In 3 experimental studies, the authors explored how ambiguity about the source of a successful joint performance outcome promotes attributional rationalization, negatively affecting evaluations of women. Participants read descriptions of a mixed-sex dyad's work and were asked to evaluate its male and female members. Results indicated that unless the ambiguity about individual contribution to the dyad's successful joint outcome was constrained by providing feedback about individual team member performance (Study 1) or by the way in which the task was said to have been structured (Study 2) or unless the negative expectations about women's performance were challenged by clear evidence of prior work competence (Study 3), female members were devalued as compared with their male counterparts-they were rated as being less competent, less influential, and less likely to have played a leadership role in work on the task. Implications of these results, both theoretical and practical, are discussed.

No abstract

Because the racial disparity was confined to earlier stages, future studies should investigate whether blacks have more advanced disease at diagnosis and whether less aggressive treatment is provided because of understanding.

Higher education has undergone considerable expansion in recent decades in a number of OECD countries. Expansion has been especially dramatic in the UK where aggregate student numbers have doubled in 20 years. However, over the same period, funding per student has halved in real terms. In the UK as well as in other countries, most notably Australia, innovation to diversify the funding base has taken place. This has included a limited role for fee contributions. This paper makes the case for much greater reliance on fee contributions from students, accompanied by a greater availability of income contingent loans.