Jacquelyn W. Gaebelein

Sex differences in listening comprehension.

In order to examine the effect of sex of the speaker on listening comprehension in a public speaking situation, 60 male and 60 female subjects viewed either a male or female speaker presenting a talk on either a masculine (chess), feminine (interior decorating), or neutral (snow skiiing) topic. The results supported the hypotheses that when a male speaks he is listened to more carefully than a female speaker, even when she makes the identical presentation. No differences were found when the topic was biased towards one sex; males were still recalled better than females. The above relationships were also true for male and female subjects; both recalled information more accurately from male speakers than from female ones. Rating of informativeness of the presentation showed no difference for sex of the speaker; but effectiveness ratings of the speaker indicated that while both male and female subjects rated male speakers equally effective, the same was not true for the female speakers. Male subjects rated the female speakers significantly more effective than they did male speakers, whereas female subjects rated male and female speakers equally effective.

Instigative Aggression in Females

40 females suggested to partners (confederates) which shock intensity should be delivered to an opponent during a competitive task. Aggressiveness of the instigations was a function of cooperativeness of the partner, aggressiveness of the opponent, and winning and losing in the competition, but not of either instrumental value or E. Results were compared with data from male Ss. Only instrumental reward differentially affected behaviors of men and women.

Sex differences in instigative aggression

Abstract The instigative aggression paradigm, in which male and female subjects instructed a female confederate which shock to set for an opponent in a competitive reaction time task, was employed. It was observed that males instigated more aggression than females and that both passive and assertive noncooperation effectively reduced instigative aggression, the assertive form of noncooperation being only slightly less effective. Questionnaire data suggested that females found the passive noncooperator most desirable while males found her least so. Results were discussed in terms of violation of task role and sex role expectations.

The Utility of Within-Subjects Variables: Estimates of Strength

Procedures to estimate the magnitude of a treatment effect are examined for analysis of variance designs which have repeated-measures. It is shown that the estimate of the magnitude of an effect logically follows from the expected mean squares associated with the design in question. In particular, it is argued that the estimate of utility (strength of effect) for a within-subjects variable should be adjusted to reflect the underlying ANOVA model; viz., the inter-subject variability should be removed from the utility estimate.

SELF-DISCLOSURE AMONG FRIENDS, ACQUAINTANCES, AND STRANGERS

The relationship between self-disclosure and degree of acquaintance was explored under the guise of collecting handwriting samples from 32 male and 36 female undergraduates. Results indicated that high self-disclosure from an experimenter elicited more intimacy than low and that friends tended to disclose most and strangers least. No sex differences were observed.

Naturalistic versus experimental approaches to aggression; theoretical and methodological issues

Various strategies to study human aggression are described, accompanied by a discussion of four major issues. It is concluded that the three major goals of research, precise measurement, realism, and generality, cannot be achieved in a single study or series of studies using only one paradigm. Investigators of a particular problem need to develop a research program that incorporates a number of strategies; hypotheses generated “in the street” need to be tested in the laboratory and vice versa.

Third party instigation of aggression as a function of attack and vulnerability

Abstract Subjects serving as advisors instructed a confederate which shock intensity to deliver to an opponent in a reaction-time competition; subjects could also directly aggress by setting shock for the opponents partner. Vulnerable subjects (shock electrode on) both instigated less aggression, i.e., suggested that less intense shocks be set, and directly aggressed less frequently than nonvulnerable subjects (no shock electrode). Attacked subjects, those for whom the opponents set shock, both instigated more aggression and more frequently set shock than did nonattacked subjects. The relationship between vulnerability and attack was additive for instigative aggression and multiplicative for direct aggression. Both modes of aggression were significantly influenced by the intensity of provocation from the opponents.

Third party instigation of aggression as a function of noncooperation and veto power

Abstract The purpose of the present study was to test the validity of three hypotheses previously offered to explain the attenuating effects of pacifistic noncooperation on instigative aggression. During part one of the experiment all subjects served as instigators; in the second part they actually set shocks for the target. Subjects instigated either a cooperative or noncooperative confederate, and either did or did not have veto power over the confederates shock selections. Results of the study indicated that all hypotheses, norm-conformity, compliance, and maintenance of power, were viable for subgroups of subjects. Results were discussed in terms of individual differences and the temporarily inhibiting effects of passive resistance.

The effects of verbal and behavioral noncompliance on third party instigation of aggression

Abstract Females, assigned to one of four conditions defined in terms of a confederates behavior, suggested which shock intensity the confederate ought to set for an opponent during a reaction time competition, should the opponent lose the trial (had slower reaction time). Confederates either verbally complied or disagreed with suggestions to set high shock, while either actually setting the intensity suggested or setting a lower intensity. Over trials, the opponent became increasingly provocative. Results revealed the main effects and interaction of confederates verbal and actual behaviors, as well as provocativeness of the opponent, significantly influenced the level of shock subjects suggested. Subjects with verbally and behaviorally compliant confederates suggested more intense shock than subjects who encountered any noncompliance.

The consequences of noncooperation for the target of third party instigated aggression

Abstract Consequences for a new target as a function of noncooperation was investigated in the instigative aggression paradigm. Subjects instigated partners to aggress against an opponent by suggesting what shock intensity to deliver. The partner was either cooperative (i.e., complied with the suggestion) or noncooperative (i.e., refused to set high shocks). Subsequently, subjects were given the opportunity to be directly aggressive by actually setting the shocks themselves. During this phase a new target who was nonprovocative was introduced. Subjects aggressed alone, in the presence of their partner, or in the presence of a new person. Results revealed that noncooperation reduced the level of instigative aggression and carried over to the second phase of the experiment. Subjects who had had cooperative partners were more aggressive toward the new target than were subjects who had had noncooperative partners. The presence or absence of the partner was not significant.