[iv] The University of Oregon McNair Research Journal

The University of Oregon McNair Research Journal [v]

[vi] The University of Oregon McNair Research Journal

The University of Oregon McNair Research Journal [1]

[2] The University of Oregon McNair Research Journal

The University of Oregon McNair Research Journal [3]

[4] The University of Oregon McNair Research Journal

The University of Oregon McNair Research Journal [5]

[6] The University of Oregon McNair Research Journal

The University of Oregon McNair Research Journal [7]

[8] The University of Oregon McNair Research Journal

The University of Oregon McNair Research Journal [9]

[10] The University of Oregon McNair Research Journal

The University of Oregon McNair Research Journal [11]

[12] The University of Oregon McNair Research Journal

The University of Oregon McNair Research Journal [13]

[14] The University of Oregon McNair Research Journal

The University of Oregon McNair Research Journal [15]

[16] The University of Oregon McNair Research Journal

The University of Oregon McNair Research Journal [17]

[18] The University of Oregon McNair Research Journal

The University of Oregon McNair Research Journal [19]

[20] The University of Oregon McNair Research Journal

The University of Oregon McNair Research Journal [21]

[22] The University of Oregon McNair Research Journal

The University of Oregon McNair Research Journal [23]

[24] The University of Oregon McNair Research Journal

The University of Oregon McNair Research Journal [25]

Figure2:ExamplesofDigitRatio

[26] The University of Oregon McNair Research Journal

The University of Oregon McNair Research Journal [27]

TABLE1:DigitRatiosforEachSubject

Subject/sex 1/male 2/Female 3/Male 4/Male 5/Female

Age 2 18 3 18 3 18 2 18 2 18

DigitRatio 0.86 0.93 0.84 0.95 ** 0.98 0.91 0.92 0.90 0.91

Subject/sex 6/Male 7/Female 8/Female 9/Male 10/Female

Age 3 18 2 17 3 18 3 18 3 20

DigitRatio 0.88 0.93 0.92 0.93 0.96 0.94 0.89 0.90 0.91 0.99

Subject/sex 11/Male 12/Male 13/Female 14/Male 15/Male

Age 2 17 3 18 4 17 3 18 2 18

DigitRatio 0.89 0.91 0.89 0.87 0.92 0.97 0.92 0.92 0.89 0.91

Subject/sex 16/Female 17/Male 18/Female 19/Female 20/Male

Age 3 17 3 17 4 17 3 18 4 18

DigitRatio 0.94 0.94 0.82 0.96 0.92 0.96 0.91 0.93 0.89 0.93

Subject/sex 21/Female 22/Male 23/Female 24/Female 25/Male

Age 3 18 3 18 2 18 3 18 3 18

DigitRatio 0.91 0.92 0.89 0.93 0.94 0.93 0.91 0.96 0.91 0.86

Subject/sex 26/Male 27/Female 28/Male 29/Female 30/Female

Age 3 16 3 18 3 18 2 18 3 18

DigitRatio 0.94 0.93 0.90 0.95 0.88 0.92 0.86 0.94 0.91 0.95**Denotesincompleteinformation

[28] The University of Oregon McNair Research Journal

The University of Oregon McNair Research Journal [29]

[30] The University of Oregon McNair Research Journal

The University of Oregon McNair Research Journal [31]

[32] The University of Oregon McNair Research Journal

The University of Oregon McNair Research Journal [33]

[34] The University of Oregon McNair Research Journal

The University of Oregon McNair Research Journal [35]

[36] The University of Oregon McNair Research Journal

The University of Oregon McNair Research Journal [37]

[38] The University of Oregon McNair Research Journal

The University of Oregon McNair Research Journal [39]

[40] The University of Oregon McNair Research Journal

The University of Oregon McNair Research Journal [41]

[42] The University of Oregon McNair Research Journal

The University of Oregon McNair Research Journal [43]

[44] The University of Oregon McNair Research Journal

The University of Oregon McNair Research Journal [45]

[46] The University of Oregon McNair Research Journal

The University of Oregon McNair Research Journal [47]

[48] The University of Oregon McNair Research Journal

The University of Oregon McNair Research Journal [49]

[50] The University of Oregon McNair Research Journal

The University of Oregon McNair Research Journal [51]

[52] The University of Oregon McNair Research Journal

The University of Oregon McNair Research Journal [53]

[54] The University of Oregon McNair Research Journal

The University of Oregon McNair Research Journal [55]

[56] The University of Oregon McNair Research Journal

The University of Oregon McNair Research Journal [57]

[58] The University of Oregon McNair Research Journal

Figure 1. Model of Antecedent and Response-Focused

Emotion Regulation (Gross, 1998).

