.Breakwell, . M. (1986). Political nd attributionalesponsesf theyounghort-termnemployed.Political sychology,, 575-586.Brickman,. (1987). Commitment,onflict,nd caring.Englewood liffs, J:Prentice-Hall.Brown,L. M., & Gilligan,C. (1992).Meetingt thecrossroads:Women'ssychologynd girls'development.ambridge,MA: Harvard niversityress.Brown, . (1974). Toward Marxist sychology.ew York:Harper.Carlson,R. (1984). What's social about social psychology?Where's heperson n personalityresearch? ournal fPersonalitynd SocialPsychology,7, 1304-1309.Carragee,K. M. (1993). A critical valuation f debates xamininghemediahegemonyhesis.Western ournalfCommunication,7, 330-348.Cherulnik,. D., & Bayless,J. K. (1986). Person erceptionnenvironmentalontext: he influ-enceofresidentialettingsn mpressionsf heirccupants. ournalf ocialPsychology,26,667-673.Cialdini,R. B. (1988). Influence:cience ndpractice.Harper ollins.Clark,K. B., & Clark,M. P. (1947).Racial dentificationndpreferencenNegro hildren.nE. E.Maccoby, . M. Newcomb, E. L. HartleyEds.),Readingsn socialpsychologypp. 602-611). New York:Holt,Rinehart,nd Winston.Cohen,G. A. (1978). Karl Marx'stheory fhistory: defence. xford: larendon ress.Collins,P. H. (1991). Blackfeministhought: nowledge,onsciousness,nd thepolitics fem-powerment. ew York:Routledge.Converse, . (1964).The nature fbeliefystemsnmasspublics.n D. E. ApterEd.),Ideologynddiscontentpp. 206-261). London:Collier-MacMillan.Crocker, ., Broadnax, ., Luhtanen, ., & Blaine,B. (1993).Belief nU.S. governmentonspir-acies againstblacks: Powerlessnessr group onsciousness? npublished anuscript,tateUniversityf NewYork t Buffalo.Crosby, . J. 1982).Relative eprivationndworking omen.New York:Oxford niversityress.Crosby, . J.,Pufall,A., Snyder, . C., O'Connell, M., & Whalen,P. (1989). The denialofpersonal isadvantagemong ou,me, nd ll the therstriches.nM. Crawford M. Gentry(Eds.), Gender nd thought: sychological erspectivespp. 79-99). New York:Springer-Verlag.Cunningham,. (1987). Falseconsciousness.nDemocraticheoryndsocialismpp. 236-267).Cambridge: ambridge niversityress.Darley,J.M., & Gross,R. H. (1983). A hypothesis-confirmingias in abeling ffects. ournalfPersonalityndSocial Psychology,4, 20-33.D6pret, . F., & Fiske,S. T. (1993). Socialcognitionndpower: omecognitiveonsequencesfsocial structures a source fcontroleprivation.nG. Weary,. Gleicher, K. MarshEds.),Controlmotivationnd social cognitionpp. 176-202). New York: pringer-Verlag.


25/29

420 JostDeutsch,M. (1985). Distributiveustice.New Haven:Yale Universityress.Dewey,J. 1900). Psychologynd socialpractice. sychological eview, , 105-124.Dittmar, . (1992). Perceivedmaterialwealth nd firstmpressions.ritishJournal f SocialPsychology,1, 379-391.Dovidio,J.F., & Gaertner,. L. (1986).Prejudice,iscrimination,ndracism: istoricalrendsndcontemporarypproaches.n J.F. Dovidio& S. L. GaertnerEds.),Prejudice, iscrimination,and racismpp. 1-34). SanDiego,CA: Academic ress.Dworkin,A. (1983). Right-wingomen.New York:Perigree.Eagleton, . (1991). Ideology. ondon:Verso.Edelman,M. (1960). Symbolsndpoliticaluiescence. merican olitical cienceReview, 4,695-704.Elster,J. (1982). Belief,bias, and ideology.n M. Hollis & S. Lukes (Eds.), Rationalitynd

