Citation

Sutphin ST, Simpson B. Soc. Sci. Res. 2009; 38(3): 609-621.

Copyright

(Copyright © 2009, Elsevier Publishing)

DOI

10.1016/j.ssresearch.2009.01.007

PMID

unavailable

Abstract

This research addresses a long standing puzzle in the social sciences: why are stratified social systems accepted as legitimate (the way things "ought" to be) by those who are advantaged and those who are disadvantaged by them? We build on previous studies of self-evaluations to explain the legitimation of inequality. The research consists of two experiments designed to test the self-evaluation theory of legitimacy. The theory proposes that structural inequality becomes legitimated when individuals' self-evaluations and the level of resources they receive are congruent. Study 1 examines the impact of structural power on self-evaluations. Results show that participants randomly assigned to advantaged positions in power structures earn more rewards and, as a result, develop higher self-evaluations than those randomly assigned to disadvantaged positions. Study 2 addresses the relationship between self-evaluations and legitimated structural inequality by testing competing hypotheses of legitimacy. The results partially support the self-evaluation theory and partially support competing arguments about legitimacy. We conclude with a discussion of the implications of our work and suggestions for future research.