Метод факторных виньеток и шкала самооценки альтруизма: сравнение онлайн- и офлайн-опросов
The article reports the results of the study of a peculiar type of everyday judgments about distributive justice. It examines the ways the social context affects normative judgments about the distribution of costs necessary for the public good maintenance from a third-party point of view. We used the factorial survey approach to estimate the effects of contextual information about the cost recipients’ kinship relations, the specific mode of providing information about their current financial standing, as well as the size of total costs on the perception of distributive justice. The participants generally tended to distribute costs compensating to those in the worst financial situation at the expense of those who were in a better financial situation if the recipients of costs were relatives, the information of cost recipients' financial standing described their incomes rather than debts, and the total costs were relatively low. Alongside with the statistically significant main effects, the pronounced first-order interaction effects between the total costs size and two other experimental factors were revealed: the increase in total costs diminished both the effects of kinship and of the information provision form (incomes vs. debts), thereby pushing participants to perceive an egalitarian division of costs as fair. The results support the general hypothesis about the contextual nature of distributive justice and promote our understanding of its manifestations in the form of ordinary normative judgments concerning the distribution of costs which are necessary for the public good maintenance.
When comparing two signals to characterize the differences in their states use the term phase shift, which refers to the difference between their phase angles for any time. To measure the phase and pulse temporal parameters exist a number of methods.
Several approaches to the concept of fatherhood present in Western sociological tradition are analyzed and compared: biological determinism, social constructivism and biosocial theory. The problematics of fatherhood and men’s parental practices is marginalized in modern Russian social research devoted to family and this fact makes the traditional inequality in family relations, when the father’s role is considered secondary compared to that of mother, even stronger. However, in Western critical men’s studies several stages can be outlined: the development of “sex roles” paradigm (biological determinism), the emergence of the hegemonic masculinity concept, inter-disciplinary stage (biosocial theory). According to the approach of biological determinism, the role of a father is that of the patriarch, he continues the family line and serves as a model for his ascendants. Social constructivism looks into man’s functions in the family from the point of view of masculine pressure and establishing hegemony over a woman and children. Biosocial theory aims to unite the biological determinacy of fatherhood with social, cultural and personal context. It is shown that these approaches are directly connected with the level of the society development, marriage and family perceptions, the level of egality of gender order.