The effects of hand and direction parameter preknowledge on choice reaction times

The two studies undertaken investigated how reaction times are affected by preknowledge concerning hand and direction parameters, and the order in which these data are disclosed. In the first experiment, preknowledge was manipulated by selecting 2-CRT pairs which had either a common hand or direction component. Reaction signal information content (as defined by the number of unknown response parameters) was controlled, but no parameter differences emerged. When parameter order was manipulated by sequential precuing, the ‘hand then direction’ order conferred a significant advantage. Motor preparation and response selection explanations for this effect are considered. Various difficulties with the paradigms used are discussed, including those of distinguishing between response selection and motor programming contributions, controlling and inferring the strategies adopted by subjects, and defining task difficulty. The prospects for independently fostering either response identification or motor preparation by means of an appropriate selection of precues are also discussed.     

Do Students with Different Characteristics Take Part in Psychology Experiments at Different Times of the Semester?

ABSTRACT In this study we examined 15 personality and demographic differences between psychology students who took part in experiments at different times of the semester and different times of the day. In general, few significant relations were found and those that did emerge were small in magnitude. Females and freshmen signed up for experiments earlier in the semester. Females took part in their first experiment earlier in the semester, as did students who were Protestant and who came from smaller home towns. Students low in self-consciousness also tended to begin participating earlier. Extraverts participated earlier in the day than introverts. Results generally were consistent with previous findings of differences between research volunteers and non-volunteers. However, it was concluded that because of their small magnitude and inconsistency from site to site, with a few precautions experimenters probably need not be concerned that timing effects threaten the external validity of psychological research outcomes.     

Interview with Dr. Peter Rutter,author ofSex in the Forbidden Zone,July 27, 1990

Articles

Interview with Dr. Peter Rutter, author ofSex in the Forbidden Zone, July 27, 1990     

Men's and women's evaluations of menstrual-related excuses

Based on an attributional analysis of menstrual distress, the present study examined how a woman is evaluated when she attributes an instance of negative social behavior to the approach or onset of menstruation. College men and women were asked to imagine an interaction in which a woman behaves very irritably and then gives one of several excuses for her negative behavior, two of which were menstrual related. Subjects evaluated each excuse in terms of (1) degree of annoyance, (2) blameworthiness, and (3) internality versus externality. The results showed consistent relationships between these evaluations and both sex of subject and general attitudes about menstruation. Males tended to see menstrual-related excuses as less blameworthy and more external than did females. In addition, general attitudes regarding the debilitating effects of menstruation predicted greater tolerance toward the use of menstrual excuses. These results are discussed in terms of their implications for the socialization and continuing reinforcement of menstrual distress.The research reported in this article was supported by grants SOC-7602137 and SOC-7602179 from the National Science Foundation. The authors wish to thank Russ Fazio for his help in collecting the data and Al Rogers and Terry Balaban for their help in analyzing the data. Diane N. Ruble is now at New York University. Ann K. Boggiano is now at the University of Colorado.     

Assertion modeling and stimuli effects on assertive behavior and self-efficacy in adolescents

The present investigation examined variations of modeling and stimuli with 61 adolescents selected for unassertive or aggressive behavior toward teachers. A 3 × 2 × 2 factorial design evaluated the effects of type of assertion modeling (three sessions of overt vs covert vs no-modeling), type of training stimuli (single involving teachers only vs multiple involving teachers, parents and peers) and type of initial behavior (unassertive vs aggressive) on behavioral role-play and self-efficacy. Modeling, particularly overt modeling, improved assertive behavior in teacher situations, peer situations and total teacher, parent, and peer situations. The use of single type stimuli improved self-efficacy in total teacher, parent and peer situations, and in novel situations involving others. Behavior but not self-efficacy was differentially affected by initial unassertive or aggressive behavior of participants. Self-efficacy and behavior were only moderately correlated. Results suggest effectiveness of short-term modeling with adolescents and different specificity properties of self-efficacy and assertive behavior.     

A negativity bias in interpersonal evaluation

Two studies were conducted to demonstrate a bias toward negativity in evaluations of persons or their work in particular social circumstances. In Study 1, subjects evaluated materials written by peers. Those working under conditions that placed them in low status relative to the audience for their evaluations, or conditions that made their intellectual position within a group insecure, showed a clear bias toward negativity in those evaluations. Only individuals who believed their audience to be of relatively low status and at the same time believed their intellectual position to be secure did not show this bias. In Study 2, subjects viewed a videotape of a stimulus person and rated him on several intellectual and social dimensions. Again, subjects believed their audience to be of either relatively high or relatively low status. As a cross dimension, they were given instructions to focus on either the intellectual or the social abilities of the stimulus person while viewing the videotape. A strong main effect of audience status was demonstrated, but only in ratings of intellectual traits; subjects who believed their audience to be of relatively high status rated the stimulus person's intellectual qualities significantly more negatively. Moreover, this effect was independent of the instructional focus subjects had been given. The negativity bias is discussed in the context of previous demonstrations of biases toward weighting negative information more heavily than positive information, as well as previous demonstrations of seemingly pervasive positivity biases in memory and judgment.     

Cognitions, affect, and behavior following uncontrollable outcomes: A response to current human helplessness research

A series of articles in the Journal of Personality challenge several central assumptions of the reformulated learned helplessness model: that perceptions of uncontrollability, awareness of noncontingency between responses and outcomes, and attributions made about the outcome are necessary to explain learned helplessness effects. The present article addresses the validity of this challenge through a consideration of the methodology employed in these and other traditional studies of human helplessness conducted in the laboratory. We maintain that although performance deficits can be demonstrated reliably following exposure to uncontrollable outcomes, a number of factors other than expectations of future uncontrollability (i.e., learned helplessness) may be responsible for these effects. In addition, demands of the experimental situation may prevent subjects from admitting their true underlying thoughts and feelings regarding the manipulations employed. Finally, the current use of artificial laboratory paradigms may unnecessarily restrict the study of a complex psychological phenomenon such as learned helplessness. We suggest that future researchers employ paradigms that more closely parallel real world situations to which they hope to generalize, or utilize naturally occurring uncontrollable life events to study the problem. In addition, we argue that future research should broaden its focus beyond attributions to explore other mediators of human helplessness.