A computer search was conducted to examine empirical research on the relationship between various ingratiation tactics and the judgments and evaluations of targets and observers. The data revealed a small positive effect for ingratiation on performance evaluations and a significantly stronger positive effect for ingratiation on judgments of interpersonal attraction (i.e., liking). However, these effects were qualified by a number of categorical and continuous moderator variables, including the specific ingratiation tactic used, the perceived transparency of the ingratiation, the direction of the influence attempt {upward, downward, or lateral), whether perceivers were targets of the influence attempt or simply observed the ingratiator, the gender of the perceiver, and the setting in which the data were collected. The implications of these findings for future research on the impact of various forms of ingratiation are discussed. Portions of this article were presented at the 1994 Midwestern Psychological Association convention, Chicago. I would like to thank Shane Klosowski for assistance with the computer searches and coding of each study, Gina Contrada and Liza Willroth for their work on coding and reliability assessments, and Alan Feingold and Jon Pierce for their helpful comments on a previous version of the article.

A meta-analytic review of age-discrimination research from laboratory and field settings revealed a significant, yet modest overall effect size with younger applicants and workers evaluated more positively than older applicants and workers. The present predictions and findings were compared with those from previous meta-analytic investigations by Kite and Johnson (1988) and by Finkelstein, Burke, and Raju (1995). A number of significant moderational relationships were revealed, including negative linear relationships between the relative generalizability of the research (in terms of participants, setting, and stimulus materials) and effect size. In addition, the type of design used (between-subjects vs. within-subject) and the specific type of dependent measures used to evaluate applicants and workers were found to significantly moderate effect size.'Portions of this research were presented at the May 2002 meeting of the Midwestern Psychological Association, Chicago, Illinois. The authors thank two anonymous reviewers for their helpful comments and suggestions; and Tara Hodges, Karen Sowada, and Christopher King for their assistance with the search process, coding, and the reliability assessment.2Correspondence concerning this article should be addressed to

No abstract

No abstract

Ninety-six undergraduate and graduate students partiapated in a study that examined the effects of subject and defendant race on attributions made for a blue-collar (burglary) and a white-collar (embezzlement) crime. It was predicted that attributions for race stereotypic defendants (e.g., a white embezzler) would be internal (dqositional), that attributions for race nonstereotypic defendants (e.g., a black embezzler) would be external, and that attributions would be related to jail sentences. Subjects were randomly assigned to receive one of four crime descriptions that varied in terms of defendant race (black or white) and type of crime (burglary or embezzlement) committed. Subjects were subsequently asked to recommend jail sentences and to respond to items regarding the probable cause of the defendant's behavior. As predicted, race stereotypic crimes were perceived as being due to internal factors and the hypothesized relationship between attributions and jail sentences received partial support. The application of attributional models to the study of juror deasion-making is discussed.