relativismpp. 123-148). Oxford: asil Blackwell.Elster, . 1985).Making enseofMarx.Cambridge:ambridge niversityress.Fine,M. (1979).Optionso njustice:eeing therights. epresentativeesearch nSocialPsychol-ogy, 0, 61-76.Fine,M. (1992).Disruptiveoices:Thepossibilitiesffeministesearch.AnnArbor: niversityfMichigan ress.Fine, M., & Bowers,C. (1984). Racial self-identification:heeffectsf socialhistoryndgender.JournalfApplied ocialPsychology,4, 136-146.Fiske,S. T. (1993). Controllingther eople:The impact f poweron stereotyping.mericanPsychologist,8, 621-628.Freud,A. (1946). The goandthemechanismsfdefence. ew York: nternationalniversityress.Furnham, . (1985). Justworld eliefs n anunjust ociety: cross ulturalomparison.uropeanJournal fSocial Psychology,5, 363-366.Gabel,J. 1975). False consciousness: nessayonreification.xford: asil Blackwell.Giles, H., & Powesland, . F. (1975).Speech tylend social evaluation. ondon:Academic ress.Goethals,G. R. (1986). Fabricatingnd gnoringocialreality: elf-servingstimatesfconsensus.In J.Olson,C. P. Herman, M. P. Zanna Eds.),Relative eprivationnd socialcomparison:The Ontario ymposium/VolumeV (pp. 135-157). Hillsdale,NJ:Erlbaum.

Gottlieb, . (1992).Marxism 844-1990: Origins, etrayal, ebirth. ew York:Routledge.Gramsci,A. (1971). Selectionsrom he risonnotebooks. ew York: nternationalublishers.Greenwald, . G. (1980). The totalitariango:Fabricationnd revision fpersonal istory.meri-canPsychologist,5, 603-618.Guimond, ., & Dube-Simard,. (1983). Relative eprivationheorynd theQuebec nationalistmovement:hecognitive-emotionistinctionnd hepersonal-groupeprivationssue.Journalof Personalitynd Social Psychology,4, 526-535.Guimond, ., Begin,G., & Palmer, . L. (1989). Education ndcausal attributions:hedevelop-ment f person-blame'nd system-blame'deology.ocial Psychology uarterly,2, 126-140.Gurin, . (1985). Women's enderonsciousness. ublicOpinionQuarterly,9, 143-163.Hackman,J.R., & Oldham,G. R. (1980). Workedesign. eading,MA: Addison-Wesley.Hare-Mustin,. T., & Marecek,J. 1988). Themeaningf difference:ender heory,ostmoder-nism, ndpsychology.mericansychologist,3, 455-464.Hinkle,S., & Brown,R. (1990). Intergroupomparisonsnd social identity:ome linksandlacunae. n D. Abrams M. A. Hogg Eds.), Social identityheory: onstructivend criticaladvances pp. 48-70). HemelHempstead: arvester.


26/29

Psychologyf False Consciousness 421Hoffman, ., & Hurst,N. (1990). Gender tereotypes:erceptionr rationalization?ournal fPersonalitynd Social Psychology,8, 197-208.Ichheiser, . (1970). Appearancesnd realities:Misunderstandingsn human elations. an Fran-

