Social Discounting and Externalizing Behavior Problems in Boys

Social discounting refers to the fact that most people assign more value to the welfare of close affiliates than they do to the welfare of distant affiliates—they discount the latter compared to the former. We report the first study to apply a social discounting paradigm to boys. We were particularly interested in investigating the relations between social discounting, age, and externalizing behavior problems (antisocial behavior). Results showed that (1) preadolescent boys were more likely than adolescent boys to show atypical response patterns in allocating rewards to affiliates; (2) task behavior was well represented as social discounting once boys with atypical response patterns were deleted from the sample, and (3) boys functioning in the clinical range on indices of externalizing behavior problems demonstrated steeper social discounting compared to controls. We conclude that social discounting as a measure of perceived social closeness is feasible for use in adolescent samples. Social discounting may operate similarly to other forms of discounting in impulsive individuals. Copyright © 2011 John Wiley & Sons, Ltd.     

"In Search of Token Women in Academia": Some Definitions and Clarifications

This article makes an important distinction between two definitions of "token woman." In the first definition, a token woman is one of few women in a predominantly male setting. The second meaning of "Token Woman" identifies that subset of such women who have made the distinctive psychological adaptation described by Laws (1975). The methodological decisions in Young, MacKenzie, and Sherif's (1980) research are justified as based on that definitional distinction. Constantinople's critique is shown to be appropriate as an alternative to Laws' theory, but not as a criticism of our research. Alternative generational explanations for previous findings about Token Women are not supported by existing data.     

In Search of Token Women in Academia

Women faculty in predominantly male departments at a large university were interviewed and responded to paper-and-pencil instruments in a test of Laws' analysis of the necessity for the „token women” adaptation to their marginality for success in academia. By multiple criteria, three clusters were identified: (a) token women, who accepted academia as a meritocracy, were aware of little sex discrimination and belonged to no feminist group; (b) non-token women, who disagreed with academia as a meritocracy and were aware of sex discrimination; and (c) women with mixed or moderate orientations. (Membership in feminist groups was found in the latter two clusters.) Women in the three clusters did not differ significantly by academic rank or marital status and only marginally by age and longevity in academia. As predicted, however, they did differ by tenure status. Contrary to Laws' analysis, token women were not more likely to have had a sponsor, which was significantly related only to rank. Women in the three clusters were equally accurate in recognizing male-female status discrepancies. Their differing definitions of sex discrimination were revealed in differential bias when choosing among alternatives of indeterminate correctness. Token women minimized such discrepancies, in line with beliefs attributing them to women, rather than the system. Others maximized such discrepancies.
The university faculty has traditionally been a man's world, except in those fast-disappearing enclaves considered „women's fields” (e.g., home economics). Today, faculty women are tallied on affirmative action reports in columns for persons with „minority characteristics.”