Catherine Cozzarelli

Attitudes Toward the Poor and Attributions for Poverty

Prior psychological research on attitudes toward the poor has focused almost exclusively on the attributions people make to explain why individuals are poor (e.g., Smith & Stone, 1989; Zucker & Weiner, 1993). The goal of the current study was to investigate the relationships among feelings about the poor and poverty, stereotypes of the poor, attributions for poverty, and sociopolitical ideologies (as assessed by the Protestant Ethic, Belief in a Just World, and Right Wing Authoritarianism Scales). In our Midwestern college sample (n = 209), attitudes toward the poor were found to be significantly more negative than attitudes toward the middle class. In addition, participants were most likely to blame poor people them-selves for their poverty. However, attitudes toward the poor and attributions for the causes of poverty were found to vary among individuals from different sociodemographic backgrounds and by degree of endorsement of Protestant ethic, just world, and authoritarianism beliefs. Few gender differences were obtained.

Personal resilience, cognitive appraisals, and coping : An integrative model of adjustment to abortion

We hypothesized that the effects of personality (self-esteem, control, and optimism) on postabortion adaptation (distress, well-being, and decision satisfaction) would be fully mediated by preabortion cognitive appraisals (stress appraisals and self-efficacy appraisals) and postabortion coping. We further proposed that the effects of preabortion appraisals on adaptation would be fully mediated by postabortion coping. Results of a longitudinal study of 527 women who had first-trimester abortions supported our hypotheses. Women with more resilient personalities appraised their abortion as less stressful and had higher self-efficacy for coping with the abortion. More positive appraisals predicted greater acceptance/reframing coping and lesser avoidance/denial, venting, support seeking, and religious coping. Acceptance-reframing predicted better adjustment on all measures, whereas avoidance-denial and venting related to poorer adjustment on all measures. Greater support seeking was associated with reduced distress, and greater religious coping was associated with less decision satisfaction.

Perceived social support, self-efficacy, and adjustment to abortion.

Prior to their having a 1st trimester abortion, womens perceptions of social support from their partner, family, and friends and self-efficacy for coping were assessed. Depression, mood, physical complaints, and anticipation of negative consequences were measured after the 30-min recovery period. As predicted, perceived social support enhanced adjustment indirectly through its effects on self-efficacy. Women who perceived high support from their family, friends, and partners had higher self-efficacy for coping. Higher self-efficacy, in turn, predicted better adjustment on the psychological measures but not on the physical complaint measure. No direct path between social support and adjustment was observed. In addition, women who told close others of their abortion but perceived them as less than completely supportive had poorer postabortion psychological adjustment than either women who did not tell or women who told and perceived complete support.

Personality and self-efficacy as predictors of coping with abortion.

The present study explored the relationships among dispositional optimism, self-esteem, chronic perceptions of control, depression, and self-efficacy in predicting psychological adjustment among women undergoing an abortion. Self-efficacy was found to be a strong, proximal predictor of adjustment, both immediately after the abortion and 3 weeks later. Optimism, perceptions of personal control, and high self-esteem were all related to better postabortion adjustment (mainly through the mediator of increased self-efficacy for coping). In addition, the effects of these three personality variables were found to overlap considerably. Finally, preabortion depression had both direct and indirect (through self-efficacy) effects on adjustment. These effects did not overlap completely with the effects attributable to personality.

Mixed messages: implications of social conflict and social support within close relationships for adjustment to a stressful life event.

The authors examined the impact of womens perceptions of negative (conflict) and positive (support) exchanges with their mothers, partners, and friends before having an abortion on negative (distress) and positive (well-being) indexes of adjustment after the abortion. Preabortion conflict and support from the partner predicted postabortion adjustment in the same affective domain: Conflict uniquely predicted distress, whereas support uniquely predicted well-being. Within-source interactions were observed between support and conflict from mothers and friends. Women who perceived high support from their mothers or friends were more distressed if they also perceived them as sources of high conflict than if they perceived them as sources of low conflict. Among women who perceived their mothers or friends as nonsupportive, no relationship was observed between conflict and distress. Cross-source buffering was not observed.

