Abstracts of Recent Publications

Journal articles, selected book chapters, and convention presentations from the past three years are grouped into the following categories:

Academic Integrity and Dishonesty
Attitudes Toward Homosexuality
Prejudice
Human Sexuality
Other Topics

Academic Integrity and Dishonesty

Whitley, B. E., Jr. (2001). Gender differences in affective responses to having cheated: The mediating role of attitudes. Ethics & Behavior, 11, 249-259.: Women college students cheat at the same rate as men but report more negative attitudes toward cheating. Consistent with predictions derived from cognitive consistency theories, female college students, compared to male students, reported less positive affect in response to having cheated. This gender difference was mediated by gender differences in attitudes toward cheating.

Blankenship, K. L., & Whitley, B. E., Jr. (2000, May). Personality factors associated with academic dishonesty: A Big 5 analysis. Paper presented at the meeting of the Midwestern Psychological Association, Chicago.: We hypothesized that academically dishonest students would score lower than honest students on the Big 5 personality dimension of conscientiousness. Cheaters scored lower on both conscientiousness and agreeableness than noncheaters. False excuse makers also scored lower on conscientiousness and agreeableness than students who did not use false excuses.

Blankenship, K. L., & Whitley, B. E., Jr. (2000). The relationship of general deviance to academic dishonesty. Ethics and Behavior, 10, 1-12.: This study investigated the relationships of cheating on an exam and using a false excuse to avoid taking an exam as scheduled to various forms of minor deviance. College students completed measures of cheating, false excuse making, and minor deviance. A factor analysis identified clusters of deviance behaviors. Cheaters scored higher than noncheaters on measures of unreliability and risky driving behaviors, and false excuse makers scored higher than other students on measures of substance use, risky driving, illegal behaviors, and personal unreliability. In addition, males scored higher than females on substance abuse and illegal behaviors factors. Results are interpreted in terms of personological theories of honesty and reliability.

Whitley, B. E., Jr., Nelson, A. B., & Jones, C. J. (1999). Gender differences in cheating attitudes and classroom cheating behavior: A meta-analysis. Sex Roles, 41, 657-680.: Based on the differential socialization theory of gender differences in moral reasoning we expected that, compared to women, men would report more favorable attitudes toward cheating and more cheating behavior. We conducted a meta-analysis that included 8 studies of gender differences in attitudes toward cheating, 34 studies of gender differences in cheating behavior, and 6 studies that investigated both attitudes and behavior. Although the mean effect size for gender differences in attitudes was of moderate magnitude, equivalent to a correlation of r = .21, the mean effect size for behavior was small, equivalent to r = .08. Behavior effect sizes also varied as a function of field of study, method of data collection, and country in which the study was conducted.

Wryobeck, J. M., & Whitley, B. E., Jr. (1999). Educational value orientation and peer perceptions of cheaters. Ethics and Behavior, 9, 231-242.: The dominant themes in dishonesty research have been characteristics of cheaters and the situational surrounding the event; researchers have paid less attention to how cheaters are viewed by their peers. We examined the degree to which peers judgments of a cheater and his accomplice varied as a function of the accomplice's motive and the rater's degree of learning and grade orientation. Accomplices were judged less harshly and elicited more sympathy and less anger than cheaters, and participants saw themselves as more likely to act as the accomplice had done than as the cheater had done. Grade orientation was related to affective responses to the cheater and accomplice. Learning and grade orientation were jointly related to whether the participants reported that thy would act as the cheater and accomplice had. [See also Whitley & Kost, below)

