Suchergebnisse

Marital paradigm theory (MPT) asserts that societal and cultural norms and values contribute to marital beliefs. The current research examines a tenet of MPT that marital salience – a belief about the importance of getting married – and marital centrality – a belief about the importance or weight assigned to the spousal role once married – are related but distinct concepts such that individuals can diverge in their endorsement of each (for example, highly endorse one but not the other). Data from an online, anonymous survey of 4,060 emerging adults were used to group participants into a typology of low salience-low centrality, high salience-high centrality, low salience-high centrality, and high salience-low centrality. Groups were compared across background characteristics and marital meaning beliefs. Several patterns of differences among predictors were identified and discussed in the context of how the high salience-low centrality group compared with the other groups. Overall findings were consistent with MPT.

ObjectiveThis research examines college students' experiences of dislocation during the COVID‐19 pandemic.BackgroundDue to governmental stay‐at‐home orders during the pandemic, families with "dislocated" (compelled to return home) college students would likely encounter unique stressors while also being limited in their normal ways of coping.MethodsUsing an online survey, the current study sought to discover how diverse individual characteristics and family living situations of 323 dislocated students associated with varying homelife experiences (e.g., intrusive parenting, students making an extra effort to spend time with family), and how such experiences associated with relationship changes during the quarantine.ResultsAnalyses detected some differences in the students' homelife experiences based on background and living situations, especially related to being a first‐year student, having been excited about returning home, and feeling accepted by parents about being home. Negative family relationship quality during the quarantine was most predicted by negative attitudes from students and parents about students being home, the student feeling less adultlike (based on treatment and own identity conception), and having low autonomy.ConclusionReturning home for quarantine was challenging for most students, and circumstances and attitudes appeared to contribute to how such challenges associated with family relationship changes.ImplicationsImplications for practitioners and universities are discussed in regard to preparing college students and their families for similar conditions.

Due to the COVID-19 pandemic and college campus closure in early 2020, students returned to live at home in unprecedented circumstances. A sample of 336 college students reported about their experiences living at home and the extent to which they perceived their mental health declining during the stay-at-home order (quarantine). Multiple regression analysis indicated that being a freshman (compared to a senior), having more negative interaction with a parent, fearing for one's own and one's family's health, perceiving less parental acceptance about being home, having low autonomy, and displaying less positive coping (not working to improve one's self and strengthen family relationships, more idleness) associated with self-reported decreases in mental health during quarantine. Thematic analysis of open-ended responses suggested that students viewed the quarantine as relevant to their mental health, especially because of positive or negative family experiences, and to a lesser degree disruption of education and work norms.

Prior work suggests that awareness of stereotypes about a person's in-group can affect a person's behavior and performance when they complete a stereotype-relevant task, a phenomenon called stereotype susceptibility ( Shih, Pittinsky, & Ambady, 1999 ). In a preregistered confirmatory design, we found that priming Asian women with social identities associated with math stereotypes did not influence their performance on a subsequent mathematics exam, and hypothesized moderators did not account for the effect. The conditions necessary to obtain the original results are not yet fully understood.

Does the identity of a majority opinion writer affect the level of agreement a Supreme Court decision receives from the public? Using a survey experiment, we manipulate majority opinion authors to investigate whether individuals are willing to agree with Supreme Court opinions authored by ideologically similar justices even though the decisions cut against their self-identified ideological policy preferences. Our study provides insight into the extent to which policy cues—represented by a political institution's policy messenger—affect agreement with a given policy. We find that a messenger effect indeed augments the level of agreement a given Supreme Court case receives.