Previous research demonstrates expectations predict actual performance. These studies evaluated the influence of other variables, specifically task sex orientation, biological gender, and sex-role identification, on performance expectancies. Two studies investigated sex differences in performance expectancies: Study 1 used a task normatively favoring males; Study 2 used a task normatively unbiased by gender. Subjects were 207 undergraduates, approximately equal numbers of males and females. Experimenter sex was controlled. Performance expectancies were influenced by interactions of task sex orientation with biological gender and task sex orientation with sex-role identification, but these variables became secondary to personal experience. These findings were interpreted as having implications on initial choice and consequent involvement in novel activities and situations.

The objectives of this investigation were to develop, implement, and determine the effects of rational behavior therapy for residents in a retirement community. The question addressed was, "Will rational behavior therapy, relative to a discussion group and control group, exhibit significant changes in level of rational thinking and depression?" Drawing upon a cognitive theory of depression relevant to the aged population and upon rational behavior therapy literature, it was hypothesized that short-term rational behavior therapy intervention would be significantly related to a modification of belief systems and a decrease in depression. The participants were residents of two retirement communities. There were 25 subjects who completed the study through posttest assessment. These subjects were randomly assigned to three groups and assessed at pretest, posttest, and follow-up. The experimental group did not experience the hypothesized significant increase in level of rational thinking and decrease in level of depression. Possible explanations are given for lack of expected effects. Overall, the discussion group had more significant increases in rational thinking than the experimental and control groups.

Superiority, control, and dominance theories of disparaging humor were reviewed, and sexist humor was studied as representative of the field. The effects of educational level and sex of subject on the judgment of humor in sexist material were investigated, utilizing a set of 50 cartoons and jokes devised to approximate overlapping standard curves on the dimensions sexist content and humor. Subjects were 71 males and 73 females, comprising 84 undergraduates and 60 doctoral graduate students. Each subject performed a forced Q sort of the jokes, with 104 rating for humor and 40 rating for sexism to establish content weights. Subjects' rankings, age, sex, and educational level were recorded upon completion of the task. Significant negative correlations were found between educational level and judgment of humor in sexist material, and female subjects judged sexist material to be significantly less funny than males. Some support was indicated for existing theories.