Friends with benefits relationships (FWBRs) uniquely combine friendship with sexual activity but differ from romantic relationships in that they may be less likely to be exclusive or long lasting. A longitudinal analysis of the trajectory of FWBRs is presented, in which participants in FWBRs at Time 1 reported on their relationship outcomes at Time 2 (N = 192). Results demonstrated that a plurality of FWBRs transitioned into having no relationship of any kind at Time 2 (31%). Those who wanted their FWBR to transition into a friendship typically obtained that outcome (59%), whereas those who wanted to transition into a romantic relationship did not (15%). Time 2 relationship status predictors and further implications of FWBR trajectories are discussed.
Child death review teams (CDRTs) focus on the prevention of child deaths, but a comprehensive understanding of their activities is lacking. This exploratory study addressed this gap through a qualitative analysis of reported CDRT activities using the "spectrum of prevention" framework. We collected state-level CDRT reports published 2006-2015, recorded their activities (n = 193), and coded them using the "spectrum of prevention" framework. The highest percentage (64.2%) of activities was categorized under "fostering coalitions and networks." We recommend that CDRTs increase their reporting of activities so others can better understand their potential impact on preventing child deaths.
Cognitive complexity refers to open-minded, flexible, multidimensional thinking. An individual demonstrating high complexity interprets nuance, thinks about multiple perspectives, distinguishes among ideas, and considers their connections. Conversely, cognitive simplicity involves more concrete information processing wherein an individual may gravitate toward a singular perspective without recognizing alternatives or nuances. Cognitive complexity is a multifaceted construct that has been conceptualized as both a personality trait and a flexible information processing system that changes across situations. This “trait versus state” distinction has led to a wide array of measurements that can be broadly categorized by three distinct methodological approaches: (a) self-report measures, (b) behavioral measures, and (c) language content analysis. Having multiple and often divergent measures of the same construct can pose challenges in some regards, yet it also provides researchers flexibility in how to examine questions at the intersection of politics and cognition. Focal areas of inquiry center around the causes and consequences of cognitive complexity as they relate to political ideology, political attitudes and behavior, and political peace and conflict, among other political dynamics. One of the dominating questions that has driven theory and research in political psychology concerns political ideological differences in cognitive complexity. Research comparing cognitive complexity across the political spectrum suggests political moderates are generally more complex than both conservatives and liberals, whereas conservatives tend to be less complex than political liberals. The relationship between cognitive complexity and political ideology is qualified by several factors, such as the type of complexity measurement used and the topic under consideration. Other research finds that individuals seeking power, such as candidates campaigning for election or advocates fighting for political change, will generally find more success in cognitively simple strategies (e.g., using simple rather than complex communication). Maintaining positions of political power, on the other hand, demands more complexity. These findings have implications that extend beyond elections and governance, some of which are relevant to political peace and conflict. For example, research finds that cognitive complexity is generally associated with peace, and simplicity with violence. Several avenues for future research exist in both theoretical and applied disciplines. One of many possibilities involves the relationship between cognitive complexity and political division and distrust. How do division and distrust influence how people think and process information with respect to cognitive complexity? Does the presentation of “fake news” impact the complexity of thought among media consumers; if so, what consequences might that have on political attitudes and decision-making? Relatedly, research has examined the features of complex (vs. simple) linguistic styles that differentiate true and false stories, finding that liars demonstrated lower cognitive complexity in their deceptive communication. Future research is needed to investigate the possible applications for estimating and predicting deception in news sources and among political leaders. Aside from these examples, the cognitive complexity construct and its variety of measurement approaches affords researchers interested in political domains countless avenues for continued investigation.
People have diverse psychological needs that they seek to have fulfilled to maximize their well-being. Romantic relationships are the primary source individuals use for need fulfillment, but fulfillment can come from other sources as well—friends, family, strangers, vocation, and recreation. Whereas having a bevy of available sources puts individuals at an advantage in terms of ensuring their needs are met, which source they utilize may ironically decrease the quality of their valued romantic relationship. Across three studies (total N = 5,169) with diverse methodologies (i.e., nationally representative, cross-sectional, longitudinal), we found that when people achieve psychological need fulfillment from sources other than their romantic partner, they view their relationship less positively (Study 1), perceive greater quality of alternatives to their romantic relationship, and think more about ending the relationship (Studies 2 and 3). Demonstrating robustness, these associations hold independent of the amount of fulfillment provided by the romantic partner.
scite is a Brooklyn-based organization that helps researchers better discover and understand research articles through Smart Citations–citations that display the context of the citation and describe whether the article provides supporting or contrasting evidence. scite is used by students and researchers from around the world and is funded in part by the National Science Foundation and the National Institute on Drug Abuse of the National Institutes of Health.
hi@scite.ai
10624 S. Eastern Ave., Ste. A-614
Henderson, NV 89052, USA
Copyright © 2024 scite LLC. All rights reserved.
Made with 💙 for researchers
Part of the Research Solutions Family.