Individual differences in the desire for simple structure may influence how people understand, experience, and interact with their worlds. Studies 1 and 2 revealed that the Personal Need for Structure (PNS) scale (M. Thompson, M. Naccarato, & K. Parker, 1989 possesses sufficient reliability and convergent and discriminant validity. In Studies 3-5, Ss high in PNS were especially likely to organize social and nonsocial information in less complex ways, stereotype others, and complete their research requirements on time. These data suggest that people differ in their chronic desire for simple structure and that this difference can have important social-cognitive and behavioral implications. A consideration of chronic information-processing motives may facilitate the theoretical integration of social cognition, affect, motivation, and personality.'' Differences in degrees of freedom are the result of missing data.
A measure of preference for consistency (the PFC Scale) was developed. In three construct validation experiments, scores on the PFC successfully predicted individuals who would and would not be susceptible to a set of standard consistency-based effects: cognitive balance, foot in the door, and dissonance. The pattern of results in each of the experiments suggested the type of consistency that the PFC measures: a tendency to base one's responses to incoming stimuli on the implications of existing (prior entry) variables, such as previous expectancies, commitments, and choices. A surprisingly large percentage (at least half) of our participants showed no strong inherent preference for consistency—a finding that may explain the frequent failure to detect or replicate (a) traditional consistency effects and (b) a wide variety of other experimental phenomena.
Negative social exchanges have been more reliably related to psychological health than have positive social exchanges. Little research, however, has sought to understand how underlying appraisal processes link such exchanges to psychological health. This study examined the frequencies of occurrence and appraisals of four parallel domains of positive and negative exchanges in relation to positive well-being and psychological distress in a national sample of 916 older adults. Structural equation analyses revealed that negative exchanges were related both to less well-being and greater psychological distress, whereas positive exchanges were related only to positive well-being. Furthermore, results supported a process in which appraisals mediated the link between social exchanges and psychological health. This social appraisal process helps explain the disproportionate impact of negative exchanges on psychological health.
We propose that two related sources of variability in studies of caregiving health effects contribute to an inconsistent pattern of findings: the sampling strategy used and the definition of what constitutes caregiving. Samples are often recruited through self-referral and are typically comprised of caregivers experiencing considerable distress. In this study, we examine the health effects of caregiving in large population-based samples of spousal caregivers and controls using a wide array of objective and self-report physical and mental health outcome measures. By applying different definitions of caregiving, we show that the magnitude of health effects attributable to caregiving can vary substantially, with the largest negative health effects observed among caregivers who characterize themselves as being strained. From an epidemiological perspective, our data show that approximately 80% of persons living with a spouse with a disability provide care to their spouse, but only half of care providers report mental or physical strain associated with caregiving.
scite is a Brooklyn-based organization that helps researchers better discover and understand research articles through Smart Citations–citations that display the context of the citation and describe whether the article provides supporting or contrasting evidence. scite is used by students and researchers from around the world and is funded in part by the National Science Foundation and the National Institute on Drug Abuse of the National Institutes of Health.