cisco:Jossey-Bass.Israel,J.,& Tajfel,H. (Eds.) (1972). Thecontextfsocialpsychology.ondon:Academic ress.Janoff-Bulman,. (1992). Shatteredssumptions:oward new sychologyftrauma.NewYork:FreePress.Jennings, . K. (1991). Thinkingbout ocial njustice. olitical sychology,2, 187-204.Jost, .T., & Banaji,M. R. (1994). The roleofstereotypingnsystem-justificationnd theproduc-tion ffalse onsciousness. ritish ournalfSocial Psychology,3, 1-27.Kahneman, ., Slovic,P., & Tversky,. (Eds.) (1982).Judgmentnder ncertainty:euristicsndbiases.Cambridge: ambridge niversityress.Kinder, ., & Sears,D. 0. (1985). Public pinionndpoliticalction.n G. Lindzey E. Aronson(Eds.),Handbook fsocialpsychologypp. 659-741). New York:RandomHouse.Kluegel,J.R., & Smith, . R. (1986). Beliefs bout nequality:mericans' iews fwhat s andwhat ught o be. New York:AldinedeGruyter.Kunda,Z. (1990). The case formotivatedeasoning.sychologicalulletin, 08,480-498.Lane,R. E. (1962).Politicaldeology:WhyheAmericanommonmanbelieveswhat e does.NewYork:Free Press.Lerner,M. J. 1980). Thebeliefn a justworld:Afundamentalelusion.NewYork: lenum ress.Levine,A., Sober,E., & Wright,. 0. (1992). Reconstructingarxism. ondon:Verso.Lewin,K. (1941). Self-hatredmongJews. nResolvingocialconflicts:elected apersongroupdynamicspp. 186-200). New York:Harper Brothers.Lewy,G. (1982). False consciousness: nessayonmystification.ewBrunswick,J:TransactionBooks.Lifton, . J. 1961/ 989).Thoughteformnd the sychologyf otalism.hapelHill,NC: Univer-sity f North arolina ress.Lind,E. A. & Tyler, . R. (1988). Thesocialpsychologyfproceduralustice.NewYork: lenumPress.Lipset,S. M. (1960/1981).Working-classuthoritarianism.n Politicalman: The social bases ofpoliticspp. 87-126). Baltimore:he Johns opkinsUniversityress.Lukacs,G. (1971). Historynd class consciousness. ambridge, A: TheMIT Press.MacKinnon, . A. (1989). Toward feministheoryfthe tate.Cambridge, A: Harvard niver-sity ress.Major,B. (1994). From ocial inequalityopersonal ntitlement:he roleofsocialcomparisons,legitimacyppraisals,ndgroupmemberships.dvances nExperimentalocial Psychology,26, 293-355.Major,B., McFarlin, ., & Gagnon, . (1984).Overworkedndunderpaid.ournalfPersonalityandSocialPsychology,7, 1399-1412.Mannheim, . (1936). Ideology ndutopia.New York:Harcourt, race,& Co.Marcuse,H. (1964). One-dimensional an. Boston:Beacon Press.Marks.G., & Miller,N. (1987). Tenyears f research n thefalse-consensusffect: nempiricaland theoreticaleview. sychologicalulletin, 02, 72-90.Martin, . 1986). The tolerance f injustice.n J.Olson,C. P. Herman, M. P. Zanna Eds.),Relative eprivationnd socialcomparison:heOntarioymposium/VolumeV (pp. 217-242).Hillsdale,NJ:Erlbaum.Marx,K. (1869/1935).Relations etween he rish ndEnglishworkinglasses. n E. BurnsEd.),Ahandbook fMarxismpp. 194-197). London:VictorGollanczLtd.


27/29

422 JostMarx,K., & Engels,F. (1846/1970). he GermandeologyEd. C. J.Arthur). ew York: nterna-tional ublishers.Mason,P. (1971). Patternsfdominance. ondon:Oxford niversityress.McGuire,W. J. 1985). Attitudesnd attitudehange. n G. Lindzey& E. AronsonEds.),Hand-bookofsocialpsychologypp. 233-346). NewYork:RandomHouse.McGuire,W. J. 1989). A perspectivistpproacho the trategiclanningfprogrammaticcientificresearch.n B. Gholson,W. R. Shadish,Jr.,R. A. Niemeyer, A. C. Houts Eds.), Thepsychologyfscience:Contributionso metasciencepp. 214-245). New York:CambridgeUniversityress.McGuire,W. J. 1993). Thepoly-psy elationship:hreephasesof a longaffair.n S. IyengarW. J. McGuire Eds.), Explorationsnpolitical sychologypp. 9-35). Durham,NC: DukeUniversityress.McMurtry,. 1978). The structurefMarx's world-view.rinceton:rincetonniversityress.Mepham,J. 1972). Thetheoryf deologyn Capital'.RadicalPhilosophy,, 12-19.Meyerson, . (1991). False consciousness. xford: larendon ress.Miller,D. T., & McFarland, . (1991).When ocialcomparisonoes awry: hecase ofpluralisticignorance.nJ.Suls & T. Wills Eds.),Socialcomparison: ontemporaryheoryndresearch(pp. 287-313), Hillsdale,NJ:Erlbaum.Miller, . T.,& Porter,. A. (1983). Self-blamenvictims fviolence.Journalf ocial ssues,39,139-152.Miller, . T., & Prentice,. A. (1994).Collectiverrorsnd rrorsbout he ollective. ersonalityand Social Psychologyulletin,0, 541-550.Miller,G. A. (1969). Psychologys a means fpromotingumanwelfare. mericansychologist,24, 1063-1075.Miller,R. W. 1984).Analyzing arx:Morality,ower, ndhistory.rinceton:rincetonniversityPress.Nisbett,R. E., & Ross, L. D. (1980). Human nference:trategiesnd shortcomingsfsocialjudgment.nglewood liffs, J:Prentice-Hall.Nisbett, . E., & Wilson,T. D. (1977). Tellingmore hanwecanknow:Verbal eportsnmentalprocesses. sychological eview, 4, 231-259.Nisbett, . E., Krantz, . H., Jepson, ., & Fong,G. T. (1982). Improvingnductivenference.nD. Kahneman, . Slovic,& A. TverskyEds.), Judgmentnder ncertainty:euristics ndbiases pp. 445-459). Cambridge: ambridge niversityress.Noelle-Neumann,. (1984). Thespiralofsilence.Chicago:UniversityfChicagoPress.Okami,P. (1992). Intolerablerievancesatientlyndured: eferentognitionsndgroup onflictsmediatorsfanti-JewishentimentmongAfrican-Americans.olitical sychology,3, 727-753.Parkin, . (1971). Class inequalityndpolitical rder.New York:Praeger.Pepitone,A. (1981). Lessons from hehistoryf socialpsychology.merican sychologist,6,972-985.Peterson, ., & Seligman,M.E.P. (1983). Learned elplessnessndvictimization.ournalf ocialIssues,39, 103-116.Piven, . F., & Cloward, . 1977).Poorpeople'smovements: hyheyucceed,how heyail.NewYork:Vintage ooks.Plon,M. (1974). On themeaning f the notion f conflictnd its studyn social psychology.EuropeanJournalfSocial Psychology,, 389-436.Pochoda,P. (1978).Marx's bject elationsheoryfdevelopment.sychoanalyticeview, 5,281-311.


