Matching Items (6)
Filtering by
- All Subjects: psychology
Description
Although aggression is sometimes thought to be maladaptive, evolutionary theories of resource control and dominance posit that aggression may be used to gain and maintain high social prominence within the peer group. The success of using aggression to increase social prominence may depend on the form of aggression used (relational versus physical), the gender of the aggressor, and the prominence of the victim. Thus, the current study examined the associations between aggression and victimization and social prominence. In addition, the current study extended previous research by examining multiple forms of aggression and victimization and conceptualizing and measuring social prominence using social network analysis. Participants were 339 6th grade students from ethnically diverse backgrounds (50.4% girls). Participants completed a peer nomination measure assessing relational and physical aggression and victimization. They also nominated friends within their grade, which were used to calculate three indices of social prominence, using social network analysis. As expected, results indicated that relational aggression was associated with higher social prominence, particularly for girls, whereas physical aggression was less robustly associated with social prominence. Results for victimization were less clear, but suggested that, for girls, those at mid-levels of social prominence were most highly victimized. For boys, results indicated that those both high and low in prominence were most highly relationally victimized, and those at mid-levels of prominence were most highly physically victimized. These findings help inform intervention work focused on decreasing overall levels of aggressive behavior.
ContributorsAndrews, Naomi C. Z (Author) / Hanish, Laura D. (Thesis advisor) / Martin, Carol Lynn (Committee member) / Updegraff, Kimberly A (Committee member) / Arizona State University (Publisher)
Created2013
Description
The current study was a benefit cost analysis that examined mental and behavioral health and prescription drug service use data of 347 participants (212 youth and 135 caregivers) from a bereavement intervention, the Family Bereavement Program (FBP).The preliminary goals of the current study were to compare the FBP intervention and the Literature Control (LC) groups at the six year follow-up on: (a) number of participants using mental/behavioral health services and prescription drugs, (b) the frequency of use of mental/behavioral health services and prescription drugs, and (c) the costs of mental/behavioral health services and prescription drugs. The final, and primary goal, was to (d) calculate the benefits of the FBP by analyzing the monetary difference between the LC and FBP groups in terms of cost of services used and then by applying those benefits to the cost of the intervention. Data representing participating youths' and caregivers' mental health service use and prescription drug use at the sixth year post-intervention were collected, as were the costs of those services. Results indicated that fewer FBP participants used services and prescription drugs than the Literature Control (LC) participants, but FBP participants, particularly the youth, used some low intensity services more frequently whereas the LC youth used more intensive and costly services more frequently. Consequently, service costs were greater for participants in the LC group than for participants in the FBP group. The benefit cost ratio revealed that the FBP, as delivered, saved society between $.15 and $.27 in mental and behavioral health costs for every dollar spent on the intervention. Implications of these findings and directions for future research are discussed.
ContributorsPorter, Michèle M (Author) / Hanish, Laura D. (Thesis advisor) / Sandler, Irwin N. (Committee member) / Wolchik, Sharlene A (Committee member) / Johnson, William G. (Committee member) / Arizona State University (Publisher)
Created2011
Description
In an affordance management approach, stereotypes, prejudices, and discrimination are conceptualized as tools to manage the potential opportunities and threats afforded by others in highly interdependent social living. This approach suggests a distinction between two “kinds” of stereotypes. “Base” stereotypes are relatively factual, stable beliefs about the capacities and inclinations of groups and their members, whereas “affordance stereotypes” are beliefs about potential threats and opportunities posed by groups and their members. Two experiments test the hypothesized implications of this distinction: (1) People may hold identical base stereotypes about a target group but hold very different affordance stereotypes. (2) Affordance stereotypes, but not base stereotypes, are shaped by perceiver goals and felt vulnerabilities. (3) Prejudices and (4) discrimination are more heavily influenced by affordance stereotypes than by base stereotypes. I endeavored to manipulate participants’ felt vulnerabilities to measure the predicted corresponding shifts in affordance (but not base) stereotype endorsement, prejudices, and discriminatory inclinations toward a novel target group (Sidanians). In Study 1 (N = 600), the manipulation was unsuccessful. In Study 2 (N = 338), the manipulation had a partial effect, allowing for preliminary causal tests of the proposed model. In both studies, I predicted and found high endorsement of the base stereotypes that Sidanians try to share their values and actively participate in the community, with low variability. I also predicted and found more variation in affordance (vs. base) stereotype endorsement, which was systematically related to participants’ felt vulnerabilities in Study 2. Taken together, these findings support my hypothesized distinction between base stereotypes and affordance stereotypes. Finally, I modeled the proposed correlational relationships between felt vulnerabilities, base stereotypes, affordance stereotypes, prejudices, and discriminatory inclinations in the model. Although these relationships were predominantly significant in the predicted directions, overall fit of the model was poor. These studies further our critical understanding of the relationship between stereotypes, prejudices, and discrimination. This has implications for how we devise interventions to reduce the deleterious effects of such processes on their targets, perhaps focusing on changing perceiver vulnerabilities and perceived affordance (rather than base) stereotypes to more effectively reduce prejudices and discrimination.
