Search

The authors distinguish between minimum and confirmatory standards of incompetence and hypothesize that for groups stereotyped as relatively competent (or deficient in incompetence), minimum standards of incompetence are lower (suspicion of incompetence is triggered sooner) but confirmatory standards are higher, relative to groups stereotyped as relatively incompetent. An initial study demonstrated this evidentiary pattern for male versus female targets. In Studies 2 and 3, participants were exposed to a poor-performing male or female (Study 2) or Black or White male (Study 3) trainee and were asked to record 'notable' behaviors in either their 'informal notes' (instantiating a minimum standard) or a 'formal performance log' (instantiating a confirmatory standard). Consistent with predictions, fewer incompetent behaviors were recorded in the formal log than in informal notes for White male trainees. Firing decisions generally mimicked these patterns and in Study 3 were partially mediated by the accessibility of incompetent behaviors.

Persuasive analogies consist of linguistic cues that invite audiences to represent a problem in terms of an analog and to make choices compatible with this manipulated representation. The authors explore how the frequency of linguistic cues moderates analogical bias in choice behavior. Participants read versions of a managerial decision scenario differing in the number of sports (e.g., game plan) or family (e.g., parent company) idioms used to describe situational attributes and then chose between analogically consistent and inconsistent response options. Analogies consisting of an intermediate number of cues elicited higher rates of analogically consistent responding than those of higher and lower cue frequency. When explaining their responses, participants referred to the sports or family analogies most often to rationalize rejecting the analogically consistent response option after reading high cue frequency versions. These findings indicate that there are lower and upper boundaries to a persuasive analogy's optimal cue frequency. Keywords: analogy, idioms, decision making, choice

Using structural equation modeling, the authors tested theoretical predictions concerning the effects of perceived discrimination against one's gender on psychological well-being in women and men. Results were highly supportive of the Rejection-Identification Model, with perceptions of discrimination harming psychological well-being among women but not among men. The results also support the Rejection-Identification Model's prediction that women partially cope with the negative well-being consequences of perceived discrimination by increasing identification with women as a group. In contrast, perceived discrimination was unrelated to group identification among men. The authors found no support for the hypothesis that perceptions of discrimination have self-protective properties among the disadvantaged. Results are consistent with the contention that the differential effects of perceived discrimination among women and men are due to differences in the groups' relative positions within the social structure.