Whitley, B. E., Jr., & Kost, C. R. (1999). College students' perceptions of peers who cheat. Journal of Applied Social Psychology, 28, 1731-1760.: We conducted two studies that investigated the efficacy of three theoretical models in explaining college students' judgments of peers who cheat and of accomplices who assist cheaters. The value pluralism model predicted that accomplices who acted for money would be judged more harshly than those who acted from friendship, the attributional model predicted that cheaters whose actions were caused by internal controllable factors would be judged more harshly than those whose actions were caused by external uncontrollable factors and that feelings of anger and sympathy would mediate this relationship, and the relative preference model predicted that students who saw themselves as more likely to act as the cheater and accomplice did would make less harsh judgments. Results of both studies indicated that accomplices were judged less harshly and elicited more sympathy and less anger than cheaters, and that participants saw themselves as more likely to help someone cheat than to cheat themselves. Overall, the results of the studies provided little support for the value pluralism model, mixed support for the attributional model, and consistent support for the relative preference model. Implications of the results for theory and application are discussed.

Keith-Spiegel, P., Tabachnick, B. G., Whitley, B. E., Jr., & Washburn, J. (1998). Why do professors ignore cheating? Opinions of a national sample of psychology instructors. Ethics and Behavior, 8, 215-227.: To understand better why evidence of student cheating is often ignored, a national sample of psychology instructors was sampled for their opinions. The 127 respondents overwhelmingly agreed that dealing with instances of academic dishonesty was among the most onerous aspects of their profession. Respondents cited insufficient evidence of cheating as the most frequent reason suspicious behavior is overlooked. A factor analysis revealed four other clusters of reasons why cheating may be ignored. Emotional reasons included stress and lack of courage. Difficult reasons included the extensive time and effort required to deal with cheating students. Fear reasons included concern about retaliation or a legal challenge. Denial reasons included beliefs that cheating students would fail anyway and that the worst offenders do not get caught. Reasons why academic dishonesty should be proactively confronted are presented.

Whitley, B. E., Jr., & Kite, M. E. (1998). The classroom environment and academic integrity: A behavioral science perspective. In D. D. Burnett, L. Rudolph, & K. O. Cliford (Eds). Academic integrity matters (pp. 39-55). Washington, DC: National Association of Student Personnel Administrators.: In this chapter we offer a behavioral science framework for understanding students' academic dishonesty. We discuss three themes: students' lack of knowledge of inappropriate behavior, their motivation to perform inappropriate behavior, and situational constraints on inappropriate behavior. We focus on factors that are under the instructor's control, such as providing appropriate information or effectively monitoring student behavior, rather than factors that might influence academic dishonesty but are outside the instructor's control, such as students' attitudes and personalities. We conclude with discussions of how to handle cheating and of students' perceptions of whether cheating is worth the risk of being caught.

Whitley, B. E., Jr. (1998). Factors associated with cheating among college students: A review. Research in Higher Education, 39, 235-274.: A review was conducted of the results of 107 studies of the prevalence and correlates of cheating among college students published between 1970 and 1996. The studies reviewed found cheating to more common in the 1969 to 1975 and the 1986 and 1996 time periods than between 1976 and 1985. Among the strongest correlates of cheating were having moderate expectations of success, having cheated in the past, studying under poor conditions, holding positive attitudes toward cheating, perceiving that social norms support cheating, and anticipating a large reward for success. However, an important limitation on the conclusions drawn from this research is that many variables were included in only one or a few studies. A model of the antecedents of cheating is proposed and the implications of this model for the identification of students at risk for cheating and controlling cheating are discussed.

Return to top of page

Return to Whitley's faculty page

Prejudice

Whitley, B. E., Jr. (2001, August). Group-based dominance, opposition to equality, and prejudice. Paper presented at the meeting of the American Psychological Association, San Francisco.: Social dominance orientation has recently been found to consist of two components, group-based dominance (GBD) and opposition to equality (OEQ). This study examined the relationships of GBD and OEQ to attitudes toward homosexuality and African Americans in terms of affective responses to and support for the social equality of the groups. In multiple regression analyses, GBD predicted all four attitudes but was less strong for homosexual equality than for the others. OEQ was a good predictor of both types of attitudes toward African Americans, less so for homosexual equality, and did not predict affective responses to homosexuality.

