Idiomatic Communication and Interpersonal Solidarity in Friends’ Relational Cultures

This study examined the relationship of interpersonal solidarity to various aspects of idiomatic communication in friends’ relational cultures. A pilot study determined that the typology of idiom functions used in past investigations of romantic relationships could be extended to friendship. The idioms described functioned to name activities, emotional states, objects, and places; communicate affection; manage confrontations; accomplish greetings and goodbyes; reference the self, partner, or other individuals; issue requests and insults; and denote sexual matters. In the main study, 114 females and 117 males each identified a close same-sex friend, completed the Interpersonal Solidarity Scale, and filled out an idiom report form for each idiom that had emerged in the friendship. The majority of the 1,380 idioms reported were verbal, used in public contexts, and used in more than just the one friendship described. For both sexes, solidarity was positively correlated with five idiom categories: activities, affection, confrontation, nicknames for self, and objects. In addition, solidarity correlated positively with place, requests, nicknames for friend, and sexual references for females and with emotions, greetings/goodbyes, labels for others, and teasing insults for males. For both sexes, solidarity was related to the total number and breadth (diversity) of idioms reported, as well as to other features of friends’ idiomatic codes. A subset of the idiom variables collectively accounted for over one third of the variance in, solidarity. Support was also found for several hypothesized sex differences in the structure and use of idiomatic codes. Associations among idiom function, channel, patterns of use, and relational consequences were also explored.     

Voices,Boxes, and Sources of Messages

Can adults be induced to use social rules distinguishing “self” and “other” to respond to the behaviors of technologies? In a 2×2×2 between-subjects laboratory experiment involving the use of multiple computers with voice output, 88 computer-literate college students used a computer for tutoring and a different computer for testing. The performance of the tutoring session was either praised or criticized (Manipulation 1) in the same voice as the tutoring session or a distinct voice (Manipulation 2) via the computer (box) that performed the tutoring or a distinct computer (box; Manipulation 3). Respondents were shown to use voices but not boxes to distinguish “self” from “other” behavior in applying the social rules “Performance evaluations from others are more accurate than are performance evaluations of self,”“Praise from others is friendlier than praise from self,” and “Criticism from self is friendlier than is criticism from others,” to evaluate the tutoring and evaluation session.     

What Is Music? Is There a Definitive Answer?

Philosophers frequently defend definitions by appealing to intuitions and contemporary folk classificatory norms. I raise methodological concerns that undermine some of these defenses. Focusing on Andrew Kania's recent definition of music, I argue that the way in which it has been developed leads to problems, and I show that a number of other definitions of interest to philosophers of art (and others) run into similar problems.     

Relational mechanisms in the goal pursuit process

Four studies tested a model for goal pursuit, which proposed three relational mechanisms that yield motives for a goal. These motives, in turn, predict goal outcomes, but the association was expected to be stronger among women than among men. Study 1 (n = 116) tested the model for a short‐term, collaborative project between strangers; Study 2 (n = 186) examined parents being motivated by their children to be healthier; Study 3 (n = 124) examined nontraditional college students' career searches; and Study 4 (n = 181) examined young adults' progress toward a self‐improvement goal. Results showed support for the model in all four studies, with the exception that feeling accountable to others was not a consistent predictor of relational motives.     

The Problem of Free Mass: Must Properties Cluster?

Properties come in clusters. It seems impossible, for instance, that a mass could float free, unattached to any other property. David Armstrong takes this as a reductio of the bundle theory and an argument for substrata, while Peter Simons and Arda Denkel reply by supplementing the bundle theory with accounts of property interdependencies. I argue against both views. Virtually all plausible ontologies turn out to be committed to the existence of free masses. I develop and defend the view that the clustering of properties is a mere contingent truth, on grounds that properties can be subtracted one-by-one. This opens the door not just to the (unsupplemented) bundle theory, but also to any plausible account of the relation between objects and properties.