"Feminism Lite?" Feminist Identification, Speaker Appearance, and Perceptions of Feminist and Antifeminist Messengers

Drawing on a communications model of persuasion ( Hovland, Janis, & Kelley, 1953 ), this study examined the effect of target appearance on feminists' and nonfeminists' perceptions of a speaker delivering a feminist or an antifeminist message. One hundred three college women watched one of four videotaped speeches that varied by content (profeminist vs. antifeminist) and target appearance ("feminine" vs. "masculine"). Self-identified feminists responded more favorably to a profeminist message when it was presented by a feminine than a masculine-appearing speaker and expressed less feminist attitudes after viewing a masculine-appearing feminist speaker. Nonfeminists' evaluations did not vary as a function of speaker appearance or message content. Implications for the communication of feminist ideology are discussed.     

Scientific reasoning in a real‐world context: The effect of prior belief and outcome on children's hypothesis‐testing strategies

The impact of event outcome and prior belief on scientific reasoning was investigated within a real‐world oral health context. Participants (N= 144; ranging from 3 to 11 years) were given hypothesis‐testing tasks and asked to explain their answers. Participants were presented with information that was either consistent or inconsistent with their own beliefs. Each task consisted of scenarios in which the outcome was either good or bad oral health. When the information was belief consistent and the outcome was good, or when the information was belief inconsistent and the outcome was bad, children were more likely to choose scientifically appropriate tests of the stated hypothesis (i.e. manipulate only one variable). Evidence‐based explanations were associated with scientifically appropriate choices in the good‐outcome, belief‐inconsistent scenario and the belief‐consistent, bad‐outcome scenario. Participants' performance on these tasks is explained by considering the plausibility of causal variables. A control of variables strategy was used to test hypotheses in cases in which the evidence was consistent with participants' beliefs and knowledge of causal mechanisms. In contrast, when the evidence was inconsistent with participants' beliefs, children chose to manipulate behaviours likely to lead to a positive health outcome. These findings demonstrate that context and prior knowledge interact to play an important role in children's scientific reasoning.     

Poor peer work does not boost student confidence

Students' low confidence, particularly in numerical topics, is thought to be a barrier to keeping them engaged with education. We studied the effects on confidence of exposure to a peer's work of varying quality (very good or bad) and neatness (messy or neat). Previous research underpinned our hypothesis that a peer's bad-quality work—which students rarely see—might boost student confidence more than very good work. We also predicted that a peer's very good work—which students are often shown—might be less discouraging if it were messy, suggesting it required effort and struggle. However, in experiments with university students and low-educated adults, these hypotheses were not supported, and all participants decreased in confidence after seeing any peer work. The failure to find support for these hypotheses can inform future research into social comparison effects on self-confidence in numerical topics. These results also have practical implications for teachers and managers who are expected to provide examples of peer work.