This research investigated how individual differences impact ratings of blame for sexual harassers and their victims and whether or not any relationships could be explained by defensive attribution theory. This theory claims that blame is a product of the relevance of the situation and the actors within that situation. Participants completed an online questionnaire in which they read hypothetical cases of sexual harassment. They rated the relevance of the situation and the individuals in the scenarios, attributed blame to hypothetical harassers and victims, as well as other information expected to predict ratings of blame. Results suggested that 1) defensive attribution theory explains the effects of sexual harassment proclivity and gender on blame for sexual harassers; 2) defensive attribution theory may require revision to include the impact of situational relevance on personal relevance, and 3) blame for harassers and victims is explained by two different processes. This research has legal and organizational implications.

In this study, 174 undergraduates from the University of Central Florida were asked to rate individual human and animal avatar features from the video game Spore on their level of femininity, masculinity, likability, and how well the feature represented them on a 7 point Likert scale of agreeability. Avatar features were presented on a neutral gray, quadruped body in two different views. It was expected that participants would show higher likability for avatar features that they perceived as corresponding to their Personal Attribute Questionnaire (PAQ) gender. Males liked feminine features approximately the same as females, however, in many categories females liked the most masculine features more than the most feminine features. Males liked the most masculine body detail feature more than females, and females liked the most masculine body detail more than males. It also was anticipated that avatar features rated as having both low femininity and low masculinity would be the features rated lowest in likability overall. These features did not have the lowest likability, but were somewhat close to neutral in likability. These results have implications for likable avatar creation for businesses, the military, and education.

Extant empirical evidence suggests that multiple risk and protective factors implicated in children's development of behavior problems are intertwined. This study, therefore, investigated the relationships among parental depression and anger, attributions of control, discipline, parent-child relationship variables, and children's behavior problems. Results were based on the responses of parents (55 mothers and 13 fathers) with children in Head Start and parents (52 mothers and 4 fathers) with children in Private School settings. All parents had children who ranged in age from 3- to 8-years. Compared to Private School parents, Head Start parents had lower levels of nonviolent discipline, involvement, and autonomy granting and endorsed greater internalizing behavior problems in their children. Significant correlations were found among parent-child relationship characteristics, parental discipline practices, and child behavior problems in both samples. Regression analyses suggested that Private School parents' use of psychological aggression and autonomy granting interact in the prediction of children's internalizing behavior problems. Although Head Start parents' higher attributions of child control for failure predicted lower levels of nonviolent discipline, and Private School parents' use of psychological aggression predicted greater levels of children's externalizing behavior problems, there was no evidence of parental discipline mediating the relationship between parental attributions and children's behavior problems. These findings emphasize the importance of research involving disadvantaged and nondisadvantaged community samples in order to provide a context for understanding how parental discipline and children's behavior problems are related to parent traits and parent-child relationship characteristics.

This study sought to connect two bodies of knowledge--integrative complexity and attribution theory. Integrative complexity is a term that indicates the simplicity vs. complexity of a person's mental frame and perceptual skill. A person who perceives nuance and subtle differences typically scores higher on an integrative complexity measure. Attribution theories are concerned with how individuals perceive causation for various events. The limited research into the linkages between perceived causation for an event and how complexly a person thinks about the domain of that event, coupled with the dearth of attribution research in the natural resource management literature, inspired this research. Florida Keys coral reef users were sent a mail questionnaire between July 2009 and March 2010. Integrative complexity level was determined using an index that was developed for this research. Based on attributional and cognitive complexity literature, it was hypothesized that people who score lower in integrative complexity would exhibit an "external" attribution pattern. Integrative complexity was also proposed to influence: attitude and value extremity; number of perceived problem causes; and use of mediated communication. Finally, it was hypothesized that individuals will assign more blame to other groups than to their own. Six of the study's seven null hypotheses were rejected: 1) a significant relationship was found between integrative complexity level and the number of causes that respondents recorded for the decline of the Florida Keys reef ecosystem, 2) significant differences were observed in attitude extremity according to integrative complexity, 3) significant differences were observed in value orientation according to integrative complexity, 4) significant differences were observed in value extremity according to integrative complexity level, 5) significant differences were observed in mediated communication according to integrative complexity level, and 6) significant differences were observed in blame pattern according to group affiliation. Only one null hypothesis was not rejected: no support was found for a connection between integrative complexity and attribution style. These results indicate support for the integrative complexity index, though work to refine the measure seems in order. Additional recommendations for future research include investigating new approaches to examining the relationship between integrative complexity and attribution style.

Attributions of child behavior have been shown to influence discipline responses and ultimately, child developmental trajectories. Research highlights various social-psychological factors in the formation of attributions, largely characterized as stable. However, research also demonstrates the efficacy of attribution retraining (AR) programs in restructuring individuals’ explanations for various outcomes. This study examined a trauma-informed training intervention with an AR component designed to evoke balanced and contextual attributions of child behavior among child-serving professionals. Of particular interest was the malleability and stability of attributions, and their influence on discipline responses. From pre- to post-training, there was a significant decrease in hostile attributions (stable after one week), significant decrease in unsupportive intervention preference, and significant increase in attitudes related to trauma-informed care. Offered as a feasible and scalable method, continued dissemination of the training intervention may improve the quality of child-serving professionals’ attributions, prompting more adaptive discipline responses and positive child interactions.

<p>Drawing upon Applicant-Attribution-Reaction Theory (AART) and research in the area ofjob applicant reactions, this study clarifies and underscores the influence of attributions on job applicant perceptions and behavioural reactions to staffing procedures and decisions. Overall, applicant attributions were influenced by: (a) experiencing a staffing process that satisfies/violates procedural justice rules; (b) receiving a favourable (selected) or unfavourable (rejected) selection outcome; and (c) receiving an explanation for a selection decision. Results further suggest that applicant attributions, influence applicant perceptions and behaviours. Consistent with AART's predictions, process fairness perceptions mediated relationships between applicant attributions and each of organizational perceptions, recommendation intentions, litigation intentions, job acceptance intentions, and reapplication intentions. Theoretical and practical implications for these findings are discussed.</p> / Thesis / Doctor of Philosophy (PhD)

No description available.

No description available.

No description available.

No description available.