Determinants of Mediator Behavior: A Test of the Strategic Choice Model1

The present study simulated an organizational dispute to test 12 hypotheses about mediator behavior that were derived from the strategic choice model of mediation. This model is based on the assumption that mediators have four basic strategies to resolve disputes: (a) integrate, which involves a search for mutually acceptable outcomes; (b) press, which involves lowering one or both parties' aspirations; (c) compensate, which involves offering positive benefits in exchange for concessions; and (d) inaction, which involves letting the parties handle the dispute by themselves. The major proposition of the model is that two factors, the mediator's assessment of the likelihood of a mutually acceptable agreement and the mediator's concern for the parties' aspirations, interact to predict mediator behavior. Nine of the 12 hypotheses derived from the model were supported. Pressing by mediators occurred most when mediators had a low estimate of the likelihood of agreement in combination with a low concern for the parties' aspirations. Compensating occurred most when mediators had a low estimate of the likelihood of agreement in combination with a high concern for the parties' aspirations. Inaction occurred most when the mediators' estimate of the likelihood of agreement was high and their concern for the parties' aspirations was low. Integrating occurred most when the mediators had a high concern for the parties' aspirations.     

Orientations toward relationships: Choosing a situation in which to begin a relationship

An investigation was conducted to examine how individuals choose situations in which to initiate relationships. It was hypothesized that individuals' self-monitoring orientation and the characteristics of their relationship partners would interact to determine situation choices. Accordingly, low- and high-self-monitoring men were asked to rate their preferences for interacting in romantic and nonromantic situations with particular types of partners. The characteristics of the partners were varied along two dimensions: physical attractiveness and personality desirability. Results demonstrated that low-, relative to high-, self-monitoring individuals' preferences for interacting in romantic situations were more influenced by the personality characteristics of potential partners. In contrast, high-, relative to low-, self-monitoring individuals' preferences for interacting in romantic situations were more influenced by the physical attractiveness of potential partners. Neither of these effects occurred when preferences for nonromantic situations were assessed. Implications of these differences for the initiation, maintenance, and dissolution of relationships were discussed.     

Relationships and Emotional Experience in a Process of Gay Identity Development: A Case-Study Based on Personal Construct Theory

A case-study of gay identity development is presented based on Kelly's personal construct theory. The subject is a married man in his early thirties. Repertory grid technique is used to investigate the subject's construing of his relationships with gay men, and Kelly's account of emotion in terms of constructs of transition is used in analysing the emotional dimensions of the subject's experience. Three dimensions of interpersonal construing emerged from the grid analysis: emotional impact, negative affect and friendship. Five aspects of the subject's emotional experience are discussed: aggression, threat, anxiety, hostility and guilt. Some implications of the study for counselling are outlined, its limitations noted, and possible avenues for further research identified. It is argued that the study serves to illustrate the value of Kelly's perspective in understanding the interpersonal and emotional dimensions of gay identity development.     

Correspondence analysis used complementary to loglinear analysis

Loglinear analysis and correspondence analysis provide us with two different methods for the decomposition of contingency tables. In this paper we will show that there are cases in which these two techniques can be used complementary to each other. More specifically, we will show that often correspondence analysis can be viewed as providing a decomposition of the difference between two matrices, each following a specific loglinear model. Therefore, in these cases the correspondence analysis solution can be interpreted in terms of the difference between these loglinear models. A generalization of correspondence analysis, recently proposed by Escofier, will also be discussed. With this decomposition, which includes classical correspondence analysis as a special case, it is possible to use correspondence analysis complementary to loglinear analysis in more instances than those described for classical correspondence analysis. In this context correspondence analysis is used for the decomposition of the residuals of specific restricted loglinear models.     

The control of social desirability in personality inventories: A study using the principal-factor deletion technique

The present study sought to investigate Paulhus' (1981) principal-factor deletion technique (PFDT), a factor analytic method for controlling for socially desirable responding. Adult subjects (N = 330) responded to both forms of the Eysenck Personality Inventory and a 32-item lie scale. Peer ratings of extraversion and neuroticism served as criterion measures. The factor deleted by PFDT more closely reflected neuroticism than impression management. Factors resulting from PFDT were considerably less valid and less content saturated than those emerging from an ordinary factor solution. The implications of these results are discussed from the perspectives of predictive and construct validity.     

Fusing Apples and Oranges: A Rejoinder to Carver & Scheier and to Fenigstein

ABSTRACT A simple parable is introduced that serves as an analogy to the private/public self-focus distinction The analogy elucidates that the reliability of the effects observed by the private/public research direction is not the focus of the Wicklund and Gollwitzer critique Rather, the critique questions the validity of the explanations offered More importantly, the analogy implies the conclusion that construing social dependency as an issue of self-focus does injustice to both the social dependency and self-focus concepts