No abstract

A meta-analysis of 797 studies and 1,001 effect sizes tested a theoretical hypothesis that situational constraints, such as perceived social pressure and perceived difficulty, weaken the relationship between attitudes and behavior. This hypothesis was confirmed for attitudes toward performing behaviors and for attitudes toward issues and social groups. Meta-analytic estimates of attitude-behavior correlations served to quantify these moderating effects. The present results indicated that the mean attitude-behavior correlation was .41 when people experienced a mean level of social pressure to perform a behavior of mean difficulty. The mean correlation was .30 when people experienced social pressure 1 standard deviation above the mean to perform a behavior that was 1 standard deviation more difficult than the mean. The results suggest a need for increased attention to the “behavior” side of the attitude-behavior equation. Attitudes predict some behaviors better than others.

Expressive writing, focusing the instructions on writing about one's living and dealing with a diagnosis of breast cancer, is recommended for early breast cancer survivors as a feasible and easily implemented treatment approach to improve quality-of-life.

Peer violence was remarkably high at baseline. Among urban public school students, 94% of 6th-grade boys and 85% of girls reported being victimized by peers in the last 4 weeks. And 85% of boys and 66% of girls reported perpetrating such violence. Boys scored worse on a number of mental health measures. A cluster RCT is underway to evaluate a well-established school-based intervention using sports and games to reduce peer violence.

Previous research has shown that exposure to successful role models can restore performance that had been impaired by stereotype threat, and that some role models are more effective than others. The present research examined the effects of role model deservingness on women's mathematics test performance after being placed under stereotype threat. In Experiment 1, a woman who attained success by herself (deserved) proved a more effective role model than an equally likable and successful woman whose success was handed to her (not deserved). In Experiment 2, women role models proved more effective at combating stereotype threat when their successes were attributable to internal-stable (deserved) than external-unstable (not deserved) causes, an effect that was partially mediated by reduction in extra-task thinking. The results are seen as having implications for theories of stereotype threat and causal attribution.