The role of the Resident Assistant (RA) has assumed special prominence during the last thirty years, as theories of student development have promoted the practice of peer education, particularly in residence halls. RAs have been given a long list of tasks and job expectations that can be generally categorized within peer counseling and policy enforcing functions. Some researchers and writers in the field of student development and residence hall ecology have argued that with proper training and supervision, RAs can adequately fulfill their assigned duties while simultaneously matriculate, fulfilling their own personal undergraduate academic and social needs. This assumption is presently under scrutiny, as information from cognitive development regarding late adolescent epistemology questions the readiness of these students to be able to perform simultaneously in all of their roles. In particular, the role of enforcing university rules and regulations with many floormates who are also peers and friends presents RAs with levels of conflict that may stem from their current cognitive developmental level, thus limiting the ways they negotiate conflict during enforcement activities. The result may be a mis-match of person to task. Some undergraduate RAs may not be ready to carry out their most developmentally challenging task of enforcing campus policy with peers to whom they have ties of support and friendship. The purpose of this study is to investigate the possibility of certain behavioral trends in the ways RAs negotiate conflict with their peers while enforcing university policy based on their tested cognitive developmental level. By administering two production-type developmental assessments and one preference-type conflict mode inventory, as well as performing individual interviews of selected RAs, I examine possible mis-matches and matches of RAs with their roles, particularly that of policy enforcement with peers.

A study was conducted to test Tomkins' Polarity theory (1963) on the psychological basis for being ideologically liberal or conservative and its relationship with intolerance of ambiguity and gender differences. Normativism, the conservative orientation, was found to have a positive relationship with intolerance for ambiguity. Males were found to be generally less humanist than females. Theoretical background and relevant research is discussed. Suggested applications of this study are to political persuasion, voting behavior, and the psychology of partisanship. This study intends to contribute to the literature on the psychology of ideology, political behavior and ideological differences between men and women.

No description available.

No description available.

No description available.

No description available.

No description available.

No description available.

No description available.

No description available.