Complexities of the Status‐Legitimacy Hypothesis: Authoritarian Personality and System Justification Across Class

Introduction The status‐legitimacy hypothesis (SLH) posits that low‐status individuals are more motivated to justify oppressive social systems than high‐status beneficiaries. However, recent research suggests this phenomenon is inconsistent, indicating critical moderators are overlooked. We revisit the SLH examining authoritarianism's moderating role. Methods Using two large representative datasets—the General Social Survey (1972‐2018) and American National Election Study (1992‐2020)—we examine how authoritarianism conditions the association between social class and system justification across attitudes toward government and economy. Results Regarding government attitudes, authoritarianism is mostly associated with greater support for the SLH. However, regarding economic attitudes, findings are more complex, revealing nuanced patterns in how authoritarianism moderates the class‐system justification relationship. Conclusion These findings warrant reconsideration of what status legitimacy means for high‐ versus low‐status individuals. This work expands system justification theory by identifying authoritarianism as a personality trait shaping system perceptions and offers a path toward reconciling conflicting empirical findings on social class effects on perceived status legitimacy.