SAGE Journal Articles
Click on the following links. Please note these will open in a new window.
This policy study examined the differences in student achievement scores in reading and mathematics in selected public middle schools of choice and in traditional public middle schools with similar demographics and socioeconomic characteristics in a southeastern school district in North Carolina during the 1997-1998, 1998-1999, and 1999-2000 school years. The purpose was to determine whether there were significant differences in academic achievement between students in selected public middle schools of choice and students in traditional public middle schools as measured by the end-of-grade test scores in reading and mathematics. The result from the one-way ANOVA showed that there were significant differences in academic achievement between students in selected public middle schools of choice and students in traditional public middle schools as measured by the end-of-grade tests in reading and mathematics.
This research qualifies a social psychological truism: that people like others who like them (the reciprocity principle). College women viewed the Facebook profiles of four male students who had previously seen their profiles. They were told that the men (a) liked them a lot, (b) liked them only an average amount, or (c) liked them either a lot or an average amount (uncertain condition). Comparison of the first two conditions yielded results consistent with the reciprocity principle. Participants were more attracted to men who liked them a lot than to men who liked them an average amount. Results for the uncertain condition, however, were consistent with research on the pleasures of uncertainty. Participants in the uncertain condition were most attracted to the men—even more attracted than were participants who were told that the men liked them a lot. Uncertain participants reported thinking about the men the most, and this increased their attraction toward the men.
Despite disparities in the conceptualization of work–life balance (WLB) and work–life harmony (WLH) in the literature, there remains no evidence till date to validate these differences. Furthermore, there are currently no insights that shed light on the relationship between work–life initiatives and key business strategies of contemporary organizations. Hence, the current study investigated the differences between the constructs of WLB and WLH using a cognitive dissonance approach and assessed the impact of work–life interventions, based on these approaches, on individual creativity at work. Hundred participants, age ranging from 18 to 32 years (M = 23.94, SD = 3.87), with at least 6 months of working experience were recruited. Using an online questionnaire, participants were randomly assigned into WLB (n = 55) or WLH (n = 45) conditions. Participants were tasked to complete pre- and post-intervention measures of individual creativity, as well as a manipulation check using a cognitive dissonance scale. Results showed that participants in the WLB condition elicit higher levels of cognitive dissonance compared with participants in the WLH condition. This indicates an implicit difference in the constructs of WLB and harmony. Second, findings also suggest that work–life interventions adopting a WLH approach will have a more positive impact on individuals’ creativity at work compared with interventions targeted at achieving balance. Research, practical, and cultural implications of the findings are discussed in the article.