Comparing several robust tests of stochastic equality with ordinally scaled variables and small to moderate sized samples

In a comparison of 2 treatments, if outcome scores are denoted by X in 1 condition and by Y in the other, stochastic equality is defined as P(X < Y) = P(X > Y). Tests of stochastic equality can be affected by characteristics of the distributions being compared, such as heterogeneity of variance. Thus, various robust tests of stochastic equality have been proposed and are evaluated here using a Monte Carlo study with sample sizes ranging from 10 to 30. Three robust tests are identified that perform well in Type I error rates and power except when extremely skewed data co-occur with very small n. When tests of stochastic equality might be preferred to tests of means is also considered.     

Young Tennis Players’ Competitive Task Involvement and Performance: The Role of Goal Orientations,Contextual Motivational Climate,And Coach-Initiated Motivational Climate

The purpose of this study was to examine the role of situational and dispositional factors in contributing to competitive task involvement and performance in young tennis players. One hundred fifty-one adolescent tennis players and their coaches participated in the study. Participants responded to instruments measuring pre-game dispositional goal orientations and perceptions of the motivational climate and post-game task involvement in the competition by assessing concentration, loss of self-consciousness, and autotelic experience, perceptions of coach-initiated motivational climate in competition, and self-evaluation of game performance. In addition, coaches evaluated the players’ performance. Results showed that task involvement was predicted by players’ perceptions of a coach-initiated learning motivational climate in competition. Loss of self-consciousness was predicted by the players’ perceptions of a coach-initiated performance climate in competition. Finally, coaches’ and players’ assessment of performance were predicted by autotelic experience, concentration, and by perception of coach-initiated learning and performance orientation in competition.     

Are future generations that belong to language minorities entitled to group rights?

In this article, I investigate to what extent future generations that belong to language minorities are entitled to group rights that protect their linguistic identity. In particular, I assess whether these future generations are entitled to assistance rights, symbolic claims, self-government rights and exemptions from the law. To address this I outline three arguments supporting group rights for current generations and raise the question of whether these arguments, which are true for current generations, will also be true for future generations. The answer defends the entitlement of future generations to group rights against two counterarguments. The first is that future generations have no interest in preserving their language and therefore there is no normative justification for group rights. The second is that there is a duty to eliminate group rights in order to avoid malign consequences of these rights for future generations.