28/29

Psychologyf False Consciousness 423Quattrone,. A., & Tversky,. (1988).Contrastingationalndpsychologicalnalyses fpoliticalchoice.American olitical cienceReview, 2, 719-736.Riger, . (1992). Epistemologicalebates, eministoices:Science, ocialvalues, nd the tudyfwomen.Americansychologist,7, 730-740.Roemer, . Ed.) (1986).Analytical arxism. ambridge: ambridge niversityress.Rosenberg,. W. (1988).Reason, deology,ndpolitics. rinceton,J:Princetonniversityress.Ross, L., Amabile,T. M., & Steinmetz, . L. (1977). Social roles, ocialcontrol,ndbiasesinsocial-perceptionrocesses. ournalfPersonalityndSocialPsychology,5, 485-494.Rubin, ., & Peplau,L. A. (1973). Belief n a justworld ndreactionsoanother'sot:A studyfparticipantsnthenational raftottery.ournalfSocial Issues, 29, 73-93.Rubin, ., & Peplau,L. A. (1975).Who believesn a justworld? ournalfSocialIssues,31, 65-89.Runciman,W. (1969). 'False consciousness'.nSociologyn tsplace (pp. 212-223). Cambridge:Cambridge niversityress.Sachdev, ., & Bourhis,R. Y. (1985). Social categorizationndpowerdifferentialsngroup ela-tions.EuropeanJournalfSocialPsychology,5, 415-434.Sachdev,., & Bourhis, . Y. (1987). Status ifferentialsnd ntergroupehavior.uropean ournalofSocial Psychology,7, 277-293.Sampson, . E. (1983). Justice nd the ritique fpurepsychology.ew York:Plenum ress.Samuelson,W.,& Zeckhauser, . (1987). Status uo bias n decisionmaking. ournalfRisk ndUncertainty,, 7-59.Sarnoff,. (1951). Identificationith he ggressor:omepersonalityorrelatesfanti-SemitismamongJews.JournalfPersonality,0, 199-218.Schein, . H. (1956).TheChinese ndoctrinationrogramor risonersfwar. sychiatry,9, 149-172.Scott,J. 1990). Domination nd the rtsofresistance. ewHaven:YaleUniversityress.Sears,D. 0. (1969). Political ehavior.n G. Lindzey& E. AronsonEds.), Handbook fsocialpsychology/Volume(pp. 315-458). Reading,MA: Addison-Wesley.Seligman,M.E.P. (1975). Helplessness:On depression, evelopment,nddeath. San Francisco:Freeman.Shaw,W. H. (1989).Rulingdeas. n R. Ware& K. NielsenEds.),Analyzing arxism: ewessayson analyticalMarxismpp. 425-448). Calgary:Universityf Alberta ress.Shingles, . D. (1981). Blackconsciousnessndpolitical articipation:hemissingink.AmericanPolitical cienceReview, 5, 76-91.Sidanius,J. 1993). The psychologyfgroup onflict ndthedynamics foppression: socialdominance erspective.n S. lyengar W. J. McGuireEds.), Explorationsnpolitical sy-chologypp. 183-219). Durham,NC: DukeUniversityress.Sidanius,J.,& Pratto, . (1993). Theinevitabilityfoppressionndthedynamicsf socialdomi-nance. n P. Sniderman,. E. Tetlock, E. G. CarminesEds.),Prejudice, olitics, nd theAmerican ilemmapp. 173-211). Stanford,A: Stanfordniversityress.Smith, . J., pears,R., & Oyen,M. (1994)."People ikeus": The nfluencefpersonal eprivationandgroupmembershipalience n ustice valuations.ournalfExperimentalocialPsychol-ogy, 0, 277-299.Sniderman, . M., & Tetlock, . E. (1986a). Interrelationshipfpolitical deology ndpublicopinion.n M. HermannEd.),Handbook fpolitical sychologypp. 62-96). SanFrancisco:Jossey-Bass.Sniderman,. M., & Tetlock, . E. (1986b). Symbolic acism: roblemsf motive ttributionnpolitical nalysis.JournalfSocial Issues, 42, 129-150.


