Friend support of dating relationships: Comparing relationship type,friend and partner perspectives

This study assessed the role of friends in dating relationships, comparing on–off and noncyclical relationships. Participants (N = 460) reported on the friend most familiar with their current or recent dating relationship. We examined friend support of and influence on the dating relationship and the influence of the dating relationship on the friendship. Participants' friends (N = 98) completed a similar survey to compare participants' and friends' perceptions. On–off partners reported less support for the dating relationship than did noncyclical partners. On–off partners also reported greater openness, whereas friends reported greater frequency, of communicating about the dating relationship. Friends also felt the relationship changed the friendship more; friends of on–off partners in particular reported more positive change to their friendship.     

Effects of Quantity and Quality Instructions on Brainstorming

One of the basic presumptions of brainstorming is that a focus on generating a large number of ideas enhances both the number of ideas generated and the number of good ideas (original and useful). Prior research has not clearly demonstrated the utility of such a quantity focus in comparison to a condition in which quantity is not emphasized. There have been some comparisons of the impact of quantity and quality focus on the number and quality of ideas, but the results of these comparisons have been mixed. The present study examined brainstorming with four different types of instructions: no specific focus, a quantity goal, a quality goal, or a joint quantity and quality goal. The quantity goal condition was superior to the other three conditions in leading to the generation of more ideas and more good ideas. These findings support Osborn's (1953) assumption that a quantity focus is most beneficial for brainstorming.     

Defending Luck Egalitarianism

abstract    This article defends luck egalitarianism as an interpretation of the egalitarian ideal against two major criticisms levelled against it by Elizabeth Anderson — that it is trapped in the distributive paradigm, and that it treats the victims of bad option luck too harshly to be considered an egalitarian theory. Against the first criticism, I argue that luck egalitarianism will condemn non-material inequalities and injustices if an appropriate conception of well-being is adopted. I demonstrate this by showing how the approach is sensitive to the five faces of oppression developed by Iris Young. Although the second criticism is more troubling, it does not defeat luck egalitarianism, either. I will show that few of the inequalities that arise in the real world result from option luck. Further, if cases do occur, rather than abandoning the theory, the best response is to combine luck egalitarianism with another egalitarian principle that will ensure that the basic needs of all citizens are satisfied. The paper concludes by defending the appeal of the distinction between option luck and brute luck, in light of the preceding discussion.