The explanatory cornerstone of most currently viable social theories is a strict cost-gain assumption. The clearest formal explication of this view is contained in subjective expected utility models (SEU), in which individuals are assumed to scale their subjective likelihood estimates of decisional consequences and the personalistic worth or utility of each outcome in a choice set. In this study, subjects were trained on assumptionally satisfactory probability and utility scales, and asked to play a central actor in a number of uncertain decision situations modified to include numerical estimates of decisional components. Response format (probability or utility estimation), sex of subjects, order of items, and sex role of items (male or female) were varied in a repeated measures design. Results indicated subjects made SEU-consistent rational decisions over items, but that males responding to female-appropriate decision situations did not. The results supported the validity of SEU models as a base for social theory and replicated two earlier experiments. (Author/PC)