Are sex differences in nonverbal and verbal behavior generalizable to mentally retarded persons?

Sex differences in three communication behaviors consistently found to be more common among females than males — smiling, gazing at one's partner, and sentence complexity — were examined through analysis of interviews with 78 institutionalized mentally retarded adults. While females were significantly more likely than males to smile or laugh, and tended to use longer, more complex sentences, the commonly observed sex difference in gazing failed to generalize to a retarded sample. These findings clarify limits on the generalizability of sex differences beyond college students and other normal populations.This research was partially supported by a grant to the Texas Tech University Research and Training Center in Mental Retardation from the Rehabilitation Services Administration, Department of Health Education, and Welfare.     

Evaluating employee assistance programs. A review of methods, outcomes, and future directions

Renewed interest in assisting troubled employees has led to an upsurge in the development of employee assistance programs, coupled with demands for demonstrable effectiveness. This review examines the nature and scope of these programs, their administrative and methodological context, and the types and outcomes of evaluation studies conducted thus far. Proposals for improving future investigations through a number of different approaches and strategies are then made.     

Evaluating alternative approaches to strategic planning

The question which, unfortunately, often goes unanswered, is whether a company's process of corporate planning is optimal. Furthermore, even if they wished to answer such a question there is little in the literature which can provide them with a direct, and explicit evaluative model. This paper examines the development of planning and the many different contributors towards its theoretical underpinning. Whilst recognizing that planning is a field which is a ‘semantic's jungle’ the authors carefully pick their way through the mine-field of misunderstanding and misquotation and clearly establish a base-line for evaluation and indeed propose a detailed methodology. It is hoped that this paper will be a fore-runner of many which will assist the executive in his important evaluative role concerning alternative planning approaches.