scispace - formally typeset
Search or ask a question

Showing papers on "Situational ethics published in 1975"


Journal ArticleDOI
TL;DR: In this article, the authors suggest that explicit recognition of situational variables can substantially enhance the ability to explain and understand consumer behavioral acts, and they provide a definition and description of situations, existing research is summarized, and implications for consumer research are considered.
Abstract: This paper suggests that explicit recognition of situational variables can substantially enhance the ability to explain and understand consumer behavioral acts. A definition and description of situations is offered, existing research is summarized, and implications for consumer research are considered.

1,524 citations



Journal ArticleDOI
TL;DR: In this article, a model for differentiating problem-solving styles of managers is presented and explained to develop an understanding of some contingencies under which certain problem solving styles are likely to be more effective for managerial and organizational performance.

57 citations


Book ChapterDOI
01 Jan 1975
TL;DR: In this paper, the authors conducted a survey on the perception of the social situation and on the attitudes and subjective evaluations of health states in shiftworkers in continuous-working industries and found that shiftworkers perceived social situation as a negative experience.
Abstract: In the context of a research project on the problems of shiftwork in “continuous-working” industries we conducted a survey on the perception of the social situation and on the attitudes and subjective evaluations of health states in shiftworkers.

31 citations




Journal ArticleDOI
Myron Wish1
TL;DR: In this paper, a questionnaire study was conducted in order to cover the conceptual structures people implicitly use in coding interpersonal communication, which revealed five dimensions, which were interpreted as "cooperative and friendly vs, competitive and hostile," "informal and open vs, formal and cautious," "intense vs. superficial," "equal and symmetric vs, unequal and asymmetric," and "task-ori ented vs. non-task-oriented."
Abstract: A questionnaire study was conducted in order to dis cover the conceptual structures people implicitly use in coding interpersonal communication. In the section of the questionnaire discussed in this report subjects made semantic-differential-type ratings of a large number of hypothetical communication episodes. Each "communication episode" was comprised of a dyadic relation involving the subject (e.g., "you and a coworker") and a situa tional context (e.g., "attempting to work out a compromise when your goals are strongly opposed"). A multidimensional analysis of the data revealed five dimensions, which were interpreted as "cooperative and friendly vs, competitive and hostile," "informal and open vs, formal and cautious," "intense vs. superficial," "equal and symmetric vs, unequal and asymmetric," and "task-ori ented vs. non-task-oriented." The relative importance of the interpersonal relations and the situational contexts varied con siderably for different dimensions.

25 citations


Journal ArticleDOI
TL;DR: In this article, Belk's situation is defined as a point in time and space and it is important for many psychological problems: for discrete, momentary acts (marking a questionnaire item, for example) and for behavior occurring under controlled, constant conditions in laboratories and clinics.
Abstract: By his clear statement of some issues met in attempts to bring the environment into psychological theory and research in connection with consumer behavior, Dr. Belk has made a valuable contribution. My comments will be limited to two issues that appear to me to be fundamental: namely, the temporal and spacial extent of the environment and its dynamic properties. It is true as the author says that the surroundings of a person range from the narrowest situation ("a point in time and space"), through behavior settings ("time and space dimensions [stretched] to broader and more continuous units"), to the total circumjacent environment. The question arises, therefore: for what behaviors are these variously constricted surrounds relevant? Consumer behavior, on the basis of the examples given (e.g., shopping for clothes, seeing a motion picture), almost always involves molar actions which extend over time and occur within spacially extended regions with fluctuating properties. An adequate conceptualization of the environment of consumer behavior must, therefore, have the attributes of temporal and spacial extent; and it must have other properties that can vary across time and space. This is true in all applied sciences. The course of a golf ball cannot be predicted from the "situation" (direction and strength of forces) that exists at the moment of impact with the club; the winds, slopes, turf, etc., must be included. This presents great difficulties, but it cannot be ignored. Dr. Belk's situation is defined as a point in time and space and it is important for many psychological problems: for discrete, momentary acts (marking a questionnaire item, for example) and for behavior occurring under controlled, constant conditions in laboratories and clinics. I am sure there are lawful relations between behavior and the variables of such situations, but I fail to see their relevance for molar actions. The five types of "situational characteristics" proposed include none which clearly indicates that environments are dynamic and purposeful with respect to persons. This is a frequent lack in psychological theories of the environment; in them the environment is usually either neutral with respect to the intentions of its inhabitants or chaotic, imposing driving and resisting forces on them in a random way. However, anyone who has driven on a highway, attended a fourth grade class, or shopped in a supermarket knows that these surroundings coerce people to behave in accordance with their, the surroundings', ongoing programs. This, it seems to me, should have a prominent place among the characteristics of situations.

