Gun attitudes on campus: United and divided by safety needs

All people share a need for safety. Yet people’s pursuit of safety can conflict when it comes to guns, with some people perceiving guns as a means to safety and others perceiving guns as a threat to safety. We examined this conflict on a U.S. college campus that prohibits guns. We distinguished between people (N = 11,390) who (1) own a gun for protection, (2) own a gun exclusively for reasons other than protection (e.g., collecting, sports), and (3) do not own a gun. Protection owners felt less safe on campus and supported allowing guns on campus. They also reported that they and others would feel safer and that gun violence would decrease if they carried a gun on campus. Non-owners and non-protection owners felt the reverse. The findings suggest that protection concerns, rather than gun-ownership per se, account for diverging perceptions and attitudes about guns and gun control.     

Cultural Mistrust of Mental Health Professionals Among Black Males Transitioning from Foster Care

We examined cultural mistrust of mental health professionals among Black males who are transitioning from the foster care system (N = 74) and its relationship to their level of satisfaction with child welfare services and the frequency of negative social contextual experiences. Results of hierarchical regression analysis showed that the level of satisfaction with child welfare services moderated the relationship between negative social contextual experiences and cultural mistrust of mental health professionals. Specifically, more frequent negative social contextual experiences were related to greater cultural mistrust of mental health professionals for Black males reporting low satisfaction with child welfare services, but not for those reporting high satisfaction with child welfare services. Implications for service delivery are discussed.     

The contact hypothesis revisited: status bias in the reduction of implicit prejudice in the United States and Lebanon

Although 50 years of research demonstrate that friendly intergroup contact reduces intergroup prejudice, the findings are based solely on self-reported, explicit prejudice. In two parallel experiments examining intergroup contact and prejudice-between Whites and Blacks in the United States (Experiment 1) and between Christians and Muslims in Lebanon (Experiment 2)-we examined whether intergroup status differences moderate contact effects on implicit prejudice, as well as explicit prejudice. Both experiments replicated the standard effect of contact on explicit prejudice. They also demonstrated that intergroup contact reduces implicit prejudice among low-status groups. In Experiment 1, the implicit prejudice of Blacks toward Whites (but not Whites toward Blacks) was reduced as a function of friendly contact. In Experiment 2, the implicit prejudice of Muslims toward Christians (but not Christians toward Muslims) was reduced as a function of friendly contact.     

Reviews

Book Review

Reviews     

Using auditory streaming to reduce disruption to serial memory by extraneous auditory warnings

Three experiments were conducted to examine the effects of extraneous speech warnings (i.e., low-priority warnings initiated during high-priority tasks) on cognitive performance and whether organizing the auditory warnings into streams can attenuate any disruption. Experiment 1 demonstrated that a variety of speech warnings can be separated into perceptually distinct streams by allocating them to discrete spatial locations. Experiment 2 showed that increasing the rate of presentation of the warnings to promote streaming decreased clarity ratings but increased perceived urgency ratings. Experiment 3 demonstrated that the disruption to serial memory for navigational information by extraneous speech warnings could be attenuated by streaming. Results are interpreted in light of previous research, and practical implications for auditory warning design are discussed.     

Gender Differences in Cheating Attitudes and Classroom Cheating Behavior: A Meta-Analysis

Although academic dishonesty is a major problemin American colleges and universities, relatively littleresearch has investigated gender differences incheating. Based on the differential socialization theory of gender differences in moral reasoning(e.g., Chodorow, 1989; Gilligan, 1982) we expected that,compared to women, men would report more favorableattitudes toward cheating and more cheating behavior. We conducted a meta-analysis that included 8studies of gender differences in attitudes towardcheating, 34 studies of gender differences in cheatingbehavior, and 6 studies that investigated both attitudes and behavior. Although the mean effect size forgender differences in attitudes was of moderatemagnitude, equivalent to a correlation of r = .21, themean effect size for behavior was small, equivalent to r = .08. Behavior effect sizes also varied asa function of field of study, method of data collection,and country in which the study was conducted. We discussthe implications of our results for future research on gender differences in academicdishonesty.