Whitley, B. E., Jr., & Richardson, A. J. (2000, May). Right-wing authoritarianism, religious authoritarianism, and prejudice. Paper presented at the meeting of the Midwestern Psychological Association, Chicago.: Right-wing authoritarianism (RWA) is more closely related to attitudes toward homosexuality than to other forms of prejudice. We tested the possibility that this difference stems from the religious component of RWA. We found that religious authoritarianism was related to attitudes toward homosexuality, but not to attitudes toward African Americans.

Whitley, B. E., Jr., & Richardson, A. J. (2000, March). Authoritarianism, social dominance orientation, empathy, and prejudice. Paper presented at the meeting of the Southeastern Psychological Association, New Orleans.: Substantial amounts of research have shown that right-wing authoritarianism (RWA) and social dominance orientation (SDO) are two of the primary personality factors underlying prejudice. The current research, along showed that empathy is a third important factor: Consistent with the propositions of social dominance theory, empathy partially mediated the relationship between SDO and prejudice toward African Americans and toward lesbians and gay men. We also found that empathy was able to explain variance in prejudice scores in addition to that explainable by RWA and SDO.

Whitley, B. E., Jr. (1999). Right-wing authoritarianism, social dominance orientation, and prejudice. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 77, 126-134..: Right-wing authoritarianism and social dominance orientation have been proposed as two major individual difference variables underlying prejudice. This study examined the relationships of these variables to three forms of prejudice --affective responses, stereotyping, and attitudes toward equality enhancement -- directed at two social groups -- African Americans and homosexuals. Canonical correlation analyses showed that social dominance orientation was related to most forms of prejudice directed toward both groups and that right-wing authoritarianism was related to affective responses to and stereotyping of homosexuals. In addition, it was found that, as predicted by the social dominance model, stereotyping mediated the relationships between social dominance orientation and other forms of prejudice and that social dominance orientation mediated sex differences in expressions of prejudice.

Whitley, B. E., Jr. (1998 August). Authoritarianism and social dominance orientation as independent dimensions of prejudice. Paper presented at the meeting of the American Psychological Association, San Francisco.: This research investigated the relationships of Right-Wing Authoritarianism (RWA) and Social Dominance Orientation (SDO) to five forms of prejudice: attitudes toward lesbians and gay men, attitudes toward women, modern sexism, old fashioned racism, and modern racism. Compared to SDO, RWA was more closely related to attitudes toward lesbians and gay men, and compared to RWA, SDO was more closely related to both forms of racism. RWA and SDO were equally related to attitudes toward women and modern sexism. Thus, RWA and SDO appear to be independent predictors of prejudice and to be differentially related to different forms of prejudice.

Return to top of page

Return to Whitley's faculty page

Attitudes Toward Homosexuality

Whitley, B. E., Jr. (2001). Gender-role beliefs and attitudes toward homosexuality. Sex Roles, 45, 691-722.: Two studies examined the relationships of gender-role variables to attitudes toward homosexuality. Study 1, a meta-analysis, found that endorsement of traditional gender-role beliefs, modern sexism, and hypermasculinity were related to attitudes, but that gender-role self-concept was not. Study 2 examined the relationships of endorsement of male role norms, attitudes toward women, hostile sexism, benevlent sexism, modern sexism, hypyermasculinity, and hyperfemininity to attitudes toward homosexuality and self-reported anti-gay behaviors in a college student sample. The best ;predictors of attitudes were participant gender, endorsement of male role norms, attitudes toward women, benevolent sexism, and modern sexism. The best predictors of anti-gay behaviors were participant gender and hyper-gender-role orientation; attitudes toward women and modern sexism were also predictors for men but not for women.

Whitley, B. E., Jr. (2001, August). Racial/ethnic differences in attitudes toward homosexuality: A meta-analysis. Paper presented at the meeting of the American Psychological Association, San Francisco.: Little research has examined the attitudes of members of racial and ethnic minority groups toward homosexuality. A meta-analysis of the results of that research found that, overall, members of racial and ethnic minority groups held slightly more negative attitudes than Whites. This difference was somewhat stronger for college student samples. Cultural factors that might contribute to these differences are discussed.

