Madeleine A. Fugère

Technology and engineering education students’ perceptions of hands‐on and hands‐off activities

Technology and engineering education students responded to a survey regarding hands‐on and hands‐off activities. First, the students listed hands‐on and hands‐off activities and what characterized the two types of activities. Activities such as building or assembling something as well as working manually with tools were viewed as hands‐on. Passive activities such as listening or watching were perceived as hands‐off. Then, the students rated 30 different activities on a bipolar scale ranging from 1 (high degree hands‐off) to 7 (high degree hands‐on). A Principal Components Factor Analysis of the 30 activities revealed two independent factors. The hands‐off factor consisted of many modern technological activities such as computer‐aided design, using a three‐dimensional printer, and constructing functional prototypes using stereo‐lithography technology. The hands‐on factor consisted of more traditional activities such as rebuilding an engine and using a screwdriver. These results suggest that students perceive traditional activities as more hands‐on than modern activities.

Using Empirical Article Analysis to Assess Research Methods Courses

Developing students who can apply their knowledge of empirical research is a key outcome of the undergraduate psychology major. This learning outcome was assessed in two research methods courses by having students read and analyze a condensed empirical journal article. At the start and end of the semester, students in multiple sections of an introductory research methods course and students in sections of an advanced methods course answered questions about a condensed journal article in a pre–post approach. Students in the advanced course significantly outperformed students in the introductory course at both administrations, and students in both courses improved significantly from beginning to end of the semester. Results indicate that using journal article analysis can effectively supplement assessment efforts for psychology departments.

The social psychology of attraction and romantic relationships

PART I: ATTRACTION 1. Forming Attitudes toward Potential Partners: First Impressions of Physical Characteristics 2. Forming Attitudes toward Potential Partners: First Impressions of Non-Physical Characteristics 3. First Impressions of Non-Physical Characteristics: Levels of Acquaintance and the Importance of Meeting in Person 4. Evolutionary Theory 5. Initiating and Enhancing Attraction PART II: ROMANTIC RELATIONSHIPS 6. Assessing and Changing Attitudes toward Romantic Partners 7. Romantic Relationships 8. Sex and Love 9. Gender

Resistance to mate guarding scale in women: psychometric properties.

One individuals actions may affect the evolutionary fitness of another individual. Sexually antagonistic coevolution occurs when one partners behavior decreases the fitness of the other partner (Rice, 1996). This conflict pressures the other partner to counter these disadvantageous actions. Mate guarding is a mate retention tactic aimed at keeping a partner from cheating. Mate guarding may reduce mate choice, especially for extra pair mates. Therefore, some individuals may resist their partners mate guarding tactics. We developed a scale to measure resistance to mate guarding and tested it in women (N = 1069). Using exploratory factor analysis (EFA), six theoretically sound factors emerged and explained 69% of the variance. Confirmatory Factor Analysis showed strong support for the six original subscales as well as for the overall scale. The subscales had high reliability. The validity of the Resistance to Mate Guarding Scale was also excellent. Women who stated they used more resistance to mate guarding strategies also indicated that they had partners who mate guarded more, were less invested in their relationships, felt their partners were more controlling, had a more avoidant attachment style, and had a more unrestricted sociosexual orientation.