Suchergebnisse

This paper examines divisions between majority and minority ethnic groups over attitudes towards minority rights in 13 East European societies. Using national sample surveys and multilevel models, we test the effectiveness of competing explanations of ethnic polarization in attitudes towards minority rights, as well as regional and cross-national differences in levels of polarization. We find that, at the individual level, indicators of 'social distance' (inter-marriage and social interaction) account most effectively for the extent of ethnic polarization. However, regional and cross-national variations in polarization between majority and minority groups are explained most effectively by cultural (linguistic and religious) differences. These findings accord with research in the West, indicating the importance of cultural differences as a source of ethnic polarization, while offering little support for theories focusing on economic and structural factors or the size of minority groups. They also suggest the likely sources of difficulties for democratic consolidation in ethnically divided post-communist societies.

Chapter 1. Why Prioritize Needs? -- Part I: Identification of Needs -- Chapter 2. Need as One Distribution Principle: Frames and Framing -- Chapter 3. Measuring Need-Based Justice—Empirically and Formally -- Part II: Structures and Processes of the Recognition of Needs -- Chapter 4. The Social Recognition of Needs -- Chapter 5. The Political Recognition of Needs -- Chapter 6. Deliberation and Need-Based Distribution -- Part III: Welfare Consequences of Prioritizing Need-based Distributions -- Chapter 7. Need-based Justice and Social Utility: A Preference Approach -- Chapter 8. How Sustainable is Need-Based Redistribution? -- Part IV Differentiation -- Chapter 9. Need and Street-Level Bureaucracy. How Street-Level Bureaucrats Understand and Prioritize Need -- Chapter 10. Justice Principles, Prioritization in the Health Care Sector, and the Effect of Framing -- Chapter 11. Conclusion: Elements of a Theory of Need-Based Justice.

Despite existing theoretical and empirical grounds for a needs perspective on intimate relationship functioning, little is currently known about the role of relational need frustration, especially as compared to need satisfaction. Therefore, our aim in the present study was to investigate
the relative value of the satisfaction and frustration of an individual's relational needs for autonomy, competence, and relatedness in predicting relationship satisfaction. Self-report measures were completed by 372 men and women, each of whom was involved in a committed heterosexual relationship.
Results indicated that (a) need satisfaction and need frustration both contributed to relationship satisfaction, with need satisfaction being the stronger predictor of greater satisfaction, and (b) the satisfaction or frustration of the need for relatedness was the only significant predictor
of relationship satisfaction. The results for both men and women were similar. In sum, these results imply that couple interventions should focus on reinforcing relatedness satisfaction as well as on reducing relatedness frustration in both male and female partners.