Why do people sacrifice to approach rewards versus to avoid costs? Insights from attachment theory

This research provides the first empirical investigation of how attachment orientations contribute to approach and avoidance goals for engaging in sacrifice. Study 1 is a cross‐sectional study of individuals in dating relationships, and Study 2 is a 14‐day daily experience study of dating couples. Results showed that attachment anxiety was associated with a greater frequency of sacrifice and more willingness to sacrifice for approach goals (particularly self‐focused goals) and avoidance goals. Attachment avoidance was associated with a lower frequency of sacrifice, less willingness to sacrifice for approach goals (particularly partner‐focused goals), and more willingness to sacrifice for avoidance goals (both self‐ and partner‐focused). Daily sacrifice goals were also associated with the partner's attachment orientation. Theoretical and practical implications are discussed.     

Keeping it real: Young adult women's authenticity in relationships and daily condom use

The role of relationship authenticity in shaping women's daily condom use was investigated. Forty‐seven sexually active women in dating relationships completed a measure of relationship authenticity and then reported on their daily condom use and relationship events for 14 consecutive days. Inauthentic women were less likely than more authentic women to use condoms, particularly on days with frequent negative events such as major disagreements with a romantic partner. These critical Person × Situation interactions remained significant after controlling for the use of another form of birth control, sexual frequency, knowledge of a partner's sexual history, and relationship satisfaction. Implications for sexual risk‐taking behaviors and future research using daily experience methods to study sexuality in dating relationships are discussed.     

The effect of incidental experiences of regulatory fit on trust

Two experiments provide support for the hypothesis that when people assess how much they trust another person, feelings of rightness from an initial, brief experience of regulatory fit (consistency between prevention or promotion regulatory focus of goals and strategic means) can suggest the other person is trustworthy, relative to feelings of wrongness from regulatory nonfit. This regulatory-fit effect on trust was stronger for acquaintances than for individuals participants knew well (Experiment 1) and was eliminated by drawing participants' attention to how right the earlier, trust judgment-irrelevant event made them feel (Experiment 2). Implications are discussed for regulatory-fit theory, possible applications to applied settings and to other populations, and possible effects of other types of regulatory fit.     

The joys of genuine giving: Approach and avoidance sacrifice motivation and authenticity

Why do sacrifices undertaken in pursuit of approach and avoidance goals differentially influence well‐being and relationship quality? A cross‐sectional study (Study 1), an experiment (Study 2), and a 2‐week daily experience study (Study 3) demonstrate that the personal and interpersonal outcomes of approach and avoidance sacrifice goals in dating and married relationships are mediated by felt authenticity. When people sacrificed for approach goals such as to make their partner happy, they felt more authentic, in turn contributing to greater personal and relationship well‐being. However, when they sacrificed for avoidance goals such as to avoid conflict, they felt less authentic, in turn detracting from personal and relationship well‐being. Implications for research and theory on motivational processes in close relationships are discussed.     

Missing a romantic partner: A prototype analysis

In this study, a prototype analysis of romantic missing was conducted. College‐age participants in the United States generated features of missing a partner (Study 1) and rated their centrality (Study 2). In a reaction time task, participants made category judgments for central features more quickly than for noncentral features (Study 3). In recognition and recall tasks, central features were more salient in participants’ memory, and participants evaluated individuals experiencing central features in vignettes as missing their partners more (Study 4). A prototype‐based measure of missing administered to individuals in long‐distance relationships (Study 5) correlated with commitment and attachment dimensions but only weakly with loneliness. Finally, level of missing differed based on whether individuals were in a geographically distant (vs. proximal) relationships (Study 6).     

“PROPAGANDISTS FOR THE BEHAVIORAL SCIENCES”: THE OVERLOOKED PARTNERSHIP BETWEEN THE CARNEGIE CORPORATION AND SSRC IN THE MID‐TWENTIETH CENTURY

The Carnegie Corporation's role as a patron of the behavioral sciences has been overlooked; its support for the behavioral sciences not only began earlier than the Ford Foundation's but was also at least equally important to their success. I show how the close postwar collaboration between the Carnegie Corporation and the Social Science Research Council (SSRC) to promote the behavioral sciences emerged after a strugglebetween Carnegie and the Rockefeller Foundation over the direction and leadership of the SSRC. I then focus on three postwar projects Carnegie helped conceive and fund that were publicized as the work of the SSRC: Chase's The Proper Study of Mankind (1948), Stouffer et al.'s The American Soldier ( 1949, 1950 ), and the Michigan's Survey Research Center 1952 election study. In each of these projects, Carnegie deliberately muted its own role and promoted the remade SSRC as a major advocate for the behavioral sciences.     

Religious Life-Styles and Mental Health: A Follow-Up Study

This study is part of a longitudinal research project designed to discover more about the relations between religious involvement and mental health. It represents a 3-year follow-up on a group of religious young adults. Data were collected through semistructured interviews and by means of a psychological test battery. The results are discussed.     

GROUP DIFFERENCES IN PERSONALITY: META‐ANALYSES COMPARING FIVE U.S. RACIAL GROUPS

This research poses 2 applied questions: How large are racial group differences on personality scales and are these differences likely to cause adverse impact in personnel selection? We examined the extent to which racial groups differ across Big 5 personality factors and facets. Large‐scale, quantitative estimates based on over 700 effect sizes were meta‐analytically summarized. Multiple personality instruments and understudied racial groups, particularly Asian Americans and American Indians, were included in the meta‐analyses. Most group comparisons and personality scales yielded negligible differences and are not likely to cause adverse impact in selection. However, facet‐level analyses produced different d‐values, with some group comparisons showing moderate differences, suggesting that the use of personality measures in selection does not uniformly circumvent adverse impact concerns. The veracity of this conclusion depends on (a) the particular trait in question, (b) the composition of the applicant pool (i.e., which groups are to be compared with one another), (c) the effect size (i.e., d‐value), and (d) the selection ratio. For practitioners, we present a quantitatively informed summary of when and where to expect adverse impact to result from personality measures used in personnel selection.