Excuses,Excuses: Self-Handicapping in an Australian Adolescent Sample

The purpose of the present study was to examine gender differences in the self-handicapping tendencies of a sample of 337 Australian school attending adolescents, who were aged between 15 and 19 years. Self-handicapping, as measured by the shortened Self-Handicapping Scale, was examined in relation to self-esteem, performance attributions, coping strategies, and the potential behavioral self-handicaps of reduced study hours and inefficient study habits. Girls scored significantly higher on the Self-Handicapping Scale and endorsed using emotional and illness related excuses significantly more often than boys. High self-handicapping scores independently predicted lower study hours for boys, and were associated with less efficient study for girls. Coping and attributional predictors of self-handicapping were found to be rumination, luck attribution, and poor active coping strategies for boys, and ability attributions, behavioral disengagement, instrumental support, and poor active coping strategies for girls.     

Modeling Other-Regarding Preferences and an Experimental Test

Behavior inconsistent with self-interest has beenobserved in many contexts. We argue thatmodels designed to cope with theseanomalies are inadequate to deal with avariety of social values. Our extension ofthe Fehr & Schmidt `inequity aversion'model is applied to results from dictatorexperiments in which the money to bedivided is generated by the efforts ofpaired individuals in either one or tworooms. This production leads to sharingbehavior qualitatively different from thatfound in other dictator experiments. Thepattern of sharing can be explained byentitlements, equity, and the credibilityof the experiment.     

Federal policy mandating safer cigarettes: a hypothetical simulation of the anticipated population health gains or losses.

If manufacturing a safer cigarette is technically possible--an open question--then mandating that tobacco manufacturers improve the safety of cigarettes would likely have both positive and negative implications for the nation's health. On the one hand, removing toxins may reduce the incidence of smoking-related diseases and premature mortality in smokers. On the other hand, smokers might be less inclined to quit, those who have quit might resume the habit, and youth who have never smoked will have one less reason to avoid tobacco use. To assess the expected population health impacts of a legislative or regulatory mandate, we created the Tobacco Policy Model, a system dynamics computer simulation model. The model relies on secondary data and simulates the U.S. population over time spans as long as 50 years. Our simulation results reveal that even if requiring cigarettes to be safer makes smoking more attractive and increases tobacco use, a net gain in population health is still possible.