Competing on all fronts: Achievement orientation and disordered eating

Strikingly high prevalence rates of symptoms of disordered eating among college women have been documented. The question arises as to whether one aspect of the college experience, achievement orientation, is associated with disordered eating. Competing hypotheses may be generated regarding the relationship between achievement orientation and disordered eating, with arguments for either a positive or negative relationship. The Work and Family Orientation Questionnaire (WOFO) and the Disordered Eating Symptoms Scale (DESS) were administered to 668 female undergraduate college students. Multivariate analysis of the WOFO subscales revealed that women with high levels of disordered eating obtained significantly higher scores on the Competitiveness subscale than women with low DESS scores. These findings support hypotheses of a positive relationship between competitiveness and disordered eating.     

Sexual,body-image,and personality attitudes in anorexia nervosa

Assessment of adolescent females with anorexia nervosa was carried out at the time of hospitalization and again at discharge. Findings were compared to those from a normal weight control group. The anorexic subjects at the start of treatment indicated significantly negative attitudes about sexual issues. They also reported a significantly poorer self-evaluation of their body, personality, and social skills than was evident in the comparison group. An improvement in attitude regarding these issues was demonstrated by the end of treatment. The function of weight loss in dealing with these problem areas was discussed.     

Assessing familiality of cognitive ability

In a recent paper in this journal, Benbow, Zonderman, and Stanley (1983) conclude that intellectually precocious children resemble their parents to a lesser extent than do children of lesser ability. In reply, Vining (1985) asserts that Benbow, Zonderman, and Stanley's results are artifacts of selection and their statistical methodology, and that a more appropriate statistical methodology yields quite the opposite conclusion. The present study has two purposes: (1) To show that Vining's criticism is misdirected, stemming from a misunderstanding of how Benbow, Zonderman, and Stanley selected their subjects, and (2) to point out some problems in the model, indices of familiarity, and design used by Benbow, Zonderman, and Stanley that need to be addressed before future comparative studies of familiality are attempted.     

AN EVALUATION OF EVIDENCE‐BASED INTERVENTIONS TO INCREASE COMPLIANCE AMONG CHILDREN WITH AUTISM

We evaluated 4 evidence‐based interventions to increase compliance. Three children with autism who exhibited noncompliance when asked to relinquish a preferred toy were exposed sequentially to interventions that included a reduction in response effort, differential reinforcement, and guided compliance. Results indicated that effort reduction alone was ineffective and that each participant's compliance improved after exposure to a different intervention; these results highlight the need to individualize treatments for compliance.     

An analysis of modifications to the three-step guided compliance procedure necessary to achieve compliance among preschool children

After a 3‐step guided compliance procedure (vocal prompt, vocal plus model prompt, vocal prompt plus physical guidance) did not increase compliance, we evaluated 2 modifications with 4 preschool children who exhibited noncompliance. The first modification consisted of omission of the model prompt, and the second modification consisted of omitting the model prompt and decreasing the interprompt interval from 10 s to 5 s. Each of the modifications effectively increased compliance for 1 participant. For the remaining 2 participants, neither modification was effective; differential reinforcement in the form of contingent access to a preferred edible item was necessary to increase compliance. Problem behavior varied across participants, but was generally higher during guided compliance conditions and lower during differential reinforcement conditions.