The University of Oregon McNair Research Journal [59]

Figure 2. Model of Emotion Regulation in Adulthood (Gross, 2001).

[60] The University of Oregon McNair Research Journal

The University of Oregon McNair Research Journal [61]

[62] The University of Oregon McNair Research Journal

The University of Oregon McNair Research Journal [63]

[64] The University of Oregon McNair Research Journal

The University of Oregon McNair Research Journal [65]

[66] The University of Oregon McNair Research Journal

The University of Oregon McNair Research Journal [67]

[68] The University of Oregon McNair Research Journal

The University of Oregon McNair Research Journal [69]

[70] The University of Oregon McNair Research Journal

The University of Oregon McNair Research Journal [71]

[72] The University of Oregon McNair Research Journal

The University of Oregon McNair Research Journal [73]

[74] The University of Oregon McNair Research Journal

The University of Oregon McNair Research Journal [75]

[76] The University of Oregon McNair Research Journal

The University of Oregon McNair Research Journal [77]

0.22

-0.30

0.00 0.00

-0.4

-0.3

-0.2

-0.1

0

0.1

0.2

0.3

Low Suppression High Suppression

Co

ns T

arg

et

(z-s

co

re)

Chart 1: Interaction between standardized suppression

and condition on standardized target conscientiousness

(N = 255).

LGD (Leaderless Group

Discussion)

Disclosure (Self

Disclosure Group)

Table 1: BFI and Emotion Regulation Correlations Matrix

Extraversion Agreeablenes

s

Openness Conscientiousness Neuroticism

Suppression -.47* -.16* -.14* -.18* .12*

Reappraisal .14* .19* .10 .18* -.36*

N = 255 *p < .05

[78] The University of Oregon McNair Research Journal

Table 2: Coefficients of the relationship between self scores with BFI, emotion

regulation, perceiver, and target scores

Outcome Predictors t

Model 1

Reappraisal

Suppression

.07

-.31

1.17

-5.10*

Model 2

BFI Extraversion

Reappraisal

Suppression

.55

.03

-.06

-5.19*

9.49

-1.04 Extraversion

Model 3

Perceiver Score of Extraversion

Target Score of Extraversion

Reappraisal

Suppression

.18

.41

.03

-.19

3.36*

7.41*

.58

-3.46*

Model 1

Reappraisal

Suppression

-.15

-.15

.88

-2.45*

Model 2

BFI Agreeableness

Reappraisal

Suppression

.44

-.02

-.09

7.62*

-.31

-1.57 Agreeableness

Model 3

Perceiver Score of Agreeableness

Target Score of Agreeableness

Reappraisal

Suppression

.30

.16

.03

-.12

4.98*

2.63

.46

-2.03

Model 1

Reappraisal

Suppression

.05

-.09

.71

-2.73*

Model 2

BFI Openness

Reappraisal

Suppression

.57

-.00

-.10

10.91*

-.08

-1.91 Openness

Model 3

Perceiver Score of Openness

Target Score of Openness

Reappraisal

Suppression

.17

.25

.05

-.13

2.83*

4.13*

.88

-2.22*

The University of Oregon McNair Research Journal [79]

