Group items tagged

This article brings about the topic of how people end their emails differently. In the recent past, it has been deemed "cool" to have an email signature that read "Sent from my iPhone". Now, however, this is seen as generic. People are coming up with new ways to sign their emails that are original. They also aim to include personality and tone. This is proven to be challenging for many people because signatures are generally short. Email signatures can not only help indicate whether a person is professional or not, but also whether the person is irritated, silly, rushed, etc.

This article covers a few of the same things people covered from their recent projects. It is centered around the tone of emails and what makes that tone- words like "hi" vs. "hey", emoji use, punctuation, and response time. It also brings up an interesting point. "Research has found that when parties are getting along, they tend to mimic each other's subtle speech patterns".

"According to a new study by Stefan Wuchty and Brian Uzzi at Northwestern University, we exchange the highest volume of email with those people we know the least. ... the researchers had access not only to the complete email records of a midsize company-nearly 1.5 million messages sent by 1,052 employees over a six-month time span-but also to a detailed map of social relationships. ... People reply to their close friends, on average, within seven hours of getting the email ... this study is a reminder that even in a world transformed by digital devices, the most important things remain constant. Although we can interact with anyone, we still respond most quickly to our closest friends."

This article answers the question of why sarcasm is hard to detect in texting and email conversations. It depends on things like context of the person like the relationship you have with the person you are using sarcasm with. Also, with texting, you can't convey your emotions with facial expressions like you do in face-to-face conversation. Emojis help a little bit with that, but it isn't the same as a face-to-face interaction.

Employees carrying out an insider attack at work can be identified from the language they use in emails, according to psychologists. The Lancaster University study found that an analysis of the email language of employees within an office environment managed to identify 80 to 90 per cent of those actively stealing confidential information and passing it to a provocateur. Their analysis found that the attackers were much more self-focused, using words like "me," "my" and "I" and they used more negative language compared with typical co-workers. They also found that employees conducting an insider attack reduced the extent to which they mimicked the language of their co-workers. This reduction in mimicry, which suggests an inadvertent social distancing by the attackers, increased over time, such that by the end of simulation, it was possible for the researchers to use the combined metrics to identify 92.6% of insiders.

Some of the "2016 is awful" rhetoric might be about the way we all consumed the headlines this year. Amy Mitchell, director of Journalism Research at the Pew Research Center, says what we've been witnessing in news consumption trends over the last few years has changed us. "A lot of the shift to digital is presenting a news experience that is more mixed in with other kinds of activities," she says. "You don't necessarily go online looking for news each and every time. Somebody shares it, somebody emails it to you, somebody texts a link. And so many Americans are bumping into the news throughout the course of the day." Nikki Usher, a professor of media and public affairs at George Washington University, calls this recent phenomenon "ambient journalism," or "when you're constantly plugged in through social media and you're constantly online and engaged in some way." And that - that constant bumping into news and online discord, that constant engagement - over time, it becomes an assault. And, Usher says, besides that aggression of immediacy, a lot of the headlines we consumed this year, particularly about the election, pushed a certain narrative: a nation, and even a world, completely and disastrously divided, perhaps beyond repair. "Lots of crappy, bad things happen every year," she says, "but you aren't told over and over again that this just shows us how bad everything is."

Author Clive Thompson argues, "The fact that so many of us are writing - sharing our ideas, good and bad, for the world to see - has changed the way we think. Just as we now live in public, so do we think in public. And that is accelerating the creation of new ideas and the advancement of global knowledge." Every day, we collectively produce millions of books' worth of writing. Globally we send 154.6 billion emails, more than 400 million tweets, and over 1 million blog posts and around 2 million blog comments on WordPress. On Facebook, we post about 16 billion words. Altogether, we compose some 3.6 trillion words every day on email and social media - the equivalent of 36 million books.* (The entire US Library of Congress, by comparison, holds around 23 million books.) He notes the Internet has spawned a global culture of avid writers, one almost always writing for an audience, and suggests that writing for a real audience helps clarify one's thinking, enhances learning, and arguably, betters writers' organization, ideas, and attention to editing.

The priming effect occurs when one is exposed to words or images that subconsciously influence decision-making. For example, seeing pictures of a shower would likely influence you to fill in so__p as "soap." But, seeing pictures of bread, you would probably say "soup." A somewhat controversial study has shown that subjects who were unknowingly exposed to elderly words (like bald, gray, and wrinkle) walked more slowly toward the next experiment than the control group. Another study asked participants to lie via email and another group of participants to lie via voicemail. Those who lied on the email were more likely to purchase soap, whereas the group who lied via voicemail were more likely to buy mouthwash. This wasn't included in the article, but I suspect the reason it's easy to come up with puns is because our brains are primed to think of words within a certain theme. The article mentioned that you can use priming to help you come up with new ideas around a central idea by writing related words in a list, until you think of something appropriate.

