Collaborative Voice: Examining the Role of Voice in Interdisciplinary Collaboration

The present study examined the role of voice in facilitating interdisciplinary collaboration. According to the group-value model of procedural justice, voice relates to interpersonal relationships among co-workers because it facilitates a greater interest in helping the group (e.g. group-serving behavior). We argue that because of the relationship between voice and one type of group-serving behavior--advice sharing--that greater perceptions of voice would also predict more collaboration. In a field study examining collaborative social networks among university researchers, we found that greater perceptions of voice positively related to both degree of advice sharing and collaboration. Moreover, the extent to which individuals shared advice fully mediated the relationship between perceived voice and collaboration. Implications for voice and collaboration are discussed

When bad stress goes good: increased threat reactivity predicts improved category learning performance

The way in which we respond to everyday stressors can have a profound impact on cognitive functioning. Maladaptive stress responses in particular are generally associated with impaired cognitive performance. We argue, however, that the cognitive system mediating task performance is also a critical determinant of the stress-cognition relationship. Consistent with this prediction, we observed that stress reactivity consistent with a maladaptive, threat response differentially predicted performance on two categorization tasks. Increased threat reactivity predicted enhanced performance on an information-integration task (i.e., learning is thought to depend upon a procedural-based memory system), and a (nonsignificant) trend for impaired performance on a rule-based task (i.e., learning is thought to depend upon a hypothesis-testing system). These data suggest that it is critical to consider both variability in the stress response and variability in the cognitive system mediating task performance in order to fully understand the stress-cognition relationship

When bad stress goes good: increased threat reactivity predicts improved category learning performance

The way in which we respond to everyday stressors can have a profound impact on cognitive functioning. Maladaptive stress responses in particular are generally associated with impaired cognitive performance. We argue, however, that the cognitive system mediating task performance is also a critical determinant of the stress-cognition relationship. Consistent with this prediction, we observed that stress reactivity consistent with a maladaptive, threat response differentially predicted performance on two categorization tasks. Increased threat reactivity predicted enhanced performance on an information-integration task (i.e., learning is thought to depend upon a procedural-based memory system), and a (nonsignificant) trend for impaired performance on a rule-based task (i.e., learning is thought to depend upon a hypothesis-testing system). These data suggest that it is critical to consider both variability in the stress response and variability in the cognitive system mediating task performance in order to fully understand the stress-cognition relationship

Is Pressure Stressful? The Impact of Pressure on the Stress Response and Category Learning

We examine the basic question of whether pressure is stressful. We propose that when examining the role of stress or pressure in cognitive performance it is important to consider the type of pressure, the stress response, and the aspect of cognition assessed. In Experiment 1, outcome pressure was not experienced as stressful but did lead to impaired performance on a rule-based (RB) category learning task and not a more procedural information-integration (II) task. In Experiment 2, the addition of monitoring pressure resulted in a modest stress response to combined pressure and impairment on both tasks. Across experiments, higher stress appraisals were associated with decreased performance on the RB, but not the II, task. In turn, higher stress-reactivity (heart rate) was associated with enhanced performance on the II, but not the RB, task. This work represents an initial step towards integrating the stress-cognition and pressure-cognition literatures and suggests that integrating these fields may require consideration of the type of pressure, the stress-response, and the cognitive system mediating performance

Is Pressure Stressful? The Impact of Pressure on the Stress Response and Category Learning

We examine the basic question of whether pressure is stressful. We propose that when examining the role of stress or pressure in cognitive performance it is important to consider the type of pressure, the stress response, and the aspect of cognition assessed. In Experiment 1, outcome pressure was not experienced as stressful but did lead to impaired performance on a rule-based (RB) category learning task and not a more procedural information-integration (II) task. In Experiment 2, the addition of monitoring pressure resulted in a modest stress response to combined pressure and impairment on both tasks. Across experiments, higher stress appraisals were associated with decreased performance on the RB, but not the II, task. In turn, higher stress-reactivity (heart rate) was associated with enhanced performance on the II, but not the RB, task. This work represents an initial step towards integrating the stress-cognition and pressure-cognition literatures and suggests that integrating these fields may require consideration of the type of pressure, the stress-response, and the cognitive system mediating performance

Understanding Reactions to Inequality: Examining the Palliative Function of Meritocracy and Group Discrepancies for Wellbeing

