James W. Michaels

Classroom Reward Structures and Academic Performance

Classroom reward structures refer to the performance criteria, contingencies, or standards that students must satisfy in order to receive presumably valued or reinforcing consequences such as prizes or high grades. The reward structure typical of most classrooms appears to be some compromise between indirect individual competition, in which grades are assigned to students based on their performances relative to those of their classmates (i.e., the curve), and individual reward contingencies, in which grades are assigned to students on the basis of how much material each student apparently masters (i.e., the percent mastery criterion). The typical classroom reward structure has been increasingly criticized as being less effective than alternative reward structures in strengthening the academic performances of students (e.g., Deutsch, 1949a, 1949b; Coleman, 1959; Spilerman, 1971; and Johnson & Johnson, 1974). The critics have urged more frequent use of group reward structures (i.e., group reward contingencies and intergroup competition) and less frequent use of individual reward structures (i.e., individual reward contingencies and individual competition) in schools. In addition, the critics have presented strong evidence that group reward structures more effectively strengthen certain process variables such as cooperation (i.e., collaboration and coordination), interpersonal attraction among group members, and positive attitudes towards tasks, as well as actual performance on tasks requiring cooperative interaction (i.e., interdependent tasks) such as group discussion and problem solving (e.g., Johnson & Johnson, 1974). However, attempts to demonstrate that group

Satisfaction in intimate relationships as a function of inequality, inequity, and outcomes

The present study extends previous research examining the effects of inequities on satisfaction in intimate relationships. Using self-report data from college students dating one person exclusively, we examined the relative strength of the effects of inequality, inequity, outcome level, and outcomes relative to comparison level on satisfaction. Although significant effects were found for all variables, proportions of variance accounted for by inequality and inequity were small compared to that accounted for by outcomes, thus providing stronger support for the simpler reinforcement hypothesis. Our analyses also provide an alternative interpretation for the threshold effect reported for those who are advantaged by inequitable relationships. Gender differences were also detected for several of the independent variables, but not for satisfaction or in the relationships between the independent variables and satisfaction. We also discuss several issues associated with using self-report data when applying equity and exchange theories to intimate relationships.

Social Exchange and Equity Determinants of Relationship Commitment

The present study examines the explanatory power of alternative determinants of relationship commitment derived from the social exchange and equity perspective. We hypothesized that relationship commitment varies directly with relationship outcomes, outcomes relative to the attractiveness of alternatives, relationship satisfaction and duration. We also hypothesized that commitment varies inversely with relationship inequity and that females would be less committed to their relationships than would males. Using self-report data from college students dating one person exclusively and multiple regression procedures, we found clear support for the first set of hypotheses, marginal support for the effect of inequity, and no -support for the hypothesized gender difference in commitment.

Social science journal characteristics and journal citation measures

Abstract This article examines the relationship between structural characteristics of journals and journal citation measures. Journals listed in the Social Science Citation Index were found to differ from unlisted journals on 11 of 18 characteristics. For listed journals, journal characteristics accounted for 58 percent of the variance in 1981 citations to all years, but only 33 and 15 percent respectively of the variances in the more restrictive impact factor and immediacy index measures. The effects of several journal characteristics on citations to all years and impact factor were different for journals sponsored by professional associations compared to other journals. Journal characteristics identified as having independent impacts on citation measures are suggestive of the directions journal editors might choose to move in as their journals mature.

Systematic Observation as a Measurement Strategy

Abstract The potential usefulness of direct systematic observation as a measurement strategy is addressed in the present paper. Although systematic observation offers numerous advantages over alternative methods, several persistent and unique limitations are also associated with the method. Those addressed include observer interference, problems associated with category systems, related problems of reliability and validity, and observer bias. Systematic observation has also been restricted by self-imposed limitations on the types of behavior observed and recorded, the types of research designs employed, and the types of observational technology applied. A review of both types of limitations suggests that removal of self-imposed limitations would do much to overcome other limitations and thus strengthen the status of systematic observation as a measurement strategy in sociology.