General Versus Specific Mental Models of Attachment: Are They Associated with Different Outcomes?

The present study examined the relationships between mental models of attachment and both overall psychological adjustment and relationship-related outcomes. Mental models were assessed in the context of a specific relationship as well as for people in general. Overall, partner-specific mental models had stronger and more numerous associations with the outcome variables than did general mental models. General models (especially model of self) were most strongly associated with measures of overall psychological adjustment. However, specific mental models were much more strongly associated with relationship-specific outcomes such as feelings of romantic love or relationship satisfaction than were general mental models. Self-esteem was more strongly related to global psychological adjustment than was model of self, but specific model of self was more strongly related to outcomes in relationships. Trust was not related to any of the dependent variables in the study.

Mental Models of Attachment and Coping With Abortion

This study explored the relationships between mental models of attachment and adjustment to abortion in 408 women undergoing a 1st-trimester abortion at a large free-standing abortion clinic. As expected, mental models of attachment were related to postabortion distress and positive well-being. These relationships were mediated by feelings of self-efficacy for coping with abortion, perceived support from a womans male partner, and perceived conflict from this same source. Model of self and model of others interacted only in predicting perceived conflict and positive well-being. Model of self was more strongly related to the mediator and outcome variables than was model of others. The effects of model of self, however, were largely a reflection of the overlap between model of self and self-esteem.

Cultural Estrangement and Terror Management Theory

A new measure of cultural estrangement was described. The scale assesses the extent to which individuals believe (a) that their ideas, beliefs, or values differ from those of most Americans (the A typicality subscale) and (b) that they do not fit in with main-stream American culture (the Misfit subscale). Those scoring high on the A typicality subscale reported that they perceived themselves to be nonconformists, yet these individuals did not show evidence of poor psychological adjustment. In contrast, those scoring high on the Misfit subscale reported being alienated, depressed, anxious, and low in self-esteem and life satisfaction. Self-discrepancies (a perceived gap between ones real and ideal self) were found to partially mediate the relationships between feeling like a misfit and these negative psychological outcomes. Results were discussed primarily within the context of terror management theory.

Gender differences in distributive justice preferences: The impact of domain

Past research has found that distributive justice preferences vary markedly both as a function of gender of allocator and the domain in which outcomes or rewards are allocated (e.g., relationships vs. work contexts). This study examined the interaction of these two factors in determining distributive justice preferences. Subjects were asked to fill out two scales designed to assess the degree to which their general distributive preferences in work contexts and in relationships were benevolent (prefer inputs to exceed outcomes), equity sensitive (prefer outcome/input ratios to be equal), or entitled (prefer outcomes to exceed inputs). Results revealed that womens preferences were significantly more benevolent (or less entitled) than mens in work domains, but that mens and womens distributive preferences did not differ significantly in relationships. In addition, both sexes indicated significantly more entitled preferences in work domains than in relationships, but the difference between domains was much greater for men than for women. These results suggest that, when considering issues of justice, men make a greater distinction between domains than do women, and that previously observed gender differences in distributive justice preferences may be specific to the work domain.

Do Middle-Class Students Perceive Poor Women and Poor Men Differently?.

In this study, we examined attitudes toward poor women, stereotypes about them, attributions for their poverty, and whether these thoughts and feelings differ from those about poor men. In our Midwestern college students sample (n = 206), attitudes toward poor women were significantly more positive than attitudes toward poor men. In addition, stereotypes of poor women were both more positive and more consistent with gender stereotypes than were those of poor men. Participants endorsed internal attributions for the poverty of both women and men more strongly than external or cultural attributions. However, the content of these attributions was different for the two target groups. Poor women were held responsible for nontraditional familial and reproductive patterns, whereas poor men were held responsible for lack of initiative and self-improvement. For poor men, all types of attributions included references to ability or willingness to work. The three types of attributions were more conceptually distinct for poor women.