ContributorsPick, Cari Marie (Author) / Neuberg, Steven L. (Thesis advisor) / Kenrick, Douglas T. (Committee member) / Martin, Carol L (Committee member) / Arizona State University (Publisher)
Created2018
Description
The goal of this study was to explore the multidimensionality of gender typicality and its relation to preadolescents’ psychological adjustment. With a sample of 378 6th grade students (52% male; M age = 11.44, SD = .56; 48% White), I examined how four specific dimensions of gender typicality (behavior, appearance, activities, and peer preference) predict children’s global sense of typicality; whether children’s global sense of gender typicality, behavior, appearance, activities, and peer preference are differentially predictive of self-esteem, social preference, and relationship efficacy; and whether examining typicality of the other gender is important to add to own-gender typicality. Regression analyses indicated that all four specific typicality dimensions contributed to preadolescents’ overall sense of own- and other-gender typicality (except appearance for own-gender typicality). Generally, all domains of gender typicality were related to the four adjustment outcomes. Own-gender typicality related more strongly to self-esteem, social preference, and own-gender relationship efficacy than did other-gender typicality; other-gender typicality was more strongly related to other-gender relationship efficacy. Relations between typicality and adjustment were stronger for gender-based relationship efficacy than for self-esteem or social preference. Although some differences existed, relations between typicality and adjustment were generally similar across typicality domains. Results implicate the need to measure other-gender typicality in addition to own-gender typicality. Additional contributions and suggestions for future research are discussed.
ContributorsCook, Rachel (Author) / Martin, Carol L (Thesis advisor) / Updegraff, Kimberly A (Committee member) / Miller, Cindy F (Committee member) / Arizona State University (Publisher)
Created2015
Description
The primary goal of this study was to extend previous research on traditional masculinity by examining the longitudinal associations between traditional masculinity, school engagement and attitudes toward school in a sample of middle school students. Following a sample of 338 (Mage = , SDage = , 54% male, 46% Latino) students from the 7th to 8th grades, I examined how students' self-reported endorsement of and adherence to physical toughness and emotional stoicism norms of masculinity were associated with their engagement with school and their attitudes of school liking and school avoidance. I also examined whether the endorsement and adherence to these norms varied by sex and ethnicity, and whether they changed over the one-year period. Results indicated that endorsing and adhering to masculinity norms of emotional stoicism were negatively associated with school engagement, after controlling for school engagement at Time 1. Furthermore, endorsing and adhering to masculinity norms of physical toughness were negatively associated with attitudes of school liking even when controlling for school liking at Time 1. These results were the same boys and girls, and for Latino and White adolescents. Moreover, results indicated sex, but no ethnicity differences in traditional masculinity, such that males generally reported higher levels of endorsement and adherence to norms of physical toughness and emotional stoicism. There were also identifiable developmental patterns in traditional masculinity over a one-year period. The contributions of these findings to the current scholarship on masculinity, along with their implications for future research and practice, are discussed.
ContributorsRogers, Adam A (Author) / Updegraff, Kimberly A. (Thesis advisor) / Martin, Carol L (Committee member) / Santos, Carlos E. (Committee member) / Arizona State University (Publisher)
Created2015
Description
Prejudice and discrimination toward gender non-conforming individuals is prevalent and extreme in today’s society. This prejudice can manifest in social exclusion, bullying, and victimization, or physical and sexual assault, and can result in negative social, psychological, academic, and physical health outcomes (e.g., depression, anxiety, suicidality). Thus, it is important to understand the perpetrators of gender expression-based aggression and discrimination. In two studies, I addressed how and why people experience prejudice toward gender non-conforming individuals. Using an affordance management theoretical framework, Study 1 identified threats young adults perceived from gender non-conforming peers. There were differences in perceived threats to personal freedoms, social coordination, and values for gender conforming and non-conforming peers, and these perceptions differed by the political ideology of the perceiver. Study 2 explored children’s threat perceptions associated with gender non-conformity. Children perceived threats to social coordination from gender non-conforming peers but not threats to moral values. Results from both studies supported the use of this theoretical framework for studying prejudice toward gender non-conformity. Together, these studies provide unique information about adults’ and children’s reasons for prejudice toward gender non-conforming peers.
ContributorsCook, Rachel (Author) / Martin, Carol L (Thesis advisor) / Neuberg, Steven L. (Committee member) / DeLay, Dawn (Committee member) / Ghavami, Negin (Committee member) / Arizona State University (Publisher)
Created2020