While scholars disagree whether membership in a low status group necessarily means wellbeing will suffer, system-justifying ideologies like meritocracy are agreed to have an important influence over this relationship. Recent research has shown that endorsement of meritocracy can protect low status individuals from negative wellbeing after exposure to inequality. This study sought to understand why low status targets are not always emotionally impacted by evidence of inequality. McCoy, Major, and Cosley (in preparation) revealed that one way endorsing meritocracy exerts its influence is by increasing perceptions of personal control and reducing perceptions of threat, thereby protecting overall wellbeing. The present work investigated an alternative way meritocracy may aid the low status in protecting their wellbeing in the face of group inequalities. Based on research showing how low status targets who endorse meritocracy also self stereotype more when faced with group inequalities (McCoy & Major, 2007), the present study hypothesized that the presence of inequality focuses low status targets on the stereotypical responsibilities of their group. This focus on group responsibilities related to stereotypes makes potential discrepancies concerning whether the group is living up to those responsibilities salient. For those who endorse meritocracy it was predicted that when faced with inequalities that are not directly attributable to discrimination (inconclusive condition) potential group discrepancies will be smaller than when the inequality is unequivocally attributable to discrimination (clear condition). The decreased perceived discrepancies are expected to protect the wellbeing of the low status. Female participants were exposed to one of two articles describing gender inequalities between men and women. After reading about the inequalities, participants described and rated the responsibilities of their group and then filled out a series of questionnaires assessing mood, self-esteem, and attributions to the article. Group discrepancy scores were calculated using the self-ratings participants generated regarding the perceived responsibilities of their group. As predicted, exposure to inconclusive inequality led participants to report smaller group discrepancies the more they endorsed meritocracy. Also as predicted, exposure to clear discrimination led participants to report greater group discrepancies the more they endorsed a meritocracy. Participants also exhibited a positive relationship between meritocracy and wellbeing after reading about inconclusive inequality. However, meritocracy was also positively related to wellbeing for those who read about clear discrimination against their group. While this effect was not predicted nor supported by previous research (Major et al., 2007), the present analysis attempted to shed light by examining the stereotypical content of words participants generated for the discrepancy questionnaire, group identification, and perceived experience with personal and group forms of discrimination. Ultimately, the present study found partial support for the hypotheses and has important implications for future research. The role of group discrepancies in producing this unexpected finding is discussed

Relatively Good or Absolutely Not: Examining Relative vs Absolute Stereotyping in Emotional Reactions to Discrimination

In 1962, Robert Lane argued that members of disadvantaged groups rationalize and defend their relative status positions by endorsing the idea that high status individuals are better than they are. The present work tested Lane\u27s idea by examining whether members of disadvantaged groups will embrace negative group stereotypes relative to other groups in order to protect their negative emotional reactions to discrimination. Three studies examined whether greater endorsement of relative stereotypes would protect women from the negative emotional consequences of exposure to group discrimination. In Study 1, women exposed to discrimination showed less negative (more positive) emotional reactions the more they endorsed stereotypes described as relative to another group. Importantly, this effect was only found for those given the opportunity to endorse relative stereotypes prior to completing measures of well-being, suggesting that relative stereotyping is a strategic response and not an individual difference variable. Study 2 focused solely on discrimination but included a condition where participants were given absolute stereotypes instead of relative stereotypes. This study replicated the pattern of effects found in study 1, supporting a protective function for relative stereotyping and showed that absolute stereotypes are not protective. Study 3 served as a conceptual replication of study 2, where new measures of relative and absolute stereotyping were used. The findings from study 3 and an internal meta-analysis performed on the effect sizes for relative stereotyping across the three studies, support the idea that relative stereotypes serve a protective function in response to the threat of discrimination. Together, these findings suggest that members of disadvantaged groups may endorse negative relative stereotypes in order to protect themselves from negative emotional reactions to discriminatio

Low hepatitis C antibody screening rates among an insured population of Tennessean Baby Boomers.

Chronic Hepatitis C Virus (HCV) infection is common and can cause liver disease and death. Persons born from 1945 through 1965 ("Baby Boomers") have relatively high prevalence of chronic HCV infection, prompting recommendations that all Baby Boomers be screened for HCV. If chronic HCV is confirmed, evaluation for antiviral treatment should be performed. Direct-acting antivirals can cure more than 90% of people with chronic HCV. This sequence of services can be referred to as the HCV "cascade of cure" (CoC). The Tennessee (TN) Department of Health (TDH) and a health insurer with presence in TN aimed to determine the proportion of Baby Boomers who access HCV screening services and appropriately navigate the HCV CoC in TN.TDH surveillance data and insurance claim records were queried to identify the cohort of Baby Boomers eligible for HCV testing. Billing codes and pharmacy records from 2013 through 2015 were used to determine whether HCV screening and other HCV-related services were provided. The proportion of individuals accessing HCV screening and other steps along the HCV CoC was determined. Multivariable analyses were performed to identify factors associated with HCV screening and treatment.Among 501,388 insured Tennessean Baby Boomers, 7% were screened for HCV. Of the 40,019 who received any HCV-related service, 86% were screened with an HCV antibody test, 20% had a confirmatory HCV PCR, 9% were evaluated for treatment, and 4% were prescribed antivirals. Hispanics were more likely to be screened and treated for HCV than non-Hispanic whites. HCV screening was more likely to occur in the Nashville-Davidson region than in other regions of TN, but there were regional variations in HCV treatment.Many insured Tennessean Baby Boomers do not access HCV screening services, despite national recommendations. Demographic and regional differences in uptake along the HCV CoC should inform public health interventions aimed at mitigating the effects of chronic HCV

Speaking under pressure

What can a speech reveal about someone's state? We tested the idea that greater stress reactivity would relate to lower linguistic cognitive complexity while speaking. In Study 1, we tested whether heart rate and emotional stress reactivity to a stressful discussion would relate to lower linguistic complexity. In Studies 2 and 3, we tested whether a greater cortisol response to a standardized stressful task including a speech (Trier Social Stress Test) would be linked to speaking with less linguistic complexity during the task. We found evidence that measures of stress responsivity (emotional and physiological) and chronic stress are tied to variability in the cognitive complexity of speech. Taken together, these results provide evidence that our individual experiences of stress or "stress signatures"-how our body and mind react to stress both in the moment and over the longer term-are linked to how complex our speech under stress

Chronic hepatitis C cascade.

<p>Frequency and proportions of insured Tennessean Baby Boomers accessing various HCV-related services, among those eligible for HCV screening and among those who received any HCV-related service.</p