Despite a large body of research on stereotypes, there have been relatively few empirical investigations of the content of stereotypes about Native Americans. The primary goal of this research was to systematically explore the content of cultural stereotypes about Native Americans and how stereotypes about Native Americans differ in comparison to stereotypes about Asian Americans and African Americans. Building on a classic paradigm (Katz and Braly, 1933), participants were asked to identify from a list of 145 adjectives those words associated with cultural stereotypes of Native Americans and words associated with stereotypes of Asian Americans (Study 1) or African Americans (Study 2). The adjectives associated with stereotypes about Native Americans were significantly less favorable than the adjectives associated with stereotypes about Asian Americans, but were significantly more favorable than the adjectives associated with stereotypes about African Americans. Stereotypes about Native Americans, Asian Americans and African Americans were also compared along the dimensions of the stereotype content model (SCM; Fiske, et al., 2002), which proposes that stereotypes about social groups are based on the core dimensions of perceived competence, warmth, status, and competitiveness. Native Americans were rated as less competent, less of a source of competition, and lower in social status than Asian Americans, and less competent and lower in social status than African Americans. No significant differences were found in perceived warmth across the studies. Combined, these findings contribute to a better understanding of stereotypes about Native Americans and how they may differ from stereotypes about other racial groups.

The long-term impacts of bullying, stress, sexual prejudice and stigma against members of the LGBTQ population are both worrisome and expansive. Bullying among adolescents is one of the clearest and most well documented risks to adolescent health(Nansel et al., 2004; Wilkins-Shurmer et al., 2003; Wolke, Woods, Bloomfield, & Karstadt, 2001) The present study examined the influence of sexual orientation to severity of bullying experience, coping strategies, emotion regulation and the interaction of gender role endorsements in relation to coping and emotion regulation strategy prediction. Extensive research exists to support high victimization experiences in LGBT individuals (Birkett et al., 2009; Robert H DuRant et al., n.d.; Kimmel & Mahler, 2003; Mishna et al., 2009) and separately, research also indicates support of gender role non conformity, social stress and long term coping skills (Galambos et al., 1990; Sánchez et al., 2010; Tolman, Striepe, & Harmon, 2003b). The goal of this study was to extend previous finding to find a relationship between the three variables: sexual orientation, victimization history, and non-traditional gender role endorse and utilizing those traits as predictors of future emotion regulation and coping strategies. The data suggests that as a whole LGBT identified individuals experience bullying at a significantly higher rate than their heterosexual counterparts. By utilizing gender role endorsement the relationship can be expanded to predict maladaptive emotion regulation skills, higher rates of perceived stress and increased fear of negative evaluation in lesbian women and gay men. The data was consistent for all hypotheses in the model: sexual identity significantly predicts higher bully score and atypical gender role endorsement is a moderator of victimization in LGBT individuals. The findings indicate high masculine endorsement in lesbians and high feminine endorsement in gay males can significantly predict victimization and maladaptive coping skills, emotion dysregulation, increased stress, and lack of emotional awareness.

Over the past several years, engagement and embeddedness have become popular research topics for academics and practitioners alike. Research has demonstrated associations between these constructs and a variety of predictors and outcomes. Prior research has not, however, placed enough emphasis on the roles of employee type, industry type, and work setting in determining predictors and outcomes. Additionally, the relative roles of engagement and embeddedness in predicting outcomes have not been thoroughly investigated. This study investigated the predictors and outcomes of engagement and embeddedness among unskilled, production line employees working in food processing in the agricultural industry by conducting a survey of employees and their supervisors. Employees answered questions about personality, motivation, satisfaction, engagement, and embeddedness while supervisors answered questions about each employee's performance. Results suggest that both engagement and embeddedness predict employee satisfaction and that engagement does so more strongly, both of which support prior research. However, results contradict prior research by suggesting that embeddedness is strongly predicted by traits internal to the employee while engagement is not, and neither engagement nor embeddedness significantly predicts employee performance. Further, the findings suggest that employees working in different settings and industries may experience work differently, and the measurements used to understand their experiences should reflect these differences.