Devon Proudfoot

Seeking Safer Sexual Spaces: Queer and Trans Young People Labeled with Intellectual Disabilities and the Paradoxical Risks of Restriction

Young lesbian, gay, bisexual, and transgender (LGBT) people labeled with intellectual disabilities have unique sexual health needs that are not being met. Denial by others of their right to pleasure and the exercise of heightened external control over their sexuality are commonplace. Current research indicates that these youth are at heightened risk for compromised sexual health. This study aimed to explore the ways in which social and environmental conditions influence vulnerability to adverse sexual health outcomes for this population. We used a community-based research approach to conduct qualitative interviews and focus groups with 10 young LGBT people (aged 17–26) labeled with intellectual disabilities. Participants reported multiple limitations on their autonomy that resulted in having sex in places where they did not feel comfortable and were unlikely to practice safer sex. Attempts by authority figures to protect youth through limits on their autonomy may be unintentionally leading to negative sexual health outcomes.

A Gender Bias in the Attribution of Creativity Archival and Experimental Evidence for the Perceived Association Between Masculinity and Creative Thinking

We propose that the propensity to think creatively tends to be associated with independence and self-direction—qualities generally ascribed to men—so that men are often perceived to be more creative than women. In two experiments, we found that “outside the box” creativity is more strongly associated with stereotypically masculine characteristics (e.g., daring and self-reliance) than with stereotypically feminine characteristics (e.g., cooperativeness and supportiveness; Study 1) and that a man is ascribed more creativity than a woman when they produce identical output (Study 2). Analyzing archival data, we found that men’s ideas are evaluated as more ingenious than women’s ideas (Study 3) and that female executives are stereotyped as less innovative than their male counterparts when evaluated by their supervisors (Study 4). Finally, we observed that stereotypically masculine behavior enhances a man’s perceived creativity, whereas identical behavior does not enhance a woman’s perceived creativity (Study 5). This boost in men’s perceived creativity is mediated by attributions of agency, not competence, and predicts perceptions of reward deservingness.

Navigating Risks and Professional Roles: Research with Lesbian, Gay, Bisexual, Trans, and Queer Young People with Intellectual Disabilities:

We examine ethical issues that emerged during a community-based participatory research (CBPR) study in Toronto, Canada, exploring sexual health attitudes and practices among lesbian, gay, bisexual, trans, queer, and questioning (LGBTQ) young people (ages 17–26) labeled with intellectual disabilities. These ethical concerns included: (1) managing the risk of coercion, (2) consent to participate in the study, (3) issues of confidentiality and disclosure, (4) balancing beneficence with self-determination, and (5) role conflict for researcher-practitioners who participate in CBPR projects. Incorporating critical disability perspectives and a heightened awareness of professional role conflict into CBPR practices has the potential to foster development of more inclusive and accessible sexual health initiatives and research environments.

Reactance or Rationalization? Predicting Public Responses to Government Policy

The public’s attitudes toward new governmental laws and regulations are frequently at the forefront of public policy debates. Will the public react negatively to a newly implemented public safety regulation or embrace the change? Does the public’s initial favorability toward a proposed environmental policy indicate public opinion and compliance if such a law passed? Social psychological research directly explores these questions and provides insight into how specific policy designs and implementations can shape public response to new regulations. People may exhibit one of two contrasting responses to policies: reactance or rationalization. When a rule is imposed, individuals often display reactance—exaggerating the value of the behavior being banned or restricted. However, individuals also frequently show an opposite, perhaps less conspicuous, tendency—They rationalize government policy; that is, they diminish alternatives and actively justify why the imposed regulations are favorable. In experiments, two factors—individuals’ attentional focus and a policy’s apparent absoluteness—determine whether people react against or rationalize policies that seek to restrict their behavior. In other evidence, people’s motivation to defend the status quo may hinder—but also facilitate—support for public policy changes. The implications can guide public policy design and implementation.

There’s No Team in I: How Observers Perceive Individual Creativity in a Team Setting.

Creativity is highly valued in organizations as an important source of innovation. As most creative projects require the efforts of groups of individuals working together, it is important to understand how creativity is perceived for team products, including how observers attribute creative ability to focal actors who worked as part of a creative team. Evidence from three experiments suggests that observers commit the fundamental attribution error—systematically discounting the contribution of the group when assessing the creative ability of a single group representative, particularly when the group itself is not visually salient. In a pilot study, we found that, in the context of the design team at Apple, a target group member visually depicted alone is perceived to have greater personal creative ability than when he is visually depicted with his team. In Study 1, using a sample of managers, we conceptually replicated this finding and further observed that, when shown alone, a target member of a group that produced a creative product is perceived to be as creative as an individual described as working alone on the same output. In Study 2, we replicated the findings of Study 1 and also observed that a target group member depicted alone, rather than with his team, is also attributed less creative ability for uncreative group output. Findings are discussed in light of how overattribution of individual creative ability can harm organizations in the long run.

Creativity is Gendered: The Perceived Association Between Masculinity and Creative Ability

In the current research, we propose that lay theories of creativity are gendered in nature and that the gendering of creativity contributes to gender inequality in the workplace. Specifically, we h...