Several recent studies have sought to identify characteristics of better and worse attempts at support provision; however, there has been little explicit theoretical attention to the ways in which recipients evaluate enacted support. We developed a multidimensional scale to measure these evaluations. Study 1 asked 122 adults to interpret the meaning of three adjectives (helpful, supportive, sensitive) used in previous research. Although the meanings of these terms overlap, respondents associated helpful with problem-solving utility, supportive with relational assurance, and sensitivity with emotional awareness. Study 2 asked 396 students to rate a recalled conversation on 30 semantic-differential-type scales derived from Study 1. These ratings provided a basis for selecting 12 items to form valid and reliable scales of problem-solving utility, relational assurance, and emotional awareness. Study 3 provides independent validation of factor structure, scale reliability and validity, and conceptual distinctiveness. We discuss a variety of research questions for which this multidimensional scale may be a useful tool.

No abstract

No abstract

No abstract

These studies measured selective exposure to information by "open-" and "closed-minded" subjects within a consistency perspective, using an eye camera to record actual exposure behaviors on discrepant, supportive, and balanced materials, presented simultaneously. Arousal (taken as an indicator of stress) of the subjects during exposure to each of the types of stimulus materials was measured through use of galvanic skin response equipment. These procedures were selected to overcome some of the principal questions about validity raised in regard to conventional methods in information selection studies.Among the major criticisms of information selection studies are (1) that they often have not measured seeking or avoiding behaviors, but rather interest in certain types of materials [21], and ( 2 ) that, although much of the research has been guided by a consistency perspective, there is usually no measurement of the amount of dissonance or stress produced by stimulus materials [ 1, 5, 10,221. This paper reports alternatives to the methods presently used in such studies. It is based on two studies exploring uses of psychophysiological equipment to investigate selective exposure and is intended primarily to suggest other approaches to the study not only of selective exposure but also of other areas of information pr0cessing.l Lewis Donohew (Ph.D., University of Iowa, 1965) is Professor in the School of Communications at the University of Kentucky. Joanne Parker (M.A., University of Kentucky, 1969) is Director of the Division of Education in the Lexington-Fayette County Health Department. \'irginia McDermott (M.A., University of Kentucky, 1969) is a doctoral student in Communication at Michigan State University.The authors acknowledge the support of the University of Kentucky's Major Research Equipment Fund in providing funds for the equipment used in these studies. They also wish to thank Robert Murphy, Director of the School of Communications, for his advice and help. lHowever, the principal study results-derived from small samples and non-parametric correlation analysis-are consistent with those from a larger