The present experiment investigated the effects of social modeling and monetary incentives on pain endurance as mediated by self-efficacy and pain perception. Using a 3 × 3 factorial design that crossed three levels of modeling (tolerant, no model, intolerant) with three rates of pay ($0, $1, and $2 per 20 s), 90 males performed an isometric exercise. Social modeling affected pain endurance, pain threshold, pain intensity, physiological strain, and self-efficacy; money had no effects. Exposure to intolerant models led participants to detect pain immediately and to rapidly perceive extreme pain producing low endurance. Those who saw tolerant models took longer to feel pain and experienced only a gradual increase in pain enabling them to endure longer. Self-efficacy did not mediate these effects. Structural equation analyses showed that the effects of social modeling on endurance work through perceptions of pain.

The authors surveyed students (N = 396) and faculty (A' = 156) at a 2-year college to determine their views toward publishing student ratings of instruction. Students favored published ratings of instruction, whereas faculty did not. Students cited many advantages of published ratings and rated the likelihood of potential benefits as high relative to faculty. In contrast, faculty cited numerous disadvantages of published ratings and rated the likelihood of potential costs as high relative to students. The authors discuss reasons for the contrasting views of students and faculty and offer suggestions for reconciling them.

We examined web-based ratings and open-ended comments of teaching-award winners (n = 120) and research-award winners (n = 119) to determine if teachingaward winners received more favourable ratings and comments on RateMyProfessors.com. As predicted, students rated teaching-award winners higher than research-award winners on measures of teaching quality (i.e. helpfulness and clarity). A higher percentage of teaching-award recipients relative to research-award recipients received positive open-ended comments about competence, use of humour, clarity, appearance and personality as well as both positive and negative open-ended comments about level of course difficulty. We discuss implications of these findings for lending credibility to the RateMyProfessors.com indices and for promoting published faculty evaluations at post-secondary institutions more generally.Keywords: web-based student feedback; teaching quality; student ratings of instruction; published ratings of instruction; faculty evaluation IntroductionMany post-secondary institutions employ some form of student ratings of instruction as part of a larger process of faculty evaluation. Student ratings of instruction provide formative information to instructors about teaching effectiveness (i.e. identifying areas of strength and weakness), summative information to administrators for the purposes of hiring, faculty development, promotion, or recognition, and (in those instances where ratings are made public in some form) consequential information to students for the purpose of course and instructor selection (Beran et al. 2005;Canelos 1985;Centra 1979;Marsh 1987;Murray 1984). Given their many potential uses (and misuses), the literature is replete with studies examining the validity of student ratings (e.g. for reviews see

No abstract

Aggressive and dangerous driving compromises personal and public safety. The purpose of the present study was to identify common forms of aggressive and dangerous driving and to determine contributing factors. Participants included 298 university students who completed an online survey measuring aggressive and dangerous driving and a range of possible causes. Results showed that verbal aggression was most common followed by using one’s vehicle to express anger. Aggressive driving was associated with permissive attitudes towards driving aggression, vehicle preferences, and a disposition towards anger. Texting and eating while driving were the most common types of dangerous driving. The strongest predictors of dangerous driving were commuting distance, permissive attitudes towards distracted driving, vehicle preferences, and vehicle type. Implications and suggestions for future research are discussed.