Causal explanations of male and female academic performance as a function of sex-role biases

The study was designed to assess whether attributions of causality vary as a function of sex-role attitudes. Thirty-two male and thirty-two female undergraduates were presented with one of four story completions about a medical student in which sex of the student and success versus failure were varied. Subjects were asked to account for the medical student's success (or failure) in terms of ability, motivation, ease of the goal, and luck. Results suggest that attributions do vary as a function of sex-role attitudes, as measured by the Attitudes Toward Women Scale. Subjects with liberal attitudes were less likely to offer sex-biased attributions about lack of motivation. Subjects' attributions with respect to lack of ability suggest, however, that sex-typed notions about competence may still be deeply ingrained despite recent social changes.The author would like to thank Cheryl Sharp and Robin Koenig for their assistance in compiling the data for this project, as well as Robert Heaton, James Gumina, and Louise Bickman for their editoral comments.     

Decision Control and Process Control Effects on Procedural Fairness Judgments1

Process control, the capacity to influence the content of a conflict resolution hearing, has been found repeatedly to affect disputants' judgments of the fairness of conflict resolution procedures, but never has there been an unambiguous test of the effect in nonbinding procedures. It was hypothesized that disputants experiencing nonbinding conflict resolution procedures, as well as those experiencing binding conflict resolution, would judge as more fair procedures high in disputant process control. One hundred nineteen undergraduate males and females were placed in apparent conflict with other suhjects. The procedure used to resolve the conflict was either high or low in disputant process control and was either binding or nonbinding. The outcome of the conflict resolution procedure was either favorable or unfavordblc to the subject. High disputant process control procedures were judged more fair than low disputant process control procedures regardless of whether the decision was binding, confirming the hypothesis. The results support new applications of procedural fairness theory and research and encourage testing of process control-like variables in nonlegal settings.     

The development of handedness and dichotic ear listening asymmetries in relation to school achievement: A longitudinal study

To assess the development of dichotic ear asymmetries and handedness, 208 male school children were evaluated in kindergarten and at Grades 2 and 5 (ages 66, 92, and 130 months of age, respectively) with a dichotic listening task and a hand preference test. The Wide Range Achievement Test (WRAT) also was administered at each of the three grade levels. There was significant variability in handedness scores over time only for those subjects whose scores at initial testing, that is, in kindergarten, identified them as non-right-handers. Both right and left handers had a significant increase in dichotic listening scores over time; however, only right handers had a significant right ear advantage at each evaluation. Regression analyses showed that combined hand preference scores and ear recall scores at each probe when combined accounted for almost 44% of the variance in WRAT achievement scores at Grade 5. Ear asymmetry scores, however, were not predictive of school achievement.     

Toward understanding sex differences in pay allocation: Agency,communion, and reward distribution behavior

This research examined the extent to which the personality characteristics of agency and communion are sex linked, and the extent to which differences in these orientations can account for sex differences in reward distribution behavior. In two studies, the agency and communion level of large samples of male and female undergraduates were assessed. As expected, males were more agentic and females were more communal. Moreover, when subjects who scored high or low on agency and high or low on communion were asked to allocate rewards between themselves and a co-worker, these personality differences were related to their allocation decisions. These results were used as the basis for discussing the role that sex-linked personality differences might play in distributive justice judgments.This article is an adaptation of a colloquium presentation at the meeting of the American Psychological Association, Los Angeles, August 1981. The research reported here was supported by NIMH grant MH29987-1, Goals, Motives, and Norms of Reward Distribution, and by NIMH Biomedical Research Support Grant from the College of Social Science, Michigan State University. The authors wish to thank Andrea Doughty for her valuable advice, and to gratefully acknowledge the help of Mark Teicher, Julie B. Klein, Sue Schnelbach, Pat Loepp, Barb Allen, Gavin Goodrich, Bob O'Hara, Kelly Bowen, Rod Hollenstein, Steve Schultz, and Mary Hurst.     

Generalized and specific expectancies: Sequential mediators of interpersonal behavior1

Two experiments confirmed sequential mediation of social interaction by investigating the effects of generalized expectancies on specific expectancies and the effects of specific expectancies on performance. Both experiments used a simulated tutoring task in which the subject took the role of tutor while a confederate took the role of student. In Experiment 1 subjects combined generalized expectancies about the effectiveness of certain tutoring responses with specific situational information to produce specific expectancies about the results of the tutoring responses under the experimental circumstances. Experiment 2 replicated this finding and showed that specific expectancies of the relative effectiveness of different responses influenced which response was performed more. Results were discussed in terms of cognitive motivation theory and social learning theory.