Escalation in groups: Focus on information sampling

The purpose of this experiment was to examine if groups escalate more than individuals when information is not distributed to all group members. The experiment also attempted to replicate Bazerman, Beekun, and Schoorman's (1992) findings, that participants with high responsibility escalate more than participants with low responsibility. The task was a modified version of the Heeley Store Case (Bazerman et al., 1992). The dependent measures fell into three categories: rewards, appropriateness of layoff/demotion, and forecasted future performance. The results showed little support for the hypotheses. First, high responsibility participants escalated significantly more than low responsibility candidates for only one of the six measures. This may have been due to the fact that all participants felt responsible for their decisions. For the other dependent variables, the effect was either not significant or in the wrong direction. Second, no significant interaction was found between responsibility and decision-making context (individual, groups with all shared information, and groups with shared and unshared information). We then analyzed the data using a measure of felt responsibility as a covariate. The interaction between felt responsibility and decision-making context was significant only for layoff decision. For all of the other measures, no significant interaction was found. One possible reason why our hypotheses were not supported may have been that the groups felt a diffusion of responsibility. Larger groups may have also demonstrated the effects of group processes more effectively. No clear conclusions can be made regarding the influence of information sampling on escalation. An earlier version of this paper was presented at the 1998 meetings of the American Psychological Society.     

DEFINITIONAL RESEARCH ON AFRICAN AMERICAN STUDENTS AND SEXUAL HARASSMENT

A total of 100 African American undergraduate students were given the Sexual Experiences Questionnaire (SEQ) (Fitzgerald et al., 1988) and an open-ended question assessing experiences of sexual harassment. Results showed a significant frequency of sexual imposition (19%), particularly sexual touching. Participants also clearly delineated a new category of sexual harassment previously untapped by largely Caucasian studies: comments or sexual attention based solely on racial stereotypes or racially based physical features. In conclusion, the reported differences with regard to experiences and definitions of sexual harassment indicate that previous assumptions of homogeneity of experience (with Caucasian women being the standard) appear to be incorrect.     

A study of the effects of cranial electrical stimulation on attention and concentration

There have been several anecdotal accounts that cranial electrical stimulation (CES) enhances attention and the ability to learn new tasks in a normal population, but only one published investigation confirms that CES improves attention using the Alpha Stim CES (Madden and Kirsch, 1987). The purpose of this study was to corroborate the findings of Madden and Kirsch, using more precise measures of attention, such as a Continuous Performance Test (CPT). A pretest and posttest CPT was given to two groups using the LISS CES device. The control group consisted of twenty-one subjects who received the placebo treatment. The experimental group of thirty-one subjects received twenty minutes of CES. Four measures of the CPT show significant gains in attention: Number of Hits,p=.010 Hit RT ISI Change,p=.016, Risk Taking,p=.055; and Attentiveness,p=.054. Based on subjects who demonstrated improvement by one standard deviation on two different measures of the CPT, thirty-one percent of the experimental group improved versus four percent of the control group. The use of CES as a method of increasing attention is a promising are that requires further investigation.     

Leader Attributions for Subordinate Performance: Consequences for Subsequent Leader Interactive Behaviors and Ratings1

An important application of attribution theory deals with leader explanations for subordinate performance and their effects on future leader–member interactions and performance. In the present study, subjects worked on a 2-trial task in which there was a leader and 2 members. Leaders received performance feedback and an attributional explanation for subordinate performance after Trial 1, and subsequent Trial 2 behavior was videotaped. Results showed that attributions significantly affected the amount of time spent by the leader talking to the group during the second trial, as well as the number of negative leader comments. Level of performance was a significant determinant of subordinate ratings and reward/punishment recommendations. Attributions differentially affected the punishment advocated by leaders, with failure due to internal causes more likely to be punished than failure due to external causes. Implications for an attributional theory of leadership are discussed.     

Women Recruits' Perceptions of Workforce Diversity Program Selection Decisions: A Procedural Justice Examination

This study explores the attitudes of women and how their attitudes relate to diversity management practices. Specifically, we utilize organizational justice to examine women's attitudes toward the perceived fairness of outcomes and procedures in the context of managing diversity. We utilize Cox and Blake's (1991) marketing argument as a procedural justification for the need for diversity in the workplace. Our findings indicate that diversity programs that are not justified result in negative beneficiary attitudes, regardless of a positive outcome produced.     

Measurement and Non-Measurement Influences of Test-Session Behavior on Individually Administered Measures of Intelligence

Two nested structural models were developed to determine whether test-session behaviors affect the manner in which intelligence is measured or whether their influence is related to the constructs being measured. Children’s test-session behaviors were assessed using the Guide to the Assessment of Test-Session Behaviors for the WISC-III and WIAT (GATSB; Glutting & Oakland, 1993) and intelligence was measured with the Wechsler Intelligence Scale for Children-Third Edition (WISC-III; Wechsler, 1991). Model 1 investigated relationships between test-session behaviors and the WISC-III’s four-factor solution by first evaluating the underlying factor structure of the instruments. Thereafter, this measurement model served as a baseline against which alternative models were compared. The alternative models considered the influence of test-session behaviors on: (a) the subtests used to measure the WISC-III’s constructs of intelligence, and (b) the actual constructs of intelligence. Model 2 explored similar relationships by considering only the WISC-III’s Verbal and Performance dimensions. Results indicate that test-session behaviors play a larger role influencing the mechanisms through which intelligence is measured than on the actual constructs of intelligence. Implications are discussed for clinical practice.     

Gender Discrimination and the Workplace: An Examination of Rational Bias Theory

Previous research concerning the rationalbias theory of workplace discrimination has beenconfined largely to narrow student samples. This studyextends that work with an experimental-survey design in which employed participants were asked bothhow others respond to conditions classically elicitingrational bias discrimination, and how they believepeople behave in their own firms. Participants were 148 men and 158 women (88.6% Caucasian, 4.6%Hispanic, 4% Asian, and 2.8% other racialidentification) with graduate business degrees from apublic university. Results show evidence of continuingdiscrimination, and support the theory predicting rational biasgender discrimination in the workplace. Gender ofrespondent and locus of control (defined by Spector'sWork Locus of Control scale) are also shown to be related to rational bias discrimination.Suggestions are made for further development and testingof rational bias theory.     

Influence Opportunities and the Development of Argumentation Competencies in Childhood

Whether argumentation competencies are associated with the kind of influence opportunities children have in their lives is the focus of this study. The hypothesis is that when children have the opportunity to initiate and evaluate arguments, hear others make and examine arguments, and participate equally in resolving disputes, children are able to develop their argument skills. Four argumentation competencies associated with critical discussions of proposals are identified: creating consensus about problematic situations, advocating proposals, facilitating behavioral commitment, and integrating identities. Second, fourth, and sixth grade children completed tasks that assessed their influence opportunities and argument competencies. Children who perceived themselves to have many collaborative influence opportunities, that is, opportunities in which they could engage in mutual influence, had more highly developed argument competencies than children who did not have such opportunities. As predicted, this relationship occurred with the argument competencies of problem conception, proposal advocacy and facilitating commitment. Measures of non-collaborative influence opportunities were not associated with argument competencies. Together, the results suggest that discussions in which children are given the opportunity to influence and be influenced with arguments may provide the best context for children to develop their argument skills.