Guided by attachment theory, a 2-part study was conducted to test how perceptions of relationship-based conflict and support are associated with relationship satisfaction/closeness and future quality. Dating partners completed diaries for 14 days (Part 1) and then were videotaped while discussing a major problem that occurred during the diary study (Part 2). Part 1 reveals that more anxiously attached individuals perceived more conflict with their dating partners and reported a tendency for conflicts to escalate in severity. Perceptions of daily relationship-based conflicts negatively impacted the perceived satisfaction/closeness and relationship futures of highly anxious individuals, whereas perceptions of greater daily support had positive effects. Part 2 reveals that highly anxious individuals appeared more distressed and escalated the severity of conflicts (rated by observers) and reported feeling more distressed. The authors discuss the unique features of attachment anxiety and how changing perceptions of relationship satisfaction/closeness and stability could erode commitment over time.

Little is known about why some people experience greater temporal fluctuations of relationship perceptions over short periods of time, or how these fluctuations within individuals are associated with relational processes that can destabilize relationships. Two studies were conducted to address these questions. In Study 1, long-term dating partners completed a 14-day diary study that assessed each partner's daily partner and relationship perceptions. Following the diary phase, each couple was videotaped trying to resolve the most important unresolved problem from the diary period. As predicted, (a) individuals who trusted their partners less reported greater variability in perceptions of relationship quality across the diary period; (b) they also perceived daily relationship-based conflict as a relatively more negative experience; and (c) greater variability in relationship perceptions predicted greater self-reported distress, more negative behavior, and less positive behavior during a postdiary conflict resolution task (rated by observers). The diary results were conceptually replicated in Study 2a, in which older cohabiting couples completed a 21-day diary. These same participants also took part in a reaction-time decision-making study (Study 2b), which revealed that individuals tend to compartmentalize positive and negative features of their partners if they (individuals) experienced greater variability in relationship quality during the 21-day diary period and were involved in higher quality relationships. These findings advance researchers' understanding of trust in intimate relationships and provide some insight into how temporal fluctuations in relationship quality may undermine relationships.

The present study investigated perceptions of men and women in the Texas A&M Corps of Cadets. For both stereotypes and evaluations of individual cadetsenrolled in the training program, men more than women were believed to possess the motivation and leadership qualities necessary for effective military performance, whereas women were believed to possess more feminine attributes that impair effective military performance. Because men and women did not differ on objective measures of military performance, the sex-differentiated evaluations ofcadets enrolled in training most plausibly reflect the influence of gender stereotypes rather than performance differences between the sexes. Furthermore, integration of women into the corps was associated with more favorable stereotypic judgments of women and did not reveal a backlash against women in this strongly male-dominated setting.During the 1970s, many military training programs in the United States extended their admissions policies to include women. Perhaps most noteworthy is the federal legislation passed in 1976 enabling women to be appointed to the navy, army, and air force service academies. Yet integration has proceeded slowly. In the military as a whole, only 14% of the total force is female, and only 2% of the officers are female at the level of brigadier general and rear admiral or higher (U.S. Department of Defense, 1998). Women continue to represent a small minority in military training programs. In the Corps of Cadets at Texas A&M University, which was the focus of the present research, women comprise only about 6% of the approximately 2,200 members, despite the fact that women make up slightly more than half of the total student body at the university.The present study provides insight into the slow rate of integration of women into military training programs. We examined the extent to which stereotypes of men and women in the military affect students' evaluations of themselves and other students as well as students' actual performance in the training program in which they were enrolled. Because the integration of women was not fully complete in the Corps of Cadets, we also compared the stereotypes of women held by men in integrated and nonintegrated units. Gender Stereotypes in the MilitaryAccording to gender stereotypes, men and women differ on a number of psychological dimensions that are relevant for military performance. Typical men are believed to make decisions more easily and to be more independent, self-confident, competitive, and leader-like than typical women. Typical women are believed to be more helpful, kind, gentle, and emotionally expressive than men (e.g., Broverman, Vogel, Broverman, Clarkson, & Rosenkrantz, 1972;Diekman & Eagly, 2000). The gender-stereotypic beliefs about women are in marked contrast to the attributes required for successful performance as a soldier. The psychological attributes required of a successful soldier are also stereotypic of men, whereas the stereotypic qualities possessed by women are explicitly rejected (Ebbe...

This study investigated intergroup perception in well-acquainted groups. Also of interest were the effects of a naturally occurring status differential on these perceptions. The study is framed within the social relations model, which provides a measure of in-group bias as well as 3 innovative measures of out-group homogeneity. Results indicated that low-status groups consistently displayed out-group favoritism. High-status groups displayed in-group bias, but only on ratings of leadership ability. The results also provided consistent evidence of out-group homogeneity. In instances when group status moderated out-group homogeneity effects, members of the high-status groups perceived their in-group as more variable than the out-group, whereas members of the low-status groups tended to see the in-group and out-group as equally variable.

Status and power covary such that higher status groups are typically higher power groups. This research explored the effect of status on intergroup perception controlling for power. Experiment 1 manipulated the relative status of social groups and explicitly provided the groups equal power. Experiment 2 manipulated status and power orthogonally. Multiple measures yielded consistent patterns indicating that status affected perceived group centrality and variability independent of power. The patterns were consistent with a strategic intergroup comparison account as suggested by social identity theory. Specifically, the effect of status on intergroup perception varied with the relevance and valence of the dimension of comparison in a manner that balanced social reality with a positive social identity