Are there degrees of belief?

John Maynard Keynes claimed that not all probabilities were comparable. Frank Ramsey argued that they were, and that Keynes's views to the contrary rested on a confusion of degree of entailment and degree of belief. We will argue that Keynes and Ramsey largely talked past each other, and yet that there are issues of great significance underlying their dispute. In particular, the simple principle of maximizing expected utility may be seen in a new light as one step of a rich and complex process.     

Ricoeur versus Taylor on Language and Narrative

Abstract: Although Ricoeur and Taylor are often grouped together, their conceptions of language, literature, and practical reason are very different. The first half of this essay focuses on Ricoeur's theory of triple mimesis and narrative, showing how his attempt to synthesize Kant, Husserl, and structuralism results in a formalism that blocks out the ontological, hermeneutical, and historical dimensions of literature and practical reason. The second half of the essay develops Taylor's ontological conception of public imagination and illustrates the dynamics of this conception of language and interpretation by showing how literary works debate with each other over language, subjectivity, and reference. Narrative does not just order; it argues.     

Group decision process and incrementalism in organizational decision making

In two studies examining resource allocation, support is found for the notion that group decisions are affected in systematic ways depending on whether or not there was individual consideration of the problem before meeting as a group. Specifically, compared to no prior consideration groups, prior consideration groups (1) escalate their commitment more in progress (i.e., ongoing) decisions, and (2) are less willing to concentrate resources on a single project in adoption (i.e., resource utilization) decisions. The findings challenge the blanket assertion that promoting divergent views in a group decision context is always related to better decisions.     

The Relationship Between Applicant Reactions, the Likelihood of Complaints, and Organization Attractiveness

This study examined the effect of applicants' reactions to selection measures on complaint intentions and perceptions of organizational attractiveness. Despite recent challenges to selection tests for invasion of privacy, limited research has examined the link between specific reactions and potential legal challenges. As predicted, perceived invasiveness was significantly related to perceived likelihood of complaints for three selection measures. Further, perceived job relatedness was negatively related to likelihood of complaints for a test battery and a math test, but not for an integrity test. On the other hand, neither job relatedness nor invasiveness was significantly related to organizational attractiveness for any of the tests. Limitations and implications for future research are discussed.     

Planning ahead: college seniors’ concerns about career-marriage conflict

Career-marriage conflict (CMC) reflects the reality that for many college seniors, the next decade of their lives will be spent launching a career, often a very demanding one, building a long-term romantic relationship, and coordinating the demands of two careers. We focus on the antecedents and correlates of these concerns. Based on social-role theory, we hypothesized that seniors whose mothers worked outside the home while the seniors were children would express less concern about CMC than seniors with at-home mothers. We also hypothesized that seniors’ expectations about the timing of their marriages and childbearing relate to their concerns about CMC, with students who plan to delay family formation having fewer CMC concerns. These hypotheses were supported through an analysis of secondary data from a sample of 324 college seniors at a private university in the Northeast.     

Children's Gender Stereotypes About Math: The Role of Stereotype Stratification1

Women underperform on standardized math tests compared to men. However, girls perform as well if not better than boys in math. In this paper, it is proposed that this discrepancy may be explained in part by a process of stereotype stratification, in which targets of a negative in‐group stereotype view themselves as a member of a subgroup to which the stereotype does not apply. Two experiments with elementary‐school children provide support for this theory. In Study 1, girls placed advanced math pictures with males more often than basic math pictures. In addition, girls rated men as liking and as being better at math than women, but viewed boys and girls as being equal on these variables. In Study 2, girls were more likely to draw a man when told a story about an adult mathematician, but were more likely to draw a girl when told of a child mathematician. The social and educational implications of these findings are discussed.