24 citations



Journal ArticleDOI
TL;DR: Social response to the manifestations of mental disorder rests upon the interpretation of partictuflar behaviors in varied social contexts, upon the general stereotypes and criteria used as bases for labeling, and upon the beliefs that exist with reference to the categories employed.
Abstract: MENTAL1 disorder is manifest in thoLght processes and in behavior. Such behavior may be constricted or extravagant, self-demeaning or flagrantly offensive, but it must deviate from social norms or situational proprieties in order to be labeled as mental disorder. Once behavior is so labeled, responses to it may reflect the label as much as the behavior. But before labeling takes place, whatever set of criteria may be entailed, we do not know whether or not the behaviors in question are to be regarded as manifestations of' mental disorder. Social response to the manifestations of mental disorder rests, then, upon the interpretation of' particuLlar behaviors in varied social contexts, upon the general stereotypes and criteria used as bases for labeling, and upon the beliefs that exist with reference to the categories employed. Thei'e are many facets to social response to mental disorder. One that has received a good deal of attention pertains to the labeling of partictuflar behaviors as instances of' mental disor'der and to the consequences of such labeling. Another' pertains to the treatment accoi'ded to people who have been designated as having a mental disorder-the influence of' such labeling upon their rights and privileges and upon their conceptions of themselves. Still another' hicet of'the pi'oblem relates to the institutional For'ms and the social processes that are elaborated as modes f'or dealing with mental disoi'dei' in ai given society.

19 citations


Journal ArticleDOI
TL;DR: In this paper, a situational interpretation of achievement behavior is proposed, which assumes that the reward contingencies of the immediate situation determine whether performance will be high or low, and the results of four experiments supported the prediction that women and men will improve their performance if high achievement is associated with external rewards and will only decrease their performance when low achievement was associated with internal rewards.
Abstract: A situational interpretation of achievement behavior is proposed. This interpretation assumes that the reward contingencies of the immediate situation determine whether performance will be high or low. The results of four experiments supported the prediction that women and men will improve their performance if high achievement is associated with external rewards and will only decrease their performance when low achievement is associated with external rewards. In four additional experiments it was shown that both women and men will describe themselves as high in intellectual ability or as low in ability as a direct function of external rewards contingencies. The differences between situational and personality interpretations of achievement behavior are discussed, as well as the viability of the concept of fear of success and internalized sex roles as explanatory constructs.


Journal ArticleDOI
TL;DR: This paper found that half of the respondents rated the acceptability of marijuana use in these situations, while the other half rated alcohol use, and that differences in the situational context of both of these acts produced marked changes in respondents' interpretations of them as deviant.
Abstract: Recent sociological theories of deviance argue that social interpretations of deviant acts depend heavily on the situational circumstances surrounding the act. Questionnaires administered to 925 students presented descriptions of marijuana use or alcohol use in eight different situations. These descriptions were varied systematically according to (1) the social goals of the drug-using situation, (2) the situational stability of use, and (3) the user's motivational orientation toward the drug-using situation. Half of the respondents rated the acceptability of marijuana use in these situations, while the other half rated alcohol use. Variations in the situational context of both of these acts produced marked changes in respondents' interpretations of them as deviant. However, differences between ratings of marijuana use and alcohol use also indicate that interpretations of deviance may depend on generalized social meanings of the act per se , as well as on situational circumstances.

