Search

Cross-tabulation of data from 2,713 employees and a matched sample of their employers found the following: males more than females match their employers' assessments of mobility potential of their jobs; those who match their employers, whether mobile or not, have similar levels of job satisfaction; and combination of both attitudinal and situational barriers is required to explain job satisfaction. (SK)

Affiliation, loss of affiliation, and the associated effects on homeless individuals were assessed via a survey of 230 homeless adults in Florida. Women accompanied by dependent children, unaccompanied women, and unaccompanied men were compared regarding levels of affiliation and associations among affiliation, self-esteem, and locus of control. The women accompanied by children maintained more family contacts and had higher levels of self-esteem; for that group, locus of control was more external than for either the unaccompanied women or the unaccompanied men. Women with children also had the lowest median number of days homeless and the highest average monthly incomes., A decade of research on homelessness has yielded little consensus on its causes and even less agreement on appropriate solutions. Structural causes (e.g., a shortage of affordable housing) and personal [...]

Job satisfaction is affected by employees' expectations of professional mobility, actual promotion opportunities and the positive features of the job. A study was conducted to determine the most important components of employee job satisfaction. The study entailed a comparison of employers and employees' contrasting views about job promotion and satisfaction. Findings revealed that job satisfaction was mainly related to the positive features of the job and the ability of the employee to adjust to the work environment.

The justifications scientists use when starting new journals often rely on ‘indigenous theories’ which represent their particular cognitive communities. In an analysis of new journal editorials, this paper examines these indigenous theories, together with the images of scientific community they contain, and compares them with the images of science which exist in the sociological literature. As evidenced in the editorials, scientists share with sociologists a concern for the question of whether the manner in which science grows is prescriptive for, or creates obligations for, the community of researchers or instead, the community of researchers constitutes, or produces by conscious efforts, what comes to be accepted as authoritative in the particular scientific community. Douglas' grid/group model is used as an interpretive tool to map the two dimensions of concern in this question and suggests some differences between discipline groups and some changes over time. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]