Volume 25, Issue 6 p. 823-844

Social Identity, System Justification, and Social Dominance: Commentary on Reicher, Jost et al., and Sidanius et al.

Mark Rubin

Mark Rubin

University of Newcastle, Australia

Search for more papers by this author
Miles Hewstone

Miles Hewstone

University of Oxford

Search for more papers by this author
First published: 10 November 2004
Citations: 106

Abstract

The articles by Reicher (2004), Jost, Banaji, and Nosek (2004), and Sidanius, Pratto, van Laar, and Levin (2004) discuss the strengths and weaknesses of social identity theory (Tajfel & Turner, 1979), system justification theory (Jost & Banaji, 1994), and social dominance theory (Sidanius, 1993). The latter two theories grew out of a critique of social identity theory, but this critique relates more to deficiencies in social identity research than to deficiencies in the theory itself. More balanced and comprehensive social identity research is required in order to allow a fair assessment of the theory’s limitations. In addition, Reicher (2004) and Huddy (2004) are correct that only social identity theory offers the potential for explaining social change and social stability.

The full text of this article hosted at iucr.org is unavailable due to technical difficulties.