Coping With Physical Exertion and Negative Feedback Under Competitive and Self-Standard Conditions

The relationship between goal orientation, self-efficacy, perceived ability, effort, commitment, exertion, feedback tolerance, and process/outcome measures were investigated in 4 studies. In Study 1. feedback (win, lose, win/lose) in a competitive task (accuracy of dart throws) was manipulated. Results showed dart accuracy performance correlated significantly with ego orientation when feedback was positive (win opponent), but not when negative (lose) or alterable (lose/win). Self-efficacy and perceived ability after task familiarity predicted performance in all feedback conditions. In Study 2. a computer-simulated running task was performed by participants under 3 feedback modes (win. lose, win/lose) nested within 2 conditions (self-standard and against an opponent). Results indicated that ego more than task orientation accounted for the performance variance in all experimental conditions. Self-efficacy and task-specific psychological states accounted for 63% to 68% of the performance variance. In Studies 3 and 4. exertion time in strength and endurance tasks were related to the type of activity in which participants were engaged and their commitment and exertion tolerance in the specific tasks. Goal orientation and self-efficacy accounted for much of the exertion-time variables' variance, but they were not significant predictors.     

Embeddedness and New Idea Discussion in Professional Networks: The Mediating Role of Affect‐Based Trust

This article examines how managers' tendency to discuss new ideas with others in their professional networks depends on the density of shared ties surrounding a given relationship. Consistent with prior research which found that embeddedness enhances information flow, an egocentric network survey of mid‐level executives shows that managers tend to discuss new ideas with those who are densely embedded in their professional networks. More specifically, embeddedness increases the likelihood to discuss new ideas by engendering affect‐based trust, as opposed to cognition‐based trust. Implications for network and creativity research are discussed.     

LAUNCHING A CAREER IN PSYCHOLOGY WITH ACHIEVEMENT AND ARROGANCE: JAMES McKEEN CATTELL AT THE JOHNS HOPKINS UNIVERSITY, 1882–1883

The scientific career of eminent experimentalist and psychological tester James McKeen Cattell (1860–1944) began at the Johns Hopkins University during the year (1882–1883) he held the university's Fellowship in Philosophy. This article opens by sketching the scope of Cattell's lifetime achievement and then briefly reviews the historical attention that his life and career has attracted during the past few decades. It then outlines the origins and evolution of Cattell's “scientific ideology,” traces the course of events that led to his fellowship, reviews his earliest studies at Johns Hopkins, and analyzes in some detail his initial laboratory successes. These laid the groundwork for his later distinguished work as a psychological experimentalist, both in Europe and America. It concludes, however, that even as Cattell's early experimental achievements impressed others, the personal arrogance he exhibited during his year in Baltimore served to alienate him from his colleagues and teachers. Over the long run, this arrogance and his often‐antagonistic approach to others continued to color (and even shape) his otherwise distinguished more than 50‐year scientific career.     

Touch attitudes in cross‐sex friendships: We're just friends

Results from this survey indicated that within heterosexual cross‐sex friendships, perceptions of friendship intimacy for females were more strongly tied to their positive attitudes toward: enacting and receiving more touch, enacting and receiving more safe haven (e.g., caretaking) touch, and perceiving touch as more sexually arousing, when compared to males. Females were more motivated not to touch their cross‐sex friends in public regardless of intimacy perceptions and did not positively perceive safe haven touch if they did not have a romantic partner. It is argued that males' and females' attitudes toward touch in cross‐sex friendships diverge due to evolved differences related to parental investment and the manner in which they are socialized to perceive their roles in cross‐sex friendships.