Protean and boundaryless careers as metaphors

The terms “protean career” and “boundaryless career” are metaphors. This paper outlines the nature of metaphor and its use in contemporary social science, particularly in the study of careers. It identifies five characteristics of metaphors, which serve as a guide to analyzing and evaluating them. These are (1) literal and figurative meaning; (2) elaboration in theory; (3) external understanding; (4) relationship to other metaphors; and (5) accuracy and constructiveness. The protean and boundaryless career metaphors are examined in relation to each characteristic. Both concepts have developed in understanding outside their literal and figurative meaning. Both however appear functional in the current shifting careers environment. Suggestions are made for the further development of the concepts.     

I owe you: age-related similarities and differences in associative memory for gains and losses

Older adults often experience associative memory impairments but can sometimes remember important information. The current experiments investigate potential age-related similarities and differences associate memory for gains and losses. Younger and older participants were presented with faces and associated dollar amounts, which indicated how much money the person “owed” the participant, and were later given a cued recall test for the dollar amount. Experiment 1 examined face-dollar amount pairs while Experiment 2 included negative dollar amounts to examine both gains and losses. While younger adults recalled more information relative to older adults, both groups were more accurate in recalling the correct value associated with high-value faces compared to lower-value faces and remembered gist-information about the values. However, negative values (losses) did not have a strong impact on recall among older adults versus younger adults, illustrating important associative memory differences between younger and older adults.     

Exceptions to the Rule: The Effects of Remorse,Status, and Gender on Decision Making1

One of several general rules suggested by past work is that it is advantageous to exhibit remorse when one has committed a transgression. A pair of experiments searched for the boundary conditions of this rule. In Experiment 1, mock jurors rated a remorseful defendant as more guilty when the law was fair than when the law was unfair. In contrast, an unremorseful defendant was viewed as equally guilty under both fairness levels. Study 2 conceptually replicated this result, and revealed a 3‐way interaction among remorse, status, and gender. It is argued that these findings illustrate the importance of violation of expectations on evaluation and judgment, inside the courtroom and elsewhere.     

Motivation gains in performance groups: paradigmatic and theoretical developments on the Köhler effect

In contrast to many demonstrations of social loafing, relatively few studies have documented group motivation gains. One such exception was O. K?hler's (1926, 1927) finding that team members working together did better at a taxing persistence task than would be expected from their individual performances, particularly when there was a moderate discrepancy in coworkers' capabilities. In Experiment 1, we developed a paradigm within which K?hler's overall motivation gain effect could be replicated, although the discrepancy in coworkers' capabilities did not moderate these motivation gains (after statistical artifacts were taken into account). Experiment 2 indicated that this motivation gain occurred under conjunctive but not under additive task demands, suggesting that the instrumentality of one's contribution to valued outcomes is a more likely explanation of the K?hler effect than social comparison processes.     

Effect of subgroup ratio on stereotyping

Male and female subjects observed a discussion by a group with one of three sex ratios (9M-IF, SM-SF, 1M-9F) and in which the male contributions were expressed in a more or less stereotype consistent manner. The results indicated that male speakers were stereotyped less than females and that male compared with female speakers were stereotyped increasingly less as the number of like speakers in the group increased.     

Specific and diversive curiosity and depression in junior high school students of divorced and nondivorced parents.

124 junior high school students (Grades 5 to 8) from a small school district in north central Kansas completed the Beck Depression Scale, the Maze test, and the Which-to-Discuss test. Background information, such as age, sex, grade, and marital status of parents, were also collected. There were no significant differences between boys and girls of divorced and nondivorced parents or across grades for scores on the Which-to-Discuss (specific curiosity) and depression, but boys scored significantly higher on the Maze test (diversive curiosity). No differences were noted between the students of divorced and nondivorced parents or across grades. Scores on Which-to-Discuss test and Maze test were not significantly correlated, but scores on one Maze test and depression correlated positively and significantly. When these students scored as more depressed, although in the normal range, they tended to score higher on diversive curiosity.     

Independence of Multiple Verdicts by Jurors and Juries1

An assumption underlying the common practice of permitting a juror to serve on more than one jury is that jurors can and will reach multiple verdicts independently. Two studies were carried out to examine this assumption. The first experiment had mock jurors consider several cases in succession. Subjects exhibited a clear contrast effect on the strength of evidence; those subjects who initially saw strong prosecution cases were less likely to convict in a moderate test case than those who had initially seen wcak prosecution cases. In the second study, the contrast hypothesis was tested for actual juries' verdicts through archival analyses. The results of this field study paralleled those obtained in the experimental study. The discussion focused upon alternative theoretical explanations for these results, implications for trial practice, and the strengths and weak-nesses of the methodologies applied in these studies.