A comparison of sexually dysfunctional, maritally disturbed and well-adjusted couples

Married couples seeking sex therapy, marital therapy, or no form of therapy were compared with respect to personality, sexual and marital functioning. The Sexual Dysfunction and Marital Difficulties groups (15 and 10 couples respectively) were obtained from the waiting lists of a sexual dysfunction service and marital therapy unit. Non-Problem subjects (15 couples) were from a volunteer sample. Personal adjustment, sexual and marital functioning were assessed by means of the Eysenck Personality Inventory, a Sexual Behavior Questionnaire, the Locke-Wallace Marital Adjustment Survey, and the Azrin Marital Happiness Scale. Results indicated that although all three groups were within the normal range, problem couples had higher ‘neuroticism’ scores than did Non-Problem couples. Marital Problem couples were the most debilitated. Their marital adjustment was lowest, and their sexual functioning was comparable to the Sexual Dysfunction group. Marital adjustment of the Sexual Dysfunction couples was significantly higher than that of the Marital Difficulties couples. Therapeutic and theoretical implications of the differentiating characteristics in the three couple categories are discussed.     

Fear of Success,Need Achievement,and Fear of Failure: A factor analytic study

Several tests of Fear of Success (FOS), Fear of Failure (FOF), and Need Achievement (nAch), plus Taylor's Manifest Anxiety Scale and a social desirability scale were administered to 104 males and 101 females. FOS, FOF, and nAch did not show factor validity. Results for predictive validity were also poor. Anxiety defined the first factor in the factor analysis. All first-factor tests negatively predicted female grade point average and American College Test scores. All the first-factor tests showed sex differences, with females scoring higher. A clarifying role for anxiety in the study of sex differences in achievement is indicated.     

A psychometric analysis of the Personal Attributes Questionnaire

The psychometric properties of the Personal Attributes Questionnaire were examined in independent samples of male and female high school students, college students, and adults. In each of the six samples a two-factor structure (masculinity/instrumentality and femininity/expressivity) paralleling the empirically derived scales was found. Additional factor analyses of negative masculine and feminine traits were reported. Discriminant analyses revealed highly significant differentiation between the sexes. The reliabilities (Cronbach alpha) of the unit-weighted scales in each sample were also satisfactory.Support for this research was provided by NASA Grant NSG 2065 (Robert L. Helmreich, Principal Investigator) and NSF Grant BNS 78-08911 (Janet T. Spence and Robert L. Helmreich, Principal Investigators). The article was prepared while the second author was a Fellow at the Center for Advanced Study in the Behavioral Sciences, with support from the Spencer Foundation, NIMH Grant 5T32MH14581-03, and the University of Texas Research Institute.     

Inferential processing of context: Studies of cognitively impaired subjects

Language comprehension tasks involving pronoun coreference were administered to a group of demented patients, a group of patients with cardiac disease, and groups of normal elderly persons and young adults. Pronoun coreference was constrained by either lexical, syntactic, or contextual cues. No differences were found between old and young subjects for any task. While the demented patients were impaired on all tasks, the cardiac patients were specifically impaired in the inferential processing of context.     

Resolving Ethical Dilemmas in Management: Experimental Investigations of Values, Accountability, and Choice

Hypotheses regarding the effects of personal values and accountability on the resolution of ethical dilemmas in management were formulated and tested experimentally with a sample of 135 M.B.A. students. Personal values were found to be related to how subjects chose to resolve an ethical dilemma presented to them; but, as expected, this relationship did not hold when subjects were made to feel accountable to another for their choices. Accountability, unexpectedly, however, did not have a main effect on choices. This lack of an effect tentatively was attributed to the inexplicitness of the accountability manipulations. In a second and third experiment, support for the importance of explicitness in accountability research was obtained. The theoretical and practical implications of the findings from all three experiments were discussed.