Situational moderators of gender differences in reward allocations

This experiment investigated the impact of four variables, hypothesized to convey cues as to sex-role appropriate behavior, on gender differences in reward allocations between self and a co-worker. These variables were: expectations for future interactions with the co-worker, sex of co-worker, type of reward, and type of allocation decision. Males and females were asked to indicate how they would allocate money or course points between themselves and a same or opposite sex co-worker with inferior performance. Females allocated either type of reward more equitably than males when making independent allocations. When making joint (zero-sum) allocations, however, both sexes allocated rewards more equitably with a same-sex co-worker than with an opposite-sex co-worker when future interaction with the co-worker was expected. Grades were seen as more important than money by both sexes, and both men and women allocated course points more equitably than money. Type of reward did not, however, differentially affect men's and women's allocation patterns. Overall, independent allocations were more equitable than joint allocations. Results are discussed as suggesting that gender differences in reward allocations are not a result of inherent personality differences between the sexes but rather reflect the influence of situational factors that can arouse sex-role specific self-presentational concerns.     

Sex differences,sex-role orientation,and reward allocations

In study 1, 52 male and 52 female undergraduates allocated rewards to pairs of children for their performances in team and competitive situations. Males allocated rewards more equitably, especially when allocating to boys in competition, while females allocated rewards more equally. Boys, but not girls, who did more work received more rewards than their partner; and children with greater work inputs under competitive conditions received more rewards than children in team conditions. In study 2, the sex-role orientation of 60 college students was found to be related to their reward allocations. Males and females with a masculine sex-role orientation allocated rewards equitably, while individuals with a feminine sex-role orientation allocated rewards equally. Results indicated that sex and situational differences in reward allocations are affected by sex-role orientation and differential socialization practices by adults.Portions of study 1 were presented at the Midwestern Psychological Association Meeting, Chicago, May 1978.     

White matter development during adolescence as shown by diffusion MRI

Previous volumetric developmental MRI studies of the brain have shown white matter development continuing through adolescence and into adulthood. This review presents current findings regarding white matter development and organization from diffusion MRI studies. The general trend during adolescence (age 12–18 years) is towards increasing fractional anisotropy (FA) with age and decreasing mean diffusivity (MD) with age, findings primarily due to decreasing radial diffusivity with age. However, results of studies vary as to the regional specificity of such age-related changes, likely due in part to methodological issues. Another general trend is for FA to positively correlate and MD to negatively correlate with cognitive function. This trend is however region-specific, task-specific, and population-specific; some studies have in fact found negative correlations of FA and positive correlations of MD in specific regions with specific measures of cognitive performance. There are also published reports of sexual dimorphism in white matter development, indicating differing developmental trajectories between males and females as well as differing relationships developmentally between white matter architecture and cognitive function. There is a need for more research to further elucidate the development of white matter and its relation to cognitive function during this critical developmental period.     

Rational selective exploitation and distress: employee reactions to performance-based and mobility-based reward allocations

Prior research has demonstrated that allocators frequently distribute greater rewards to persons with high professional and geographic mobility than to persons with constrained mobility, especially among the very competent. This phenomenon has been termed rational selective exploitation. Do the recipients of such allocations actually experience this distribution rule as unjust and distressing, or is it a misnomer to refer to this phenomenon as exploitation? Two studies were conducted to explore this question. Study 1 was a laboratory experiment in which we manipulated relative performance level, relative mobility level, and allocation standard: performance based versus mobility based. Study 2 was a cross-sectional survey of actual employees in which subjects reported the degree to which performance and mobility were the basis for pay decisions at their places of employment, as well as the degree to which they perceived each standard to be fair. Both studies demonstrated that people regard mobility-based allocations as less fair and more distressing than performance-based allocations. Furthermore, the degree of distress resulting from mobility-based allocations is greater among persons who are disadvantaged by that standard: among people with constrained mobility, especially those who perform at high levels. These findings provide good support for the assertion that so-called rational selective exploitation is indeed distressing to employees. Reactions to this form of distress are also explored, and the implications of these findings for the allocation process are discussed.     

Secret ambitions and public performances: The effects of anonymity on reward allocations made by men and women

The degree of equality or equity in reward allocations made by men and women is explored in three studies. Study 1 was a classroom survey which was administered after the members had completed a series of team assignments. When asked to indicate anonymously whether they would share some points with team members who had earned fewer, the men more often said yes and the women no, contradicting the patterns found in much of the literature. Studies 2 and 3 examined the hypothesis that under public conditions men and women would behave as tradition and the previous literature suggest, allocating rewards equitably and equally, respectively. In private, however, they would reverse themselves, each preferring the otherwise forbidden option. The results confirmed the prediction: when anticipating disclosure of their decisions, men chose to divide credits equitably and women equally between themselves and a less deserving partner, but when assured of anonymity, men chose more equal and women more equitable allocations. The results are discussed in light of both childhood socialization and adult constraints on sex role performances.     

The concept of development in contextualism

Contextualism, a world view or paradigm which suggests the role of social, cultural, and historical change in individual development, became the focus of increasing interest throughout the 1970s. Nevertheless, despite the suggestion that contextualism offered a new philosophical position from which to derive concepts and theories of development, criticism occurred because it was believed that the dispersive nature of contextualism obviated the formulation of a useful definition of development. We review the characteristics of the contextual paradigm and argue for a principled integration (as opposed to an eclectic one) between selected features of contextualism and of organicism. The former approach offers a dispersive view of the nature of variables involved in development and the latter provides an integrative one. We attempt to forge a probabilistic epigenetic, or developmental-contextual, paradigm for the study of human development, one which relies on the concept of integrative levels and which conceives of the causal variables of development as interacting in a temporally probabilistic manner.     

Deprivation and reward stimuli as compound stimuli

In Experiment 1 the experimental group was tested with a deprivation level and a reward magnitude which it had experienced previously but which it had not experienced in combination. This group was inferior in test performance to a group which had experienced the test deprivation-reward combination prior to test. These results were interpreted as indicating that deprivation stimuli and reward stimuli form a compound stimulus and training on the elements of the compound produces performance inferior to training directly on the compound. In Experiment 2, the decrement associated with two different shifts in deprivation and reward did not differ despite the different size change of total incentive involved in the two shifts. The results were interpreted as indicating that the deprivation-reward stimulus is not produced by a single underlying incentive mechanism.