The present study is an investigation of hypotheses derived from gender schema theory. As background for the study, gender schema theory was discussed along with research in the areas of sex-typing, person categorization, and general schema theory. The study was undertaken to determine whether sex-typed and non-sex-typed persons differ in the distinctiveness of descriptors which they attribute to complementary male and female stimulus roles and whether they differ in the richness of such descriptors. Subjects were 60 male and 60 female undergraduate students who were classified into four sex-type groups (androgynous, sex-typed, cross-sex-typed, and undifferentiated) based on their scores on the Bem Sex Role Inventory. Subjects were required to generate lists of characteristics which they associated with five female and five male role subcategories. Results showed that subjects' gender was predictive of the distinctiveness of descriptors across role subcategories, while sex-type was predictive of the richness of descriptors with sex-typed subjects exhibiting more elaborate and rich networks of association to the stimuli. The latter result is consistent with the major proposition of gender schema theory. Additionally, the results suggest that the gender schema contains information of a behavioral and image-like nature as well as more abstract, trait information. / Source: Dissertation Abstracts International, Volume: 44-02, Section: B, page: 0645. / Thesis (Ph.D.)--The Florida State University, 1983.

This study was designed to explore the impact of situation-based behavioral expectancies on accuracy in detecting deception. Two experiments were conducted. The research question for Experiment 1 centered on whether subjects would be more accurate in judging sincerity/deception when they shared the same judgment context as the sender versus when the judgment context of the sender and the observer were different. It was predicted that relative to the judgments made under the condition of High Context Congruity, the judgments made under the condition of Low Context Congruity would be less accurate. In Experiment 2, it was predicted that there would be greater accuracy in judging deception when an appropriate judgment context was presented to the subjects (Frame Present) than when no context was provided to the subjects (Frame Absent). / 296 undergraduates viewed videotapes of target persons making true and fabricated presentations. The subjects rated the sincerity, believability, and truthfulness of each presentation on a 9-point scale. The initial analyses found that accuracy in detecting deception was not a function of level of context congruity, nor a function of presence or absence of frame induction. However, post hoc analyses revealed that the context congruity effect was being masked by the effects of type of context. The level of context congruity had the opposite effect on accuracy in the different contexts. These findings supported the central argument that situational factors impact on the behavior of both the target and the evaluators of deceptive communications, and thereby affects accuracy in detecting deception. / Source: Dissertation Abstracts International, Volume: 56-05, Section: B, page: 2944. / Major Professor: John C. Brigham. / Thesis (Ph.D.)--The Florida State University, 1995.

Source: Dissertation Abstracts International, Volume: 31-09, Section: A, page: 4890. / Thesis (Ph.D.)--The Florida State University, 1970.

Source: Dissertation Abstracts International, Volume: 29-07, Section: A, page: 2360. / Thesis (Ph.D.)--The Florida State University, 1968.

Source: Dissertation Abstracts International, Volume: 30-10, Section: A, page: 4548. / Thesis (Ph.D.)--The Florida State University, 1969.

Source: Dissertation Abstracts International, Volume: 32-02, Section: A, page: 1072. / Thesis (Ph.D.)--The Florida State University, 1970.

Source: Dissertation Abstracts International, Volume: 31-09, Section: A, page: 4884. / Thesis (Ph.D.)--The Florida State University, 1970.

Source: Dissertation Abstracts International, Volume: 29-03, Section: A, page: 0960. / Thesis (Ph.D.)--The Florida State University, 1968.

Thesis (M.S.)--Lehigh University, 2009. / Adviser: Gordon B. Moskowitz.

Thesis (Ph. D.)--University OF MICHIGAN.