Effects of sex role stereotyping among European American students on domestic violence culpability attributions

Effects of European American students' sex role stereotyping and domestic violence participants' race and relationship intimacy were examined for culpability attributions. In addition to a man's responsibility rating and a sentencing measure, five factors were identified from the dependent measures; these were Sympathy with Man, Incident as Abusive, Generalness of Incident, Seriousness of Incident, and Man as Abuser. Results indicated that sex role stereotyping was influential in culpability attributions, as those with traditional orientations showed a favorable bias toward the man, particularly a married man. Traditionalists provided a shorter sentence for the man and thought the incident less abusive when the woman was African American, in comparison to egalitarians. Both egalitarians and traditionalists expressed more sympathy toward the man when the woman was African American and married. Although we had anticipated higher culpability ratings for women involved in interracial relationships, we found that the European American man was thought less responsible when the woman was African American, but no differences emerged when the woman was European American. It is suggested future research examine the specific content of various stereotypic subtypes of actors involved in domestic violence and how these stereotypic subtypes bias culpability attributions.Appreciation is extended to an anonymous reviewer for helpful comments on an earlier version of this article.Portions of this research were presented at the 1994 biennial meeting of the American Psychology-Law Society, Santa Fe, NM.     

Traffic Citations in Relation to Gender

The present study was designed to examine the possibility that traffic officers are more lenient in issuing citations to other gender drivers. Statistics on the traffic citations issued for a year were obtained from the highway patrols of two states. The information was classified by violation, officers' gender, and drivers' gender. For most categories of violation, men issued a greater percent of their citations to male drivers than women did and women issued a greater percent of their citations to female drivers than men did. The differences could have been due to leniency on the part of one gender or both genders of officers. Leniency on the part of both genders is more consistent with the literature on helping in situations with low cost and low threat to the helper. A possible interpretation is that gender identity includes norms for positive treatment of other gender persons.     

CPQ validity: The relationship between Children's Personality Questionnaire scores and teacher ratings

Scores on the Children's Personality Questionnaire (CPQ) were correlated with scores from rating scale items selected by a panel of raters measuring the same behavior as a CPQ scale. Data were obtained on a normal sample of school children in grades three to six and on two referred groups, underachievers and chilren with behavior or social problems. The teachers of the children were asked to complete two rating scales on each child. Correlations between rating scale scores and CPQ scores suggest that, in general, the CPQ does not measure the traits it purports to measure.     

An Historical Framework for Cohort Differences in Intelligence

This article reviews key issues regarding the controversy on the direction and magnitude of cohort differences in intelligence. Data from the Seattle Longitudinal Study (SLS) illustrate why differences must be studied across multiple cohorts and multiple chronological ages. Differential cohort patterns for multiple dimensions of intelligence are described. A conceptual framework is suggested for the identification of historical influences important for developmental study of cohort differences.