Search

Mothers' and fathers' sex role orientations and employment situations were examined in connection with their involvement in child-oriented activities using a longitudinal research design. During interviews that took place within 3 months of their wedding dates, 34 couples completed questionnaires that measured their sex role attitudes, masculinity-femininity, and their skills and role preferences for performing a number of child-oriented activities. Approximately 1 year later, after the couples had become parents, they were interviewed about their employment situations and again about their child-care skills and role preferences for performing certain child-care tasks. During the 2- to 3-week period following the second interview, the couples were telephoned on 9 occasions and asked to report on the household tasks, leisure activities, and child-oriented activities they had performed during the 24-hour period that preceded each call. The findings showed that mothers' sex role attitudes before their infants' births predicted their role preferences after their babies were born, and these two factors, as well as mothers' involvement in the paid labor force, were related to the extent of their involvement in child-oriented activities. Mothers' masculinity and femininity, however, were unrelated to their parenting behavior. In contrast, fathers' work involvement was related only to the extent of their leisure activities with children. In addition, fathers' role preferences for performing child-care tasks and their perceived skill at such tasks (as measured both before and after their children's births) were related to the overall extent and the nature of their involvement in child-oriented activities. Fathers' role preferences were somewhat stable from before to after children's births, and fathers' preferences before their children were born predicted the mothers' preferences afterward. Neither fathers' sex-role attitudes nor their masculinity or femininity, however, predicted their activities with infants.

Social psychological research on helping has, in part, been concerned with the intervention of bystanders into emergencies. Pertinent empirical literature does not seem to be available on what factors bystanders use to define an emergency nor the effect of such a decision on the rate of helping. A series of four studies was conducted to answer these questions. We found that (a) Emergencies are a subclass of problem situation that usually result from accidents; (b) there is a high degree of agreement concerning what problem situations are definitely an emergency; (c) emergency situations are differentiated from other problem situations by threat of harm or actual harm worsening with time, unavailability of an easy solution to the problem, and necessity of obtaining outside help to solve the problem; (d) disagreement on whether a problem situation is an emergency or not results from differing perceptions of the degree to which threat of harm or actual harm worsens with time; (e) bystanders are more likely to help in emergency than in nonemergency problem situations. The results were interpreted as indicating that the need of the victim is a salient feature used by bystanders in determining whether or not to help.