Several objectively scored measures of fear of success and fear of failure have been designed in recent years, but there is little evidence that they measure two distinct, unidimensional constructs. The present study was undertaken primarily to answer two questions: Are fear of success and fear of failure operationally distinct? Do all fear of success measures tap a single unidimensional construct? Eight fear of success and fear of failure scales were administered to 415 male and female subjects, and the scores were intercorrelated. Results indicated that fear of success is not a unidimensional construct and that some of the measures of fear of success and fear of failure are highly related. Next, each scale was factor analyzed, and 37 new variables were created. These were in turn factor analyzed, and five highly stable orthogonal factors were obtained. One of these factors appears to be fear of success; another is clearly test anxiety (called fear of failure in the literature on achievement motivation). A third factor is concerned with sex-role-related attitudes toward success in medical school. A fourth seems to reflect neurotic insecurity, and the fifth has to do with the value of success. Indices of psychological well-being and psychosomatic illness related differently to each of the five factors. Implications and further questions are discussed briefly.Homer's research on fear of success (Horner, 1969a(Horner, , 1969b(Horner, , 1972(Horner, , 1974 has generated well over 100 research articles in the past few years. According to Homer (1969a), fear of success (hereafter FOS) is "the fear that success in competitive situations will lead to negative consequences" (p. 38). Taken by itself this definitional phrase is quite general. However, because Homer was primarily interested in a form of FOS that she thought was characteristic of females in American
Data from a survey of 2,500 American women were examined to determine 1) the nature of religiousness among women and, in particular, whether modern religiousness corresponds to William James' conception of "healthy-minded" religion; 2) how religiousness is related to self-reports of mental and physical health; and 3) differences between converts (mainly to Protestant denominations) and women who have maintained the same religious affiliation all their lives. The authors found that healthy-mindedness described the nonconverts (the majority) fairly well, and that certainty of beliefs (either strong religiousness or confident nonreligiousness) was associated with better mental and physical health. Converts were distinguished from nonconverts by the former's relatively happy and less religious childhoods, stronger adult religiousness, and greater authoritarian tendencies.
This paper describes two related studies. The general hypothesis was that the rhythmic patterning of dialogue is related to how onlookers perceive certain psychological characteristics of the speakers. The experimental procedures in both studies involved evaluation by independent observers of the “credibility” of participants. In the first study 30 female college students were assigned to two conditions; each subject was either to read or to listen to monologues and dialogues (between senators and witnesses) from the “Watergate” hearings. There were significant differences in student ratings between listening and reading conditions for witnesses engaged in dialogues. In the second study 53 male and female subjects listened to tapes or read transcripts of dialogue from four senator-witness pairs. As in Study 1 subjects rated witnesses on a number of dimensions including credibility. Non-lexical qualities of speech in the taped dialogues were analyzed using a PDP-12 computer and these data were correlated with subjects' credibility ratings. The multiple regression analyses indicated that mean turn time, variability of pauses, and similarity in duration of pauses and vocalizations were significantly related to ratings of witnesses.
Ten women, 5 low scorers (field‐dependent) and 5 high scorers (field‐independent) on the Group Embedded‐Figures Test, listened to 24, 15‐minute‐long segments of a series of therapy sessions and were then asked: (a) to adopt the role of the patient and rate the warmth felt by the patient toward the therapist, and (b) to adopt the role of therapist and rate the warmth felt by the therapist toward the patient, using a 4‐point rating scale. The accuracy of subjects' ratings was evaluated against the criterion of actual ratings made by patient and therapist after each therapy session. As predicted, field‐dependent subjects were more accurate in judging warmth than field‐independent subjects. In addition, there was a significant interaction between subject's cognitive style and the person being judged. Field‐dependent subjects were more accurate in the role of patient than in the role of therapist; the opposite was true for field‐independent subjects. Suggestions are made as to possible routes used by field‐dependent and field‐independent subjects to judge emotions experienced by others.
scite is a Brooklyn-based organization that helps researchers better discover and understand research articles through Smart Citations–citations that display the context of the citation and describe whether the article provides supporting or contrasting evidence. scite is used by students and researchers from around the world and is funded in part by the National Science Foundation and the National Institute on Drug Abuse of the National Institutes of Health.
hi@scite.ai
10624 S. Eastern Ave., Ste. A-614
Henderson, NV 89052, USA
Copyright © 2024 scite LLC. All rights reserved.
Made with 💙 for researchers
Part of the Research Solutions Family.