Who's Got the Power? Gender Differences in Partners’ Perceptions of Influence During Marital Problem-Solving Discussions

Previous research on marital communication indicates that women have more influence in marital problem solving because they raise the issues and shape the discussion. Other studies suggest that men have the power in marital problem solving. This study re-examines power and influence from the partners’ point of view. Twenty-seven couples — 18 with a first child under 2, and 9 undecided about having children — were videotaped while working on a self-selected problem concerning their division of family labor. Data sources included: (a) transcribed audiotaped accounts given by each partner while viewing a videotape of their problem-solving discussion; (b) self-report questionnaires; and (c) ratings by a research team of the concordance between spouses’ accounts. Husbands and wives were perceived as having a primary influence on different aspects of the discussion. Women tended to raise the issues and draw men out in the early phase of the discussion, while men controlled the content and emotional depth of the later discussion phases, and largely determined the outcome. The women's accounts emphasized that their influence in the early phase was often illusory: their behavior was shaped primarily by the effort to choose strategies that would avoid upsetting their husbands. In terms of overall satisfaction with marriage, wives had greater tolerance than their husbands for conflict in the area of division of domestic labor, but less tolerance for their husbands’ domination of the discussion process. Women's marital satisfaction was higher when there was concordance between spouses in their accounts of their problem-solving discussion. This research highlights the importance of eliciting spouses’ own perceptions and definitions in understanding the impact of gender-linked power differences in marital communication.     

Extracting implicit theories about the risk of coercive control in romantic relationships

People readily make attributions about the likely behavior of others, based on very limited information. We exploited this tendency to assess people's sensitivity to personological and social‐circumstantial evidence of risk of coercive control in romantic relationships, by unobtrusively varying information about a fictitious couple in a between‐groups design and asking viewers to make predictions about the feelings and behavior of the three characters–a man, his girlfriend, and his sister. Key features of the story were systematically altered to elicit attributions of the man's aggressive and jealous inclinations to see if people are sensitive to the psychological link between sexually proprietary inclinations and risk of violence. The story manipulations were effective in eliciting attributions of the man's aggressive inclinations, of the woman's polyandrous inclinations, and of the man's likely jealousy. As expected, people predicted that an aggressive and jealous man would be likely to use violence and other controlling actions against his girlfriend.     

GENERAL MENTAL ABILITY,NARROWER COGNITIVE ABILITIES,AND JOB PERFORMANCE: THE PERSPECTIVE OF THE NESTED-FACTORS MODEL OF COGNITIVE ABILITIES

The nested-factors model is a well-established structural model of cognitive abilities in cognitive ability research but has not yet been used to investigate the role of cognitive abilities in job performance. Core assumptions of the nested-factors model are that a broad general mental ability (GMA) exists besides narrower abilities and that this GMA differs from the narrower cognitive abilities in breadth but not in subordination. The authors of this article propose that a recently emerging statistical technique—relative importance analysis—corresponds to the assumptions of the nested-factors model. To empirically study the implications of using the nested-factors model, the authors applied relative importance analysis to a meta-analytic matrix linking measures of 7 narrower cognitive abilities from an established ability taxonomy (Thurstone's primary mental abilities), GMA, and job performance. Results revealed that GMA accounted for 10.9% to 28.6% of the total variance explained in job performance and that GMA was not consistently the most important predictor. The discussion focuses on potential theoretical, methodological, and practical implications of the nested-factors model for personnel psychology.