The paper reports a longitudinal study of the post-pregnancy work outcomes for full-time working women who were pregnant with their first baby. Regression analyses revealed that women who did not return to work as intended were differentiated from those who did return to work by the amount of planning they had done in pregnancy, as well as having lower pre-natal income and less anti-cipated support within the workplace. Almost one third of those who returned to work part-time reported reduced job status. The study shows the importance of workplace planning and support in return to work after maternity leave. Copyright Blackwell Publishing Ltd/London School of Economics 2003..

Value priorities were analyzed as they relate to nationality (American vs. British) and gender in a study involving 207 university students from the 2 countries. Participants responded anonymously to S. H. Schwartz's Value Survey (1992, 1994), consisting of various individualistic and collectivistic values. American students assigned greater importance to the individualistic values of achievement, hedonism, self-direction, and stimulation than British students did; students from the 2 countries assigned equal importance to the power value type. Compared with men, women from both countries assigned greater value priorities to the collectivistic values of benevolence, universalism, security, and subordination of self to others. Women and men, however, did not differ on the individualistic values, and, in fact, women placed greater importance on achievement than men did. The results for the individualistic values are discussed primarily within the context of major changes in the career and work opportunities afforded women by society in the past 30 years.

Major terrorist events, such as the recent attacks in Ankara, Sinai, and Paris, can have profound effects on a nation’s values, attitudes, and prejudices. Yet psychological evidence testing the impact of such events via data collected immediately before and after an attack is understandably rare. In the present research, we tested the independent and joint effects of threat (the July 7, 2005, London bombings) and political ideology on endorsement of moral foundations and prejudices among two nationally representative samples (combined N = 2,031) about 6 weeks before and 1 month after the London bombings. After the bombings, there was greater endorsement of the in-group foundation, lower endorsement of the fairness-reciprocity foundation, and stronger prejudices toward Muslims and immigrants. The differences in both the endorsement of the foundations and the prejudices were larger among people with a liberal orientation than among those with a conservative orientation. Furthermore, the changes in endorsement of moral foundations among liberals explained their increases in prejudice. The results highlight the value of psychological theory and research for understanding societal changes in attitudes and prejudices after major terrorist events.

No abstract

The findings provide substantial support for Dweck's self-theory, showing that implicit theories are related to aspirations. However, the way in which theory of intelligence relates to age and gender suggests there may be important cross-cultural or contextual differences not addressed by Dweck's theory. Further research should also investigate the causal paths between aspirations, implicit theories of intelligence and the impact of school selection.