Whitley, B. E., Jr., & Lee, S. E. (2000). Relationships of authoritarianism and related constructs to attitudes toward homosexuality. Journal of Applied Social Psychology, 30, 144-170.: Two studies examined the relationships of right-wing authoritarianism (RWA), dogmatism, social dominance orientation (SDO), and political-economic conservatism (PEC) to attitudes toward homosexuality. Study 1 was a meta-analysis which found that all four variables were related to attitudes toward homosexuality, with RWA having the largest relationship. Study 2 examined the relationships of the four variables to attitudes toward lesbians and gay men in a college student sample. Although all four variables had zero-order correlations with these attitudes, RWA and SDO were the primary predictors, with RWA having the larger relationship. In addition, we found that the zero-order correlations of PEC and dogmatism could be explained by their overlap with SDO and RWA and that SDO partially mediated the sex difference found in attitudes toward gay men. We interpret the results in terms of RWA and SDO being independent dimensions of attitudes toward homosexuality.

Whitley, B. E., Jr., Wiederman, M. W., & Wryobeck, J. M. (1999). Correlates of heterosexual men's eroticization of lesbianism. Journal of Psychology and Human Sexuality, 11(1), 25-41.: Research has consistently found that heterosexual men attribute erotic value to depictions of lesbianism. Such attributions are also correlated with heterosexual men's attitudes toward lesbians. This research investigated some possible correlates of this perceived erotic value of lesbianism. Multiple regression analysis found that perceived erotic value was positively related to erotophilia, exposure to pornography, lifetime sexual experience, and sexual preoccupation, and that it was negatively related to adherence to traditional sexual values. Contrary to expectation, perceived erotic value was unrelated to perceptions that lesbians are hypersexual or that they have a sexual interest in men as well as women.

Lee, S. E., & Whitley, B. E., Jr. (1998, April). Attitudes toward women, modern sexism, and attitudes toward homosexuality. Paper presented at the meeting of the Midwestern Psychological Association, Chicago.: Although criticisms of the Attitudes Toward Women Scale (AWS) have suggested that it is obsolete, scores on it but not the newer Modern Sexism Scale predicted attitudes toward homosexuality in a multiple regression analysis. These results replicate well established findings for the AWS and confirm its current usefulness.

Kite, M. E., & Whitley, B. E., Jr. (1998). Do heterosexual women and men differ in their attitudes toward homosexuality? A conceptual and methodological analysis. In G. M. Herek (Ed.), Stigma and sexual orientation: Understanding prejudice against lesbians, gay men, and bisexuals (pp. 39-61). Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.: We present a gender role analysis of sex differences in attitudes toward homosexuality based on the assumption that heterosexuals' evaluations of gay men and lesbians are rooted in a broader belief system about women, men, and their appropriate roles. We provide evidence for this perspective from a meta-analysis of studies of sex differences in heterosexuals' attitudes toward homosexuality (Kite & Whitley, 1996) and discuss methodological problems with the existing research and gaps in the research literature.

Return to top of page

Return to Whitley's faculty page

Human Sexuality

Whitley, B. E., Jr. (1998). False consensus on sexual behavior: Comparison of four theoretical explanations. Journal of Sex Research, 35, 206-214.: False consensus refers to the tendency of people to overestimate the population prevalence of their own opinions, preferences, and behaviors. Four explanations have been proposed for this phenomenon: selective exposure to others who believe and act similarly, the salience of one's own beliefs and behaviors, logical information processing about the perceived causes of behavior, and motivation to justify nonnormative beliefs and behaviors. This study replicated previous findings of false consensus on sexual behavior among young women and found evidence supporting the selective exposure explanation but no evidence to support any of the other explanations.

Return to top of page

Return to Whitley's faculty page