RECRUITERS' USE OF GPA IN INITIAL SCREENING DECISIONS: HIGHER GPAs DON'T ALWAYS MAKE THE CUT

The relationship between college grade point average (GPA) and recruiters' initial screening decisions was examined using data from 548 job postings in a college recruitment program. Results indicate that in-major grade point average (GPA) is more strongly associated with screening decisions ( p = 0.18, SD_P = 0.200) than is overall GPA ( p = 0.06, SD_P = 0.187), but the magnitudes of the relationships varied across decision sets including a larger number of negative values than would be expected from sampling error alone. Subsequent examination of the bivariate data identified 6 different plot types suggesting that recruiters use a variety of GPA decision rules to initially screen applicants in college recruiting. The most common data plots found in 42% of the decision sets suggests that recruiters do not use GPA in screening decisions. But a surprising 81 of 548 decision sets indicated recruiters selected against applicants with high GPAs. Evidence that organizations recruiting for the same job produced different plot types suggests that the use of GPA data in initial screening decisions may be idiosyncratic to individual recruiters.     

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.     

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.