This study examined whether authoritarians experiencing economic threat are more likely than other authoritarians to support social policy and political agendas that restrict benefits or curtail rights for disadvantaged groups. A sample of 131 college students completed questionnaires that measured authoritarianism, degree of economic and societal insecurity, and attitudes toward eight political issues. Economic and social insecurity were indexed to perceptions of whether one's standard of living had declined, whether income inequality had grown among social classes, and whether crime, race relations, environmental quality, and governmental services had worsened. The political scales reflected issues currently debated in public forums; they included funding mechanisms for social security and health care, the state's role in regulating abortion, government services for illegal immigrants, terminating welfare for unemployed women with children, and regulation of sexual conduct. A logistic model found that, relative to non-threatened authoritarians or nonauthoritarians, threatened authoritarians were six times as likely to favor restricting benefits to powerless groups and eight times as likely to support the state's preventing women from securing an abortion. These results are discussed in terms of systemic changes in the economy that have resulted in declines in real income and increasing income inequality.

No abstract

No abstract

No abstract

Data on child abuse, date abuse and psychological problems were gathered from the same participants, 133 female undergraduates, in order to better examine possible relationships among the variables. Verbal abuse in childhood or on dates was examined as well as physical and sexual abuse. Factors influencing whether people remain in or leave abusive relationships were examined, along with possible mediators of the relationships between child abuse, date abuse, and psychological problems. Verbal, physical, and sexual child abuse were all associated with an increased risk of later date abuse or psychological problems. Abuse by a date was also associated with psychological problems. Low self-esteem and anger may have played mediating roles.

MILLER, PETER M., JULIA A. WATKINS, ROGER G. SARGENT, AND EDWARD J. RICKERT. Self-efficacy in overweight individuals with binge eating disorder. Obes Res. 1999;7:552-555. Objective: To evaluate the relationship between selfefficacy judgments in obese individuals with binge eating disorder, "borderline" binge eating disorder, and no binge eating problems. Research Methods and Procedures: Before participation in a residential weight management program, 79 male and female subjects were administered the Weight Efficacy Lifestyle Questionnaire (WEL) and the Binge Eating Scale (BES). Based on DSM-IV diagnostic questions, subjects were categorized as BED, Borderline BED, or non-BED. Results: Krusal-Wallace Rank-Order analysis of variance revealed significant negative associations between binge eating and total WEL scores as well as the subscales of Negative Emotions, Social Pressure, Physical Discomfort, and Positive Activities. Differences were significant between the BED and the Borderline BED groups with the exception of the Social Pressure scale and the Total WEL scores. BED diagnosis as well as severity of binge eating were strongly associated with low self-efficacy ratings. Discussion: These results indicate that obese individuals with binge eating disorder demonstrate lower self-efficacy than those without this condition and that self-efficacy is related to the severity of binge eating.

No abstract

No abstract