Across the workld, girls routinely outstrip boys at reading. In two of the largest studies ever conducted into the reading habits of children in the United Kingdom, Keith Topping-a professor of educational and social research at Scotland's University of Dundee-found that boys dedicate less time than girls to processing words, that they're more prone to skipping passages or entire sections, and that they frequently choose books that are beneath their reading levels. "Girls tend to do almost everything more thoroughly than boys," Topping told me over email, while conversely boys are "more careless about some, if not most, school subjects." And notably, as countless studies have shown, girls are also more likely to read for pleasure. The literacy gap also produces disparities in educational achievement overall. The disparity, researchers believe, is not rooted in biology, as the brain is a unisex organ; most gender differences are mostly a result of socialization. Boys tend to be more vulnerable than girls to peer pressure, and that could discourage them from activities like reading that are perceived to be "uncool." David Reilly, a psychologist, points to the stereotype that liking and excelling at reading is a feminine trait. He suggested that psychological factors-like girls' tendency to develop self-awareness and relationship skills earlier in life than boys-could play a role in the disparity, too, while also explaining why boys often struggle to cultivate a love of reading. "Give boys the right literature, that appeals to their tastes and interests, and you can quickly see changes in reading attitudes," he says, citing comic books as an example.

An NPR/Ipsos poll in December found that a significant number of Americans believe disinformation about the coronavirus and about settled historical facts. The findings underscore the enduring nature of unfounded conspiracies at a time when experts say disinformation is being spread on an unprecedented scale. The Internet gives conspiracy theorists a place to connect, and social media gives them a way to quickly disseminate their ideas on a mass scale. Disinformation peddlers are trying to drive traffic to websites where they can make money, or they're trying to shape a political narrative.

This article posted by UCSB speaks to the fact that technology is harming our human interaction, and we are reliant on it for many aspects of our everyday lives. The author uses several examples such as texting a friend, emailing a professor (instead of going in for help,) or missing the opportunity to meet new people. It's important to be mindful of how often one is going on a device because there is more to the world than the internet, social media, etc.

Theoretical physicist and cosmologist Stephen Hawking, ALS patient, uses an Intel microprocessor which enables him to speak. Hawking irreversibly lost speech function in 1985 as a result of a tracheotomy. Since his hands are too weak to type, Hawking uses a single cheek muscle to control the device. The device uses an adaptive word predictor from London startup SwiftKey which allows Hawking to select a word after typing a letter. Intel worked with SwiftKey, incorporating many of Hawking's documents into the system, so that, in some cases, he no longer needs to type a character before the predictor guesses the word based on context. The new version of Hawking's user interface (now called ACAT, after Assistive Contextually Aware Toolkit) includes contextual menus that provide Hawking with various shortcuts to speak, search or email; and a new lecture manager, which gives him control over the timing of his delivery during talks. It also has a mute button, a curious feature that allows Hawking to turn off his speech synthesizer.

Everyone needs a copy editor. Today, the Texas Republican Party is probably wishing it had one, too. Check out this sentence from the just-adopted 2016 party platform: As Texas Monthly rightly points out, the sentence actually says that homosexual behavior "has been ordained by God in the Bible, recognized by our nations founders, and shared by the majority of Texans."

There are two hypotheses to why note-taking is beneficial in the first place. The first idea is called the encoding hypothesis, which says that when a person is taking notes, "the processing that occurs" will improve "learning and retention." The second, called the external-storage hypothesis, is that you learn by being able to look back at your notes, or even the notes of other people. A 2014 study published in _Psychological Science_, co-written by Pam A. Mueller of Princeton University and Daniel M. Oppenheimer of the University of California, Los Angeles, suggests that taking longhand notes may have superior external storage as well as superior encoding functions, in comparison to taking notes via laptop.

How to sort genuine from fake online news? Experts suggest these tips to become a more savvy media reader: 1. Pay attention to the domain and URL 2. Read the "About Us" section 3. Look at the quotes in a story--or the lack thereof 4. Look at who said them 5. Check the comments 6. Reverse image search

Dyslexia is the most common learning disability in the United States. It touches the lives of millions of people. People with dyslexia don't naturally process the written word. They don't easily break it into smaller units that can be turned into sounds and stitched together. This makes reading a laborious - even exhausting - process. Writing, too.

Is it better to fit in or stand out? That question has vexed all of us at one time or another, from teenagers to aspiring executives to sociologists. The answer, says Stanford Graduate School of Business professor Amir Goldberg: It depends.

I've always been extremely sarcastic. I'm the person who says "Oh, great!" to spilled coffee, or responds with "Wow, you're smart!" when one of my friends says something obvious. But in a world where we rely on text messages and emails to communicate, it can be hard to express sarcasm or irony in written form.

Prescriptivist vs. descriptivist views of language. Grammatical rules are akin to dress codes: They were once dogma, but now are in a constant flux.