The Effect of Perceived Advantage and Disadvantage on Performance: The Role of External Efficacy

This experiment examined how perceptions of advantage and disadvantage determine performance in a competitive context. We distinguished between internal and external efficacy, and manipulated external efficacy by inducing perceptions of advantaged or disadvantaged starting positions in a competition, keeping the actual positions equal. The treatment increased the performance of the advantaged party and decreased the performance of the disadvantaged party. In addition, measured external and internal efficacy had qualitatively different effects on performance. The results are explained by the idea that losses loom larger than gains.     

Semantic interference from distractor pictures in single-picture naming: evidence for competitive lexical selection

Picture-naming studies have demonstrated interference from semantic-categorically related distractor words, but not from corresponding distractor pictures, and the lack of generality of the interference effect has been argued to challenge theories viewing lexical selection in speech production as a competitive process. Here, we demonstrate that semantic interference from context pictures does become visible, if sufficient attention is allocated to them. We combined picture naming with a spatial-cuing procedure. When participants’ attention was shifted to the distractor, semantically related distractor pictures interfered with the response, as compared with unrelated distractor pictures. This finding supports models conceiving lexical retrieval as competitive (Levelt, Roelofs, & Meyer, 1999) but is difficult to reconcile with the response exclusion hypothesis (Finkbeiner & Caramazza, 2006b) proposed as an alternative.     

The persistence of pro-male bias despite identical information regarding causes of success

The present study controlled performance attributions in situations which required direct male-female comparison, and found that even with such control the pro-male bias in evaluation and treatment persisted. Forty eight middle-level managers from a variety of organizations in Israel reviewed performance appraisal material of fictitious male and female employees whose work success was attributed to the same causes. Although attribution influenced decisions, the pro-male bias did not disappear. Despite identical causes provided, males were consistently ranked higher than females. It is argued that the methodology in the sex-linked bias research should use (1) direct male-female comparison, (2) mixed-sex sets of stimulus persons, and (3) ranking formats rather than rating formats.