In modern health care, individuals frequently exercise choice over health treatment alternatives. A growing body of research suggests that when individuals choose between treatment options, treatment effectiveness can increase, although little experimental evidence exists clarifying this effect. Four studies were conducted to test the hypothesis that exercising choice over treatment alternatives enhances outcomes by providing greater personal control. Consistent with this possibility, in Study 1 individuals who chronically desired control reported less pain from a laboratory pain task when they were able to select between placebo analgesic treatments. Study 2 replicated this finding with an auditory discomfort paradigm. In Study 3, the desire for control was experimentally induced, and participants with high desire for control benefited more from a placebo treatment when they were able to choose their treatment. Study 4 revealed that the benefit of choice on treatment efficacy was partially mediated by thoughts of personal control. This research suggests that when individuals desire control, choice over treatment alternatives improves treatment effectiveness by enhancing personal control.

Subjective social status (SSS) has been shown to predict well-being and mental health, above and beyond objective social status (OSS). However, little is known about the factors that moderate this relationship. Two studies explored whether the link between SSS and well-being varied depending upon the referent used for comparison in SSS judgments. Participants judged their well-being and SSS in comparison to referents that varied in abstraction. A confirmatory factor analysis on SSS judgments yielded two factors: (a) SSS perceptions toward global referents and (b) SSS perceptions toward local referents. SSS relative to a global referent was a better predictor of depression (Studies 1 and 2), life satisfaction (Studies 1 and 2), and self-esteem (Study 2) than SSS relative to a local referent. These findings have theoretical implications for understanding how people differentiate between local vs. global referents and practical implications for status-related health disparities.

<span style="font-family: Times New Roman; font-size: small;"> </span><p style="margin: 0in 0.5in 0pt; text-align: justify; line-height: normal; mso-pagination: none;" class="MsoNormal"><span style="font-family: &quot;Times New Roman&quot;,&quot;serif&quot;; font-size: 10pt;">Narcissism is a personality trait that varies in individuals much like other characteristics.<span style="mso-spacerun: yes;"> </span>Accordingly, narcissism can positively or negatively impact the leadership style and career of business leaders.<span style="mso-spacerun: yes;"> </span>While personality research has examined the level of narcissism in college-aged students over the past 30 years, only recently has limited research examined narcissism in business students.<span style="mso-spacerun: yes;"> </span>Prior research has not examined accounting students.<span style="mso-spacerun: yes;"> </span>Using the Narcissistic Personality Inventory (NPI), we assess the level of narcissism in accounting students at a public and private institution in the Midwest.<span style="mso-spacerun: yes;"> </span>Our findings show accounting students have a lower level of narcissism than other business students, both undergraduate and graduate, and the general population of college-age students. We find differences in the level of narcissism by gender and whether the student is a leader, or not, in student organizations.<span style="mso-spacerun: yes;"> </span>We also discuss implications for accounting education. </span></p><span style="font-family: Times New Roman; font-size: small;"> </span>

Previous work on trait perception has evaluated accuracy at discrete stages of relationships (e.g., strangers, best friends). A relatively limited body of literature has investigated changes in accuracy as acquaintance within a dyad or group increases. Small groups of initially unacquainted individuals spent more than 30 hr participating in a wide range of activities designed to represent common interpersonal contexts (e.g., eating, traveling). We calculated how accurately each participant judged others in their group on the big five traits across three distinct points within the acquaintance process: zero acquaintance, after a getting-to-know-you conversation, and after 10 weeks of interaction and activity. Judgments of all five traits exhibited accuracy above chance levels after 10 weeks. An examination of the trait rating stability revealed that much of the revision in judgments occurred not over the course of the 10-week relationship as suspected, but between zero acquaintance and the getting-to-know-you conversation.

Our findings suggest that income and education operate on health behaviours via different pathways and have implications for public health policy and intervention.