Journal ArticleDOI
TL;DR: Weinstein et al. as mentioned in this paper found that subjects engaged in greater ceding of identity when the stooges' altercast was not aimed at a central feature of their self-conception.
Abstract: An essential feature of social interaction is negotiation as to the identities actors may assume. A roleplaying experiment was designed in which this identity bargaining could be observed and its outcomes predicted. Male subjects interacted with female stooges who demanded that they assume a certain identity in order to accomplish a desirable goal (e.g., get a date). In half the cases the subject was altercast in an identity incompatible with his ideal self-conception; in the other half the altercast was irrelevant to his ideal self. Half the subjects interacted in private, while half believed themselves to have a peer audience. As predicted, subjects engaged in greater ceding of identity when the stooges' altercast was not aimed at a central feature of their self-conception. While measures of subjects' interpersonal strategies were not consistently differentiated when the episode had an audience, in relative privacy, however, subjects whose central feature of self was attacked proved to be relatively more defensive and derogatory toward the stooge, to project greater "secondariness," to altercast the stooge into a supportseeking identity, and to project greater autonomy. The common assumption that social interaction is goal-directed suggests central questions about the relationship between actors' goals and their means for pursuing them. The individual goes about his daily activities, attempting to affect others' behavior in ways best to achieve his purposes, while at the same time, these others pursue goals which ordinarily dovetail imperfectly with those being sought by the actor. Exchange theorists (e.g., Blau, 1964; Homans, 1961; Thibaut and Kelley, 1961) have argued that interaction goals should be viewed as preference rank orderings for the potential outcomes of behavior. Intervening between this rank ordering and the ultimate outcomes achieved in an encounter is a dynamic process of negotiation. It is through such negotiations that actors develop the shared meanings which allow them to interact (Goffman's, 1959 working consensus). Central to the working consensus is an implicit agreement over the situational identities actors may assume in the encounter. Each person projects a definition of the situation containing information about who he is in the encounter (selfpresentation, Goffman, 1959), and who alter may, or ought to, be (altercasting, Weinstein and Deutschberger, 1963). Since the purposes of any two actors seldom mesh perfectly, the definition of the situation they come to share is the product of a continuous negotiation. The negotiations centering on self-presentation and altercasting may be called identity bargaining, where actors place constraints on each other's situational identities, and finally anchor in the working con* This research was supported in various measures by N.S.F. grant GS-1093, N.S.F. dissertation grant GS-2520, and a grant from the Graduate Council of the State University of New York. Parts of it were presented at the annual meeting of the Eastern Sociological Society, 1973, and the Southern Sociological Society, 1973. I would like to express appreciation to Eugene Weinstein, Ardis Bynum, Janice Hoag, Andrea Kaplan, Leslie Miller, Frank Miyamoto, Robert Stein, Thomas Steinburn, and Mayer Zald for their assistance in various phases of the research. I would also like to acknowledge gratefully the Department of Sociology of the State University of New York at Stony Brook for the use of its facilities. This content downloaded from 157.55.39.105 on Fri, 07 Oct 2016 04:28:40 UTC All use subject to http://about.jstor.org/terms Identity Bargaining / 477 sensus an understanding of who everyone will be during the encounter. Identity bargaining is often more than simply a set of strategic maneuvers instrumental to some interactional goal; it may often yield intrinsic rewards as well. One of the commonest forms of self-presentation is the pursuit of what McCall and Simmons (1966:75) call role-support, the confirmation from others for one's claims about one's identity. "One of man's most distinctive motives is the compelling and perpetual drive to acquire support for his idealized conception of himself." Besides securing role-support by shaping the responses of others, the person constantly tries to be himself, i.e., to behave consistently with his projected definition of self. There are two different ways costs and rewards may be attached to the actor's identity. The strategic identity he assumes in an encounter may be a vehicle for accomplishing his valued purposes, or his presented identity may capture important features of his self-conception. In a given interaction, however, these two elements may create conflict for the actor. From his perspective it would be desirable to assume an identity in pursuit of his situational goals which was congruent with an idealized version of himself. He would like to avoid the dilemma that Gergen (1965) has called selfconsistency vs. strategic self-presentation. The purpose of the present research was to create an identity bargaining encounter in the laboratory, by formally posing the selfconsistency vs. self-presentation dilemma to experimental subjects. This meant creating a desirable goal for the subject to achieve with another person, who made it a precondition of success that the subject assume an identity incompatible with his self-conception. Once placed in this dilemma, under what circumstances would the actor resolve the conflict in favor of self-consistency (and failure) or in favor of strategic self-presentation (and success)? It was necessary to create an experimental condition where the subject was constrained to bargain over an important and central feature of his self-conception, and a control condition where the object of negotiation was an unimportant or irrelevant feature of his self-conception. It was hypothesized that the subject would be less likely to assume an identity necessary to achieve his interpersonal task when it was incompatible with a central feature of his self-conception as opposed to an incidental feature. METHOD




