An alternative perspective on sex differences in organizational settings: The process of legitimation

This article takes a sociological approach to a problem that has usually been considered as a psychological phenomenon. It addresses the problem of male—female interactions in work situations utilizing the organizational concepts of division of labor and legitimacy. Traditional explanations evoking sex-role socialization are reviewed and rejected for purposes of experimentation and intervention. An alternative argument, focusing on the structural arrangements of organizational settings, is presented as an explanation for behavioral effects previously attributed to inherent sex differences. The results of a pilot study are briefly described, and directions for further experimentation and possible intervention strategies are suggested.The bibliographic search and initial conceptualization of this research was supported by a grant from the Ford Foundation under the auspices of the Center for Research on Women at Stanford University. We are grateful to Miriam Rosen for much of the bibliographic work. The pilot study was supported in part by funds from the Guggenheim Foundation and by a grant from the Spencer Foundation. We also wish to thank Richard Torres and Christie Timberlake for their invaluable assistance on this project.     

Does my daughter like math? Relations between parent and child math attitudes and beliefs

As early as age six, girls report higher math anxiety than boys, and children of both genders begin to endorse the stereotype that males are better at math than females. However, very few studies have examined the emergence of math attitudes in childhood, or the role parents may play in their transmission. The present study is the first to investigate the concordance of multiple implicit and explicit math attitudes and beliefs between 6- and 10-year-old children and their parents. Data from implicit association tasks (IATs) reveal that both parents and their children have implicit associations between math and difficulty, but only parents significantly associated math with males. Notably, males (fathers and sons) were more likely than females (mothers and daughters) to identify as someone who likes math (instead of reading), suggesting gender differences in academic preferences emerge early and remain consistent throughout adulthood. Critically, we provide the first evidence that both mothers’ and fathers’ attitudes about math relate to a range of math attitudes and beliefs held by their children, particularly their daughters. Results suggest that girls may be especially sensitive to parental math attitudes and beliefs. Together, data indicate that children entering formal school already show some negative math attitudes and beliefs and that parents’ math attitudes may have a disproportionate impact on young girls.     

Is Salesperson Attractiveness a Boon or a Bane? The Moderating Role of Perceived Labor Cost‐To‐Price Ratio in Retail Bargaining

This research examines the important but unexamined effects of salesperson attractiveness on consumer bargaining behavior in retail contexts. In line with our theorizing, three studies demonstrate that the effect of salesperson attractiveness on consumer bargaining depends on their general beliefs regarding the impact of labor costs on retail prices. While consumers bargain less with an attractive salesperson when their labor costs‐to‐price (LP) ratio beliefs are relatively low, they bargain harder with an attractive, as opposed to a less attractive, salesperson, when their LP ratio beliefs are relatively high. As well, we provide evidence for the process, based on the salesperson's perceived trustworthiness and consumers' consequent bargaining stance toward her.     

Can bare dispositions explain categorical regularities?

One of the traditional desiderata for a metaphysical theory of laws of nature is that it be able to explain natural regularities. Some philosophers have postulated governing laws to fill this explanatory role. Recently, however, many have attempted to explain natural regularities without appealing to governing laws. Suppose that some fundamental properties are bare dispositions. In virtue of their dispositional nature, these properties must be (or are likely to be) distributed in regular patterns. Thus it would appear that an ontology including bare dispositions can dispense with governing laws of nature. I believe that there is a problem with this line of reasoning. In this essay, I’ll argue that governing laws are indispensable for the explanation of a special sort of natural regularity: those holding among categorical properties (or, as I’ll call them, categorical regularities). This has the potential to be a serious objection to the denial of governing laws, since there may be good reasons to believe that observed regularities are categorical regularities.     

Attentional biases toward humor: Separate effects of incongruity detection and resolution

Previous research has indicated that the comprehension of humor involves two stages: incongruity detection and incongruity resolution. However, little is known about the temporal parameters of these stages and the degree to which they influence attentional processing. In the current study, 155 participants completed a dot-probe task to examine these questions. On each trial, humor versus control, novel (incongruent but not humorous) versus control, or neutral versus neutral image pairs were presented for 300, 400, or 500 ms. A probe immediately replaced the experimental image (valid trial) or control image (invalid trial). An attentional bias toward humor and novelty by 300 ms was shown by faster probe-detection reaction times (RTs) on valid compared to invalid humor and novel trials for all three exposure times. When compared to the neutral trials, humor and novel stimuli elicited slower RTs, indicating a difficulty in attentional disengagement. An exploratory analysis found that subjective humor ratings predicted the disengagement bias at 500 ms, but not at 400 or 300 ms. These results suggest that incongruity detection biases attention by 300 ms, whereas incongruity resolution may only contribute at 500 ms.