An empirical examination of the integration of causal attribution and social learning theories in achievement situations

Using path analysis, the present investigation sought to clarify possible operational linkages among constructs from social learning and attribution theories within the context of a self-esteem system. Subjects were 300 undergraduate university students who completed a measure of self-esteem and indicated expectancies for success and minimal goal levels for an experimental task. After completing the task and receiving feedback about their performance, subjects completed causal attribution and self-esteem questionnaires. Results revealed gender differences in the degree and strength of the proposed relations, but not in the mean levels of the variables studied. Results suggested that the integration of social learning and attribution theories within a single conceptual model provides a better understanding of students' behaviors and self-esteem in achievement situations.

Does the Presence of a Learning Disability Elicit a Stigmatization?

Aims: To determine whether or not a Learning Disability(LD) label leads to stigmatization. Study Design: This research used a 2(sex of participant) x 2(LD label)x 2 (Sex of stimulus person) factorial design. Place and Duration of Study: Bucknell University, between October 2010 and April 2011. Methodology: Sample: We included 200 participants (137 women and 63 men, ranging in age from 18 – 75 years, M = 26.41. Participants rated the stimulus individual on 27 personality traits, 8 Life success measures, and the Big-5 personality dimensions. Also, participants completed a Social Desirability measure. Results: A MANOVA revealed a main effect for the Learning Disability description, F(6, 185) = 6.41 p< .0001, eta2 = .17,for the Big-5 personality dimensions, Emotional Stability, F(1, 185) = 13.39, p < .001, eta2 = .066, and Openness to Experiences F(1,185) = 7.12, p< .008, eta2 = .036.Stimulus individuals described as having a learning disability were perceived as being less emotionally stable and more open to experiences than those described as not having a learning disability. Another MANOVA revealed a main effect for having a disability or not, F(8, 183) = 4.29, p< .0001, eta2 = .158, for the Life Success items, Attractiveness, F(1, 198) = 16.63, p< .0001, eta2 = .080, and Future Success,F(1, 198) = 4.57, p< .034, eta2 = .023. Stimulus individuals described as having a learning disability were perceived as being less attractive and with less potential for success than those described as not having a learning disability. Conclusion: The results of this research provide evidence that a bias exists toward those who have learning disabilities. The mere presence of an LD label had the ability to cause a differential perception of those with LDs and those without LDs.