Journal ArticleDOI
TL;DR: In this article, it is argued that if the content does not lead directly to some behavioral change, it at least adds some small increment to a modernized mentality, and the policy implication is to make development of a modern mass media system a high priority item.
Abstract: b An assumption that runs through much of the development communication literature is that nearly all mass media content in some way aids modernization. If the content does not lead directly to some behavioral change, it is argued that it a t least adds some small increment to a modernized mentality. Accepting this, the crucial factor is availability, and the policy implication is to make development of a modern mass media system a high priority item. But availability doesn't guarantee use, and use isn't synonymous with benefits gained. Surely what is said must make some difference. Nevertheless measures of content are seldom included in research designs. Communication planning manuals devote most of their space to how to present messages-skills and techniques. They give little consideration


Journal ArticleDOI
TL;DR: In this paper, it was hypothesized that educational leaders' perceptions of their own task-human relations orientation would tend to be related to their group's perception and that the leaders' administrative theory orientation, on the other hand, would not readily be perceived as behaviors but would nevertheless be related with their behavior.
Abstract: Early studies of leadership traits proved inconclusive. More recent research has focused on behaviors and the interactions of leader traits with situational variables. Whatever the situational variables might be, however, leaders do project an image through behaviors which can be perceived by the groups they lead. In the present research it was hypothesized that educational leaders’ perceptions of their own task-human relations orientation would tend to be related to their group’s perception. It was hypothesized that the leaders’ administrative theory orientation, on the other hand, would not readily be perceived as behaviors but would nevertheless be related to their behavior. Analysis of the data from the present study supports the.se notions.

Journal ArticleDOI
01 Jul 1975
TL;DR: In this paper, ahistorical statement by Bob Dylan captures an essential feature of the situational sociologies (ethnomethodology, symbolic interaction and the phenomenological perspectives).
Abstract: This ahistorical statement by Bob Dylan captures an essential feature of the situational sociologies (ethnomethodology, symbolic interaction and the phenomenological perspectives). By slicing up history into situations, particularly episodes, the situational sociologists accomplish the task of disconnection ... the severing of the expressions of daily life from the historical and material roots which, in an unanalized, relatively unarticulated and generally imprecise fashion, they express. The technique is that of reductionism. Capitalist class relations and the historical development and historical possibilities for change of capitalist institutions and structures are reduced to the &dquo;face-to-face&dquo; social