29/29

424 JostSteele,C. M. (1992,April).Raceandthe choolingfblackAmericans.heAtlantic onthly,prilissue,68-78.Steiner,. D. (1974).Whateverappenedothe roupnsocialpsychology?ournalfExperimentalSocial Psychology,0, 94-108.Strube,M. J. 1988). Thedecision o eave nabusive elationship:mpiricalvidence ndtheoreti-cal issues.Psychologicalulletin, 04, 236-250.Tajfel,H. (Ed.) (1978). Differentiationetween ocialgroups. ondon:Academic ress.Tajfel,H., & Turner,.C. (1986).Thesocial dentityheoryf ntergroupehavior.n S. WorchelW. G. AustinEds.), Thepsychologyf ntergroupelationspp. 7-24). Chicago:Nelson-Hall.Taylor, . M., Wright,. C., Moghaddam, . M., & Lalonde,R. N. (1990). Thepersonal/groupdiscriminationiscrepancy:erceiving ygroup, utnotmyself,obe a targetor iscrimina-tion.PersonalityndSocialPsychologyulletin, 6, 254-262.Taylor, . E. (1989). Positivellusions: reative elf-deceptionnd thehealthymind.NewYork:Basic Books.Taylor, . E., & Brown, .D. (1988). Illusion ndwell-being: socialpsychologicalerspectivenmental ealth. sychologicalulletin, 03, 193-210.Taylor, . E., Wood,J.V., & Lichtman, . R. (1983). It couldbeworse: elective valuations aresponse o victimization.ournalfSocial Issues,39, 19-40.Tyler, . R. (1990). Why eopleobey he aw.NewHaven,CT: YaleUniversityress.Tyler, . R., & McGraw,K. M. (1986). Ideology ndthe nterpretationfpersonal xperience:Proceduralustice ndpolitical uiescence.JournalfSocialIssues,42, 115-128.Vaughan,G. M. (1978). Social changeand intergroupreferencesn New Zealand.EuropeanJournal fSocial Psychology,, 297-314.VanSnippenburg,. B., & Scheepers, . (1991). Social class andpolitical ehavioruring periodof economic tagnation:pathyndradicalismntheNetherlands,985.Political sychology,12, 41-63.Walker,., & Mann,L. (1987). Unemployment,elativeeprivation,nd ocialprotest. ersonalityandSocial Psychologyulletin, 3, 275-283.Wexler, . (1983). Critical ocialpsychology.oston:Routledge KeganPaul.Willhelm, . M. (1980). Can MarxismxplainAmerica's acism? ocial Problems,8, 98-112.Wood,A. W. (1988). Ideology, alseconsciousness,ndsocial illusion. n B. P. McLaughlin

A. O. RortyEds.), Perspectivesn self-deceptionpp. 345-363). Berkeley: niversityfCaliforniaress.Wright,. 0. (1985). Classes. London:Verso.Yzerbyt, . Y., Schadron, ., Leyens, .P.,& Rocher,. (1994).Social udgeability:he mpactfmeta-informationalues ontheuseofstereotypes.ournalfPersonalityndSocialPsycholo-gy, 6, 48-55.

Documents

Negative Illusions_ Conceptual Clarifica - Jost_ Jhon T