A reexamination of sex differences in job preferences

Previous research has found conflicting answers to the question of whether males and females share similar preferences for various job characteristics. It is difficult to determine if the different findings are due to the different populations sampled, the various methodologies employed, or to a real change in the phenomenon itself. This study essentially replicates earlier work by having 130 male and 84 female college students rate the importance of 10 job characteristics for both themselves and members of the opposite sex. Both sexes rated motivators as important, but females also placed importance on the hygienes. Males tended to underestimate the importance of the motivators for females, while females overestimated the importance of hygienes for males. The subject's sex could be predicted by both the importance for self and importance for opposite sex ratings, contrary to the earlier study. The difference in results and interpretation was shown to be due to the type of analyses used. Additionally, it was found that females' job preferences were related to their mothers' educational achievement.     

On the form and location of the Psychometric Bisection Function for time

The Psychometric Bisection Function for time relates the discriminability of intermediate duration stimuli to a short and long training duration. Bisection Functions for animals (R. M. Church & M. Z. Deluty, Journal of Experimental Psychology: Animal Behavior Processes, 1977, 3, 216–228) confirm Weber's Law and also show indifference between short and long reports at the geometric mean of the training durations. Two discrimination processes are studied which, in combination with different constructions of the subjective time scale, result in Bisection Functions which differ in form and location. The two discrimination processes use a likelihood ratio rule or a similarity rule to compare intermediate durations to the training durations. These rules in combination with two different constructions of the subjective time scale result in four models which conform to Weber's Law. For one of the scales subjective time is a power function of real time with the scalar property on variance (Scalar Timing). For the other, subjective time is a logarithmic function of real time with constant variance (Log Timing). Both Log and Scalar Timing assume normality on the subjective scale. Only three of these models also entail the geometric mean at the indifference point. The exception is Scalar Timing with the likelihood ratio discrimination rule. This model entails indifference at approximately the harmonic mean of the training stimuli. Variants of the remaining three models differ theoretically but alternatives are difficult to discriminate empirically. A contrast is provided by a Poisson Timing subjective scale in which variance increases directly with the mean. This scale results in indifference at the geometric mean for both discrimination rules but violates Weber's Law in both cases.     

On the problems of being more or less the same

Sixty children aged 2–3 to 5-2 were given four quantity tasks which tested their understanding of more and same. Two tasks involved addition, two involved judgment of static quantities. One of each type of task required a manipulative response, and one of each required a yes/no judgment. The tasks involved judgments of equality and inequality. Tasks involving a manipulative response were significantly easier than those involving a yes/no judgment, indicating that the nature of the response required of the child is crucial. All other differences were negligible, indicating that the other task variables investigated do not affect the child's ability to respond correctly. The ability to make accurate responses was not strongly associated with counting ability. There was a significant difference in the children's counting responses depending on the method used to elicit it.     

Analysis of variances and covariances is misleading as a guide to a common factor model

The “factor” analyses published by Schultz, Kaye, and Hoyer (1980) confused component and factor analysis and led in this case as in many others to unwarranted conclusions. They used component analysis to develop factor models that were subjected to restricted (confirmatory) maximum likelihood analysis, but the final models for which good fits with the observed correlations were obtained were not common factor models. They were, however, discussed as such and conclusions drawn accordingly. When their correlation matrices are analyzed by the principal factors method, two factors are sufficient to account for the intercorrelations. These two factors generally support the a priori expectation of a difference between intelligence tasks and spontaneous flexibility tasks. They are also quite similar in younger and older subjects, when similarity is judged in terms of factor pattern. Factor loadings for the younger subjects, however, are much smaller than expectations based on the respective ranges of talent in the two groups of subjects or on past experience with similar tests in undergraduate student populations.     

The relationship of sex and sex role to trait and situationally specific anxiety types

While considerable research has investigated the relationship of sex and/or sex role to general or trait anxiety, little is known about their relationship to more specific anxiety types. Based on the postulate that sex and sex-role differences may depend on the extent to which an anxiety-producing situation represents a sex-stereotypic domain, the present study compared their relationships to four measures of anxiety: Math anxiety, test anxiety, and two measures of trait anxiety. Subjects were 180 undergraduate students enrolled in introductory psychology courses. Although females reported higher levels of anxiety on all four scales than did males, a discriminant function analysis indicated that math anxiety was the strongest contributor to the separation of the sexes. Significant score differences as a function of sex role were found using the STAI A-Trait scale, and a significant sex × sex-role interaction was found for scores on the S-R Inventory of Anxiousness. Feminine-typed males and undifferentiated females reported highest anxiety levels in comparison to same-sex individuals. Implications for the understanding and treatment of both general and situationally specific anxiety are discussed.     

Behavior of depressed subjects in problem solving groups

This study investigated leadership selection in groups in relation to level of depression of group members. On the basis of MMPI-D and DACL scores 66 subjects were organized into groups of six to eight people consisting of all depressed, all nondepressed, or half depressed and half nondepressed subjects. Subjects performed a problem solving task alone and in groups and completed a questionnaire on leadership choice and group performance. Results indicate that nondepressed group members talked more frequently, were rated as more important contributors, and were selected as leaders more frequently than depressed members. In addition, mixed groups were perceived as more efficient and enjoyable by group members than the unmixed groups. There were no significant differences between depressed and nondepressed subjects on performance of the problem solving task whether working alone or in groups. Results were discussed in relation to other literature on the interpersonal behavior of depressed persons.     

Attention to important versus trivial tasks and salience of fatigue-related symptoms for coronary prone individuals

The present study tested the hypothesis that individuals with the Type A coronary prone behavior pattern focus their attention more on important tasks, and less on trivial tasks than do Type B's. The study used a paradigm in which some subjects worked on math problems (important task) and rated intervening mood items (trivial task), whereas others rated mood items they were to memorize (important task) and worked on intervening math problems (trivial task). All subjects were later tested on recall of mood items. Results indicated that Type A's performed better on math problems and recalled more fatigue-related mood items when the task was important than when it was trivial; for Type B subjects, there was no difference in the number of math problems solved correctly or number of mood items recalled between important and trivial task conditions. Moreover, Type A's reported greater fatigue when mood recall was the important task than when math was the important task, whereas fatigue ratings of Type B's did not differ across these conditions. The findings suggest that Type A's suppress their attention to fatigue-related symptoms only when symptoms are not the objects of focus.     

Stuttering and fluency: Exclusive events or points on a continuum?

In recent years, several studies have been conducted in which the fluency of stutterers was compared with that of normal speakers. These investigations have been of two basic types, some involving objective measures of physiologic, aerodynamic, or acoustic features of the subjects' fluent speech signal, and others involving experiments performed in which listeners attempted to distinguish the fluency produced by stutterers from that generated by normal speakers. The body of literature pertaining to each of these two types of investigations is reviewed and interpreted. The interpretations offered are then developed in an effort to shed further light on both fluency and stuttering. Implications for further research, as well as for the evaluation, treatment, and post-therapy assessment of stutterers are drawn.