01 Jan 1975
TL;DR: In this paper, the authors present a set of qualitative and quantitative tests for assessing student attitude towards teachers in elementary and secondary education, including: 1.MF-$0.76 'HC-$1.95 PLUS POSTAGE *Attitudes; Attitude Tests; *Classrooms; Effective Teaching; Elementary Secondary Education; Factor?Analysis; Human Relations; Individual Characteristics; Interaction Process, Analysis; Measurement Techniques; Qdestionnaires; Rating Scales ;'
Abstract: MF-$0.76 'HC-$1.95 PLUS POSTAGE *Attitudes; Attitude Tests; *Classrooms; Effective Teaching; Elementary Secondary Education; Factor ?Analysis; Human Relations; Individual Characteristics; Interaction Process, Analysis; Measurement Techniques; Qdestionnaires; Rating Scales ;' *Situational Tests; Statistical Analysis; Student Attitudes; Student Teacher Relationship; Teacher Attitud4;* Teache.: Behavior; Teacher Role; *Values




Journal ArticleDOI
TL;DR: The authors found that people attribute more dispositional traits to others than to themselves, and that the use of trait adjectives in this kind of research results in a number of methodological problems, such as confounding of preference for a "situational" description with response uncertainty.
Abstract: Although there is considerable support for the hypothesis that people attribute more dispositional traits to others than to themselves, the use of trait adjectives in this kind of research results in a number of methodological problems. The present study addresses the possible confounding of preference for a “situational” description with response uncertainty. Subjects were required to attribute traits to themselves, to a “typical smoker,” and to a “typical nonsmoker,” the response format being varied between conditions. Subjects attributed more traits to themselves than to others, and more to similar others than to dissimilar others. Further analysis indicated that a “situational attribution” in this type of trait-inference research is confounded with response uncertainty. It is concluded that one should be cautious in interpreting personality trait ratings as indicators of basic attributional processes.




