This study assessed whether moderately obese individuals, especially women, would be discriminated against in a mock employment interview. Potential confounding factors were controlled by having 320 Ss rate videotapes of a job interview that used the same professional actors appearing as normal weight or made up to appear overweight by the use of theatrical prostheses. Results suggested that bias against hiring overweight job applicants does exist, especially for female applicants. Bias was most pronounced when applicants were rated by Ss who were satisfied with their bodies and for whom perceptions of their bodies were central to self-concept. The decision not to hire an obese applicant was, however, only partially mediated by personality attributions. Implications and limitations of these results are discussed.

No abstract

The findings of many studies conducted before 1978 suggest that Type A behavior (TAB) contributes to the development of coronary heart disease (CHD). In contrast, many recent studies have found no association between these variables. Through meta-analysis, several reasons for null findings are identified. First, a type of range restriction bias, disease-based spectrum (DBS) bias, produced many null findings. A study is vulnerable to DBS bias when researchers select only high-risk or diseased Ss for study. Second, self-report measures of TAB were often associated with null findings. Finally, null results were found for all studies that used fatal myocardial infarction as a disease criterion. In addition to identifying the reasons for null findings, this research suggests that TAB, as assessed by the structured interview, is associated with CHD. More Type As (70%) were found in diseased populations of middle-aged men than in healthy populations of middle-aged men (46%).

Minority and majority influence were studied simultaneously within the context of freely interacting groups. It was hypothesized that minorities would act as a rein, reducing the degree of polarization in majority members' attitudes. The direction and magnitude of attitude change on a social issue in unanimous groups were compared to those of groups with either one or two minority members. In addition, the secondary effects of minority influence on cognitive processes, predicted by Nemeth (1986), were assessed using two thought listing tasks—one involving an issue discussed by the group and a second involving an issue that was not previously discussed. Results supported the ‘minority as a rein’ analogy as well as the predictions made by Nemeth. However, it appears that minority influence manifests itself differently depending on whether or not individual members have to defend their position during group interaction.