When evaluators disagree: Perplexities and perspectives

It is often held that one function served by evaluation in the fields of education and social policy generally is to assist the administrator in the making of rational decisions. If, under these circumstances, several evaluators come to different conclusions about a research proposal or a pilot social program, on what basis can the administrator make his decision? He can hardly be expected to resolve any technical dispute between the experts who are his advisors. After discussing the various functions of the evaluation process, and analyzing some of the factors that may lead to such lack of consensus amongst experts, the paper recommends that if the administrator is concerned solely with making a rationally defensible decision, then he should select his evaluating panel so that all members share the same theoretical orientation.     

To Flirt or Not to Flirt? Sexual Power at the Bargaining Table

We begin by exploring the lay belief that women can use flirtation to their advantage in professional contexts and contrast it with trained negotiators' negative views on flirtation. We then examine the impact of flirtation on negotiators' impression formation. We explore whether a flirtatious style aids women in the trade-off they often face between perceived likability and perceived competence. We discover both an upside and a downside to flirting at the bargaining table. Although flirtation appears to be positively related to women's likability, negotiators who flirted were judged to be less authentic than those who refrained from exercising their sexual power.     

Assessing callous–unemotional traits in adolescent offenders: Validation of the Inventory of Callous–Unemotional Traits

The presence of callous–unemotional (CU) traits designates an important subgroup of antisocial youth. To improve upon existing measures, the Inventory of Callous–Unemotional Traits (ICU) was developed to provide an efficient, reliable, and valid assessment of CU traits in samples of youth. The current study tests the factor structure and correlates of the ICU scale in a sample (n = 248) of juvenile offenders (188 boys, 60 girls) between the ages of 12 and 20 (M = 15.47, SD = 1.37). Confirmatory factor analyses are consistent with the presence of three independent factors (i.e., Uncaring, Callousness, and Unemotional) that relate to a higher-order callous–unemotional dimension. Also, CU traits overall showed associations with aggression, delinquency, and both psychophysiological and self-report indices of emotional reactivity. There were some important differences across the three facets of the ICU in their associations with these key external criteria.