Outcome Predictors t

Model 1

Reappraisal

Suppression

.08

-.08

1.24

-1.30

Model 2

BFI Conscientiousness

Reappraisal

Suppression

.50

.01

-.01

8.97*

.11

-.12 Conscientiousness

Model 3

Perceiver Score of Conscientiousness

Target Score of Conscientiousness

Reappraisal

Suppression

.30

.24

.03

-.07

5.05*

4.02*

.57

-1.25

Model 1

Reappraisal

Suppression

-.10

.16

-1.43

2.60*

Model 2

BFI Neuroticism

Reappraisal

Suppression

.38

.04

.14

6.10*

.60

2.33* Neuroticism

Model 3

Perceiver Score of Neuroticism

Target Score of Neuroticism

Reappraisal

Suppression

.17

.31

-.09

.11

2.94*

5.20*

-1.53

1.77

N = 255 *p < .05

[80] The University of Oregon McNair Research Journal

Table 3: Coefficients of relationship between perceiver scores with

emotion regulation, BFI, and self scores

Outcome Predictors t

Model 1

Reappraisal

Suppression

.06

-.09

.90

-1.47

Model 2

BFI Extraversion

Reappraisal

Suppression

.20

.04

-.01

2.90*

.65

-.36

Extraversion

Model 3

Self Score of Extraversion

Reappraisal

Suppression

.29

.04

-.00

4.59*

.59

-.06

Model 1

Reappraisal

Suppression

.08

-.00

1.29

-.02

Model 2

BFI Agreeableness

Reappraisal

Suppression

.00

.05

.02

.17*

.83

.38

Agreeableness

Model 3

Self Score of Agreeableness

Reappraisal

Suppression

.36

.62

.05

6.00*

1.04

.89

Model 1

Reappraisal

Suppression

-.07

-.77

-1.02

-1.21

Model 2

BFI Openness

Reappraisal

Suppression

.04

-.07

-.07

.64

-1.07

-1.12

Openness

Model 3

Self score of Openness

Reappraisal

Suppression

.22

-.08

-.04

3.48*

-1.2

-.63

The University of Oregon McNair Research Journal [81]

Outcome Predictors t

Model 1

Reappraisal

Suppression

.11

.05

1.70

.75

Model 2

BFI Conscientiousness

Reappraisal

Suppression

.14

.08

.07

2.15*

1.37

1.07

Conscientiousness

Model 3

Self Score of Conscientiousness

Reappraisal

Suppression

.33

.08

.08

5.53*

1.35

1.24

Model 1

Reappraisal

Suppression

-.10

.02

-1.55

.32

Model 2

BFI Neuroticism

Reappraisal

Suppression

.06

-.08

.02

.91

-1.16

.25

Neuroticism

Model 3

Self Score of Neuroticism

Reappraisal

Suppression

.22

-.08

-.02

3.49*

-1.30

-.24

N = 255 *p < .05

[82] The University of Oregon McNair Research Journal

Table 4: Coefficients of relationship between target scores with

emotion regulation, BFI, and self scores

Outcome Predictors t

Model 1

Reappraisal

Suppression

.07

-.25

1.19

-4.05*

Model 2

BFI Extraversion

Reappraisal

Suppression

.37

.04

-.09

5.63*

.76

-1.31

Extraversion

Model 3

Self Score Extraversion

Reappraisal

Suppression

.47

.04

-.11

8.15*

.73

-1.84

Model 1

Reappraisal

Suppression

.02

-.20

.35

-3.20*

Model 2

BFI Agreeableness

Reappraisal

Suppression

.10

.01

-.19

1.54

.09

-2.95*

Agreeableness

Model 3

Self Score Agreeableness

Reappraisal

Suppression

.03

.01

-.16

.25*

.13

-2.63*

Model 1

Reappraisal

Suppression

.02

-1.00

.33

-1.61

Model 2

BFI Openness

Reappraisal

Suppression

.27

-.00

-.07

4.37*

.06

-1.11

Openness

Model 3

Self Score Openness

Reappraisal

Suppression

.28

.01

-.05

4.62

.12

-.87

The University of Oregon McNair Research Journal [83]

Outcome Predictors t

Model 1

Reappraisal

Suppression

.06

-.10

.92

-1.53

Model 2

BFI Conscientiousness

Reappraisal

Suppression

.19

.03

-.07

2.94*

.50

-.11

Conscientiousness

Model 3

Self Score Conscientiousness

Reappraisal

Suppression

.28

.04

-.07

4.58*

.60

-1.22

Model 1

Reappraisal

Suppression

.06

.18

.89

2.82*

Model 2

BFI Neuroticism

Reappraisal

Suppression

.08

.08

.17

1.26

1.26

2.73*

Neuroticism

Model 3

Self Score Neuroticism

Reappraisal

Suppression

.33

.09

.12

5.55*

1.43

2.05*

N = 255 *p < .05

Congress established TRiO programs to provideeducational opportunities for all Americans regardless of race, ethnic background, or economic circumstances. While federal financial aid programs help students overcome financial barriers to attend college, TRiO programs help students overcome class, social, and cultural barriers to succeed academically. The UO has been awarded two TRiO programsStudent Support Services and the McNair Scholars Program.

The McNair Scholars Program is made possible through a grant from the U.S. Department of Education awarded to the University Teaching and Learning Center (TLC) and substantial institutional commitment (62% federally funded; 38% institutional support).