01 Jan 1975
TL;DR: BarTal et al. as mentioned in this paper compared the differences in causal attributions of a person experiencing success or failure in an achievement situation (the actor) and someone who read about the situation, and found that actors were relatively more likely to perceive their outcomes as caused by external factors (task difficulty and luck), while observers attributed these outcomes more to internal factors (effort).
Abstract: This study compares the differences in causal attributions of a person experiencing success or failure in an achievement situation (the actor) and someone who read about the situation (the observer). The subjects were given sets of anagrams which varied in difficulty. The results of both studies showed that actors were relatively more likely to perceive their outcomes as caused by external factors (task difficulty and luck), while observers attributed these outcomes more to internal factors (effort) . Attributions for both actors and observers were also strongly affected by whether the outcome was a success or a failure. Hypotheses concerning significant differences in attributions made by male and female observers or actors were only weakly supported; however, the data that did emerge suggested a general tendency toward stereotypic thinking by both sexes, but especially by male observers. It has been suggested that the differential attributions made by an actor and an observer may cause conflicts in educational settings, where the student is the actor and the teacher the observer. However, this present study explores a situation that differs from a classroom situation, and additional research is needed to investigate differential attributions of teachers and pupils. (BD) *********************************************************************** * Documents acquired by ERIC include many informal unpublished * materials not available from other sources. ERIC makes every effort * * to obtain the best copy available. Nevertheless, items of marginal * * reproducibility are often encountered and this affects the quality * * of the microfiche and hardcopy reproductions ERIC makes available * via the ERIC Document Reproduction Service (ED'S). EDRS is not * responsible for the quality of the original document. Reproductions * * supplied by EDRS are the best that can be made from the original. *********************************************************************** ATTRIBUTIONS OF SUCCESS AND FAILURE FOR MALES AND FEMALES AS ACTORS AND OBSERVERS Daniel Bar-Tal and Irene Hanson Frieze Learning Research and Development Center University of Pittsburgh 1975 U.S. DEPARTMENT DF HEALTH, EDUCATION I WELFARE NATIONAL INSTITUTE OF EDUCATION THIS DOCUMENT HAS SEEN REPRODUCED EXACTLY AS RECEIVED FROM THE PERSON OR ORGANIZATION ORIGINATING IT POINTS OF VIEW OR OPINIONS STATED DO NOT NECESSARILY REPRESENT OFFICIAL NATIONAL INSTITUTE OF EDUCATION POSITION OR POLICY The research reported herein was supported by the Learning Research and Development Center, supported in part as a research and development center by funds from the National Institute of Education (NIE), United States Department of Health, Education, and Welfare. The opinions expressed do not necessarily reflect the position or policy of NIE and no official endorsement should be inferred. The authors would like to thank Chuck Block and Torn Werner for their help in carrying out the first study, and to Yaffa BarTal for her assistance in both of the studies. The authors also wish to extend their appreciation to John Levine and Leonard Saxe for their helpful co.nrnents on an earlier version of this paper. ATTRIBUTIONS OF SUCCESS AND FAILURE FOR MALES AND FEMALES AS ACTORS AND OBSERVERS Daniel BarTal and Irene Hanson Frieze University of Pittsburgh Jones and Nisbett (1971) suggested .t actors and observers have very different views about why the actor behaves in the way he or she does. They reviewed experimental literature showing that an actor tends to attribute his or her behavior to situational factors, while an observer of the same behavior tends to perceive it as the result of stable personal characteristics of the actor. A number of studies have confirmed this general proposition (e.g., McArthur, 1972; Nisbett, Caputo, Legant, & Marecek, 1973; Storms, 1973). These studies, however, have tended to focus upon actor/observer differences in social situations. The present two studies investigate some of the differences in attributions made by actors and observers in an achievement situation. It is hypothesized that the general tendency noted by Jones and Nisbett (1971) for the actor to attribute his or her behavior to situational factors and for the observer to attribute this behavior to stable characteristics of the actor will be present in an achievement situation. However, it is also hypothesized that these tendencies will be affected by the positivity or negativity of the outcome. Specifically, it is expected that the actor/observer attributional difference will be magnified in a failure situation, since actors would be most likely to attribute their behavior to situational factors in such a situation. Weiner, Frieze, Kukla, Reed, Rest, and Rosenbaum (1971) have outlined four causal attributions made in achievement situations: ability, effort, luck, and task difficulty. These causes differ along two dimensions. Ability and effort are within the person and are thus internal, while luck and task difficulty are outside the person and are thus external. Also, ability and task difficulty are relatively constant over time as a person reattempti the same task, while effort and luck can fluctuate widely. Therefore, the former causes, ability and task difficulty, are both stable, even though one is internal and the other external. Similarly, effort and luck are both unstable and also differ along the internal-external dimension. These dimensions have been meaningfully employed in previous studies of attributions of the causes of achievement success and failure. A number of studies have demonstrated that different causal attributions tend to be made in success and failure situations (i. e. , Feather & Simon, 1971; Frieze & Weiner, 1971). In general, people tend to attribute success more to internal factors and failure more to external and/or unstable factors (Frieze, 1973; Frieze & Weiner, 1971). A few studies have explored how actors and observers differentially react to success and failure in making attributions (e.g., Frieze & Weiner, 1971; Ruble 1973). In a simulation situation where subjects were told to imagine either themselves or someone else succeeding or failing in an achievement situation, results supported the hypothesis that actors would attribute their outcomes more to situational factors while observers would utilize more internal, stable attributions. However, these results were modified by the outcome which had more overall effect than the actor/ observer manipulation. In general, there was a tendency within both actor and observer groups to attribute more internal factors and stable factors to the success situation than to the failure one (Ruble, 1973). In another simulation study reported by Frieze and Weiner (1971), outcome had a very strong effect, but no actor/observer differences were found. Since this study controlled the type and amount of information available in both the actor and observer conditions (e.g., percent of past successes of