Abstract Research in science education confirms the importance of self‐efficacy in students' persistence and success in the sciences. The current study examined the role of science self‐efficacy in nonspecialist, arts and communication‐oriented students encountering science in a general education context. Participants ( N = 275) completed a beginning‐ and end‐of‐semester survey including a Science Self‐Efficacy Scale, a “connection to science” measure—the Inclusion of Science in Self Scale—and a Science Anxiety Scale. Participants also responded to two open‐ended “sources of science efficacy” questions, and provided background/demographic information and access to their academic records. Results showed a significant increase in science self‐efficacy and connection to science—although no change in science anxiety—over the course of the semester. The observed shift in self‐efficacy for minority and international students was of particular note. These students started the course with lower confidence but, by the end of the semester, reported comparable science self‐efficacy, and achieved similar grades to their White/Non‐Hispanic and US resident classmates. Contrary to expectations, science self‐efficacy did not predict performance in the class. However, students' self‐reported sources of efficacy indicated increased confidence in using science in daily life, and confirmed the value of mastery experiences and of personally meaningful, student‐centered course design in scaffolding student confidence. Results are discussed in terms of the individual and instructional factors that support science self‐efficacy and student success in this unique, general education science environment.
The authors take a position that high‐quality marriages are best defined in terms of theoretically grounded sets of intra‐ and interpersonal processes that promote both individuals' mental and physical health and the health of their relationship. On the basis of a long‐standing research program on communal and exchange relationships, they set forth one set of marital processes, those surrounding the provision of mutual responsiveness, that contribute to marital quality. Then they add an important caveat: Relationship stage matters. They present a model of three additional relationship processes (strategic self‐presentation, self‐protection, partner evaluation), each of which is proposed to be healthy and normative during relationship initiation but harmful to individuals and relationship functioning if it does not diminish or disappear following marital commitment.
Emerging adulthood (EA) has been defined as a time between the ages of 18 and 25, during which individuals are neither adolescents who have never left home, live with their parents (or parent), and are highly dependent on their parents (or parent) nor adults who have assumed full responsibility for themselves and for others, such as a romantic partner or a child. Many of these individuals are going to college, technical school, or graduate school. Others are trying out careers. Sometimes they are living with a partner, sometimes with parents, and sometimes alone. This time has been declared a special stage of life, at least in western culture (Arnett, 2000) – a stage described as a time of exploration and uncertainty and also of self-focus and self-concern. Emerging adults are exploring options, evaluating possible romantic relationships and world views, and preparing for and trying out careers they may eventually assume. It is a time of many choices and few commitments.
Inclusion of other in the self, a key principle of the self-expansion model, suggests that close others overlap with the self in terms of resources, perspectives, and identities. Research from behavioral, cognitive, and neural domains provides evidence for inclusion of other in the self; the present research extends prior theoretical and empirical work to a new, visual domain by investigating whether inclusion of other in the self applies to facial processing. In two reaction time (RT) experiments, participants viewed static (Study 1) and morphed (Study 2) facial images of themselves, their close friend (i.e., a close other), and a familiar celebrity (i.e., a non-close other). In Study 1, participants showed slower RTs when comparing their own image with their friend’s image than when comparing their own image with a celebrity’s image. In Study 2, participants showed slower RTs when their own image was morphed with their friend’s image than when their own image was morphed with the celebrity’s image. These results suggest that inclusion of close others in the self extends to visual processing. Implications and limitations are discussed.
Although close relationships require partners to depend on one another for mutual responsiveness, avoidantly attached individuals are especially averse to risking such dependency. The authors propose that both avoidant and non-avoidant individuals perceive signs of their own and their partners’ responsiveness in ways that reflect motivated perceptions of dependency. The present research examined how the interplay between spouses’ attachment avoidance and observed responsive behaviors during marital conflict shaped perceptions of their own and their partners’ responsiveness. Newlywed couples attempted to resolve a relationship conflict and then reported perceptions of their own and their partners’ responsiveness during the conflict. Observers also coded both partners’ responsive behaviors during the conflict. Avoidant spouses perceived themselves as less responsive, especially when observers rated them as more responsive; avoidant spouses also perceived their partners as less responsive. The discussion highlights the role of attachment in understanding links between responsiveness-related perceptions and behaviors.
