ILLUSTRATING FEMINIST THEORY

Feminist theory holds that many of the pathological behaviors observed in patients result from their position in the social hierarchy. The goals of the demonstration detailed in this article are to show the impact of current gender roles on the psychological well-being of women and men and to generate understanding and discussion of the problems that relative status can create in the therapeutic relationship. This teaching demonstration draws parallels between the Zimbardo (1971) prison experiment and the impact that assignment to low-and high-power roles can have on the psychological health of women and men. Students are asked to rate men and women on some of the diagnostic criteria that the Diagnostic and Statistical Manual of Mental Disorders (American Psychiatric Association, 1994) associates with Axis I and II diagnoses. The students watch a video of Zimbardo's prison study and then rate the prisoners and guards. This demonstration provides another explanation for gender patterns in psychopathology by demonstrating that psychologically healthy White males will develop different patterns of psychopathology depending on whether they are placed in a dominant or subordinate role. When placed in the subordinate role, they exhibit behaviors typically seen in women clients; when placed in a dominant role they exhibit behaviors commonly associated with male clients. This exercise demonstrates the unhealthy nature of the gender roles for both women and men.     

Rivals without a cause? Relative performance feedback creates destructive competition despite aligned incentives

Whether people compete or cooperate with each other has consequences for their own performance and that of organizations. To explain why people compete or cooperate, previous research has focused on two main factors: situational outcome structures and personality types. Here, we propose that—above and beyond these two factors—situational cues, such as the format in which people receive feedback, strongly affect whether they act competitively, cooperatively, or individualistically. Results of a laboratory experiment support our theorizing: After receiving ranking feedback, both students and experienced managers treated group situations with cooperative outcome structures as competitive and were in consequence willing to forgo guaranteed financial gains to pursue a—financially irrelevant—better rank. Conversely, in dilemma situations, feedback based on the joint group outcome led to more cooperation than ranking feedback. Our study contributes to research on competition, cooperation, interdependence theory, forced ranking, and the design of information environments.     

Syntactic context and lexical access

Recent studies demonstrating that multiple meanings of an ambiguous word are initially accessed even when only one reading is syntactically appropriate with the preceding context can be criticized on at least two grounds. First, many of the syntactic contexts used were not truly restrictive, and, secondly, subjects may not have had time to integrate the context before processing the ambiguous word. In the present study, subjects listened to a sentence ending in an ambiguous word and then made a lexical decision to a target related to either the appropriate or inappropriate reading. Contexts were completely restrictive, and a pause was introduced between the context and the ambiguous word. Multiple access still obtained, providing further support for the claim that lexical access is not guided by syntactic context.     

Attributions of Responsibility for Obesity: Narrative Communication Reduces Reactive Counterarguing Among Liberals

Informed by theory and research on attributions and narrative persuasion, we compared the effectiveness of narrative and nonnarrative messages in changing attributions of responsibility for causes and solutions related to obesity in the United States. We randomly assigned 500 adults to view one of three messages (narrative, evidence, and a hybrid of the two) emphasizing environmental causes of obesity, or a no‐exposure control condition. The narrative condition increased the belief that societal actors (government, employers) are responsible for addressing obesity, but only among liberals. This pattern of results was partially explained by the success of the narrative condition in reducing reactive counterarguing, relative to the evidence condition, among liberals. We conclude with theoretical and practical implications.