Incorporating geographic distance into mate preference research: Necessities and luxuries, 2.0

This study (N = 370) examined mate preferences in men and women using the budget allocation paradigm across traits typically studied and the value placed on geographic proximity or propinquity. Importantly, traditionally studied preferences (i.e., physical attractiveness and social status) were seen as priorities, whereas the novel trait of distance was a luxury, suggesting that people were willing to travel to find a partner who satisfies their more important mate preferences. Men valued a short‐term mate who was close to them more than women did. Prior work on mate preferences was replicated in their context‐specific nature as per evolutionary models of mate choice.     

What IS Wrong with Foundationalism is that it Cannot Solve the Epistemic Regress Problem*

There are many things that could be wrong with foundationalism. For example, some have claimed that a so‐called basic belief cannot be both 1) a reason for non‐basic beliefs and 2) such that it cannot be provided with at least prima facie justification.1 If something is a reason, they say, then that something has to be a proposition (or sufficiently proposition‐like) and if it is a proposition (or sufficiently proposition‐like), then it is the kind of thing that requires a reason in order to be even prima facie justified.2 Another reason that some give for rejecting normative foundationalism is that it leads directly to skepticism.3 There is no way, they claim, to move from so‐called basic propositions (typically given as first person introspective reports) to “external world” propositions by employing normatively acceptable principles of reasoning.4 Still others have thought that the invention of a nonrea‐soned reason was as ad hoc as the invention of an unmoved mover.5     

Have Your Cake and Eat It Too: The Old Principal Principle Reconciled with the New*

David Lewis (1980) proposed the Principal Principle (PP) and a “reformulation” which later on he called ‘OP’(Old Principle). Reacting to his belief that these principles run into trouble, Lewis (1994) concluded that they should be replaced with the New Principle (NP). This conclusion left Lewis uneasy, because he thought that an inverse form of NP is “quite messy”, whereas an inverse form of OP, namely the simple and intuitive PP, is “the key to our concept of chance”. I argue that, even if OP should be discarded, PP need not be. Moreover, far from being messy, an inverse form of NP is a simple and intuitive Conditional Principle (CP). Finally, both PP and CP are special cases of a General Principle (GP); it follows that so are PP and NP, which are thus compatible rather than competing.     

KEEN TO HELP? MANAGERS' IMPLICIT PERSON THEORIES AND THEIR SUBSEQUENT EMPLOYEE COACHING

Although coaching can facilitate employee development and performance, the stark reality is that managers often differ substantially in their inclination to coach their subordinates. To address this issue, we draw from and build upon a body of social psychology research that finds that implicit person theories (IPTs) about the malleability of personal attributes (e.g., personality and ability) affect one's willingness to help others. Specifically, individuals holding an "entity theory" that human attributes are innate and unalterable are disinclined to invest in helping others to develop and improve, relative to individuals who hold the "incremental theory" that personal attributes can be developed. Three studies examined how managers' IPTs influence the extent of their employee coaching. First, a longitudinal field study found that managers' IPTs predicted employee evaluations of their subsequent employee coaching. This finding was replicated in a second field study. Third, an experimental study found that using self-persuasion principles to induce incremental IPTs increased entity theorist managers' willingness to coach a poor performing employee, as well as the quantity and quality of their performance improvement suggestions.     

Relational Drawings in Couple Therapy

In couple therapy sessions, partners often get into long and drawn-out discussions, heavy with pain, resentment, and blame. It is vital for the therapist to avoid becoming entangled in these escalating interactions. In this article, as one way of avoiding these interactions, a protocol is proposed of using relational drawings in couple therapy for opening space for new stories. This approach is strongly rooted in extensive therapeutic experience, as well as in dialogical ideas. Not the content of the partners' imagery is central, but rather the dialogical exchange about the drawings. In particular, the focus of the therapist is on the partners' interactions, their hesitations and their surprises. Working in this way opens space for the partners to reflect on what they experience as crucial in their bond. The protocol is illustrated with two detailed case examples.     

PERCEIVED INGROUP AND OUTGROUP PREFERENCE: A LONGITUDINAL CAUSAL INVESTIGATION

Although there has been substantial research on perceptions of preference in hiring, there is considerably less focus on perceptions of preference in organizational activities more generally. Researchers seldom assess perceptions of preference for both historically high- and low-status groups and for both one's own group and others. Using a three-wave longitudinal survey of 1,094 employees, the causal direction between perceived preference and satisfaction with management, moderators of that relationship, and whether responses to perceived preference differed by group were examined. On average, groups perceived more outgroup than ingroup preference. The satisfaction to perceived preference causal direction was significantly stronger than the reverse for outgroup preference, suggesting that increased satisfaction with management leads to decreased future perceptions of outgroup preference more so than vice versa. The relationship between satisfaction with management and perceived outgroup preference was moderated by perceived organizational tolerance of discrimination, suggesting that positive diversity climate can alleviate the negative effects of dissatisfaction with management on perceived outgroup preference.