Group items tagged

This article explains the various ways one might deal with grief. These expressions are narratives, symbolism, metaphors, and analysis. Being narrative is sharing the legacy of the loved one and can be formed as eulogies, organizations, etc. Symbolism represents the relationship between the living and the passed. A common symbol is a "new star in the sky" for children who have lost parents, or a couple's wedding song. A metaphor is a way to describe a loved one or a relationship. An analysis is when one writes down their thoughts to reflect upon them. One may use this in a sudden-death case and the bereaved is overwhelmed by the idea that they "should've done more to save them."

"Sporting metaphors always overrun the language of politics in the English-speaking world at election time - and perhaps most of all in the US. We have now reached the point in the race for the White House when it helps to keep a glossary of American sporting terms ever close at hand."

This journal goes into detail describing what synesthesia is, and suggests that because synesthesia is the event of one sense triggering another, that metaphor, sensory language, and in-depth descriptions could be considered as types of synesthesia.

Two graduate economics students from Washington State University used Twitter to analyze how sports pundits' reputation was affected by their confidence and accuracy at predicting the outcomes to sporting events. They analysed tweets in which professional pundits and fans made predictions about the winners of a series of high-profile baseball and American Football matches. Each tweet was given a "confidence" rating depending on its language, with words like "destroy" and "annihilate" scoring higher than "beat", for example. Both the pundits and fans' predictions were worse than chance, with the professional analysts only proving correct 47 per cent of the time and amateurs 45 per cent of the time. Yet pundits' confidence was measured as 50 per cent higher than amateurs, and they gained more followers on the networking website as a result, the researchers said. Presenting their findings at the Annual Meeting of the Academy of Economics and Finance earlier this year, the researchers explained that being confident could increase a pundit's following by 17 per cent, while predicting every game correctly only raised it by 3.4 per cent.There was a similar pattern among amateurs, with brash people increasing their following by 20 per cent but correct guesses only raising it by 7.3 per cent. In general, pundits are better served by being brash and making people excited, they claimed.

Just a few decades ago, many linguists thought the human brain had evolved a special module for language . It seemed plausible that our brains have some unique structure or system. After all, no animal can use language the way people can. However, in the 1990s, scientists began testing the language-module theory using "functional" MRI technology that let them watch the brain respond to words. And what they saw didn't look like a module, says Benjamin Bergen, a researcher at the University of California, San Diego, and author of the book _Louder Than Words_. "They found something totally surprising," Bergen says. "It's not just certain specific little regions in the brain, regions dedicated to language, that were lighting up. It was kind of a whole-brain type of process." The brain appears to be taking words, which are just arbitrary symbols, and translating them into things we can see or hear or do; language processing, rather than being a singular module, is "a highly distributed system" encompassing many areas of the brain. Our sensory experiences can also be applied to imagining novel concepts like "flying pigs". Our sensory capacities, ancestral features shared with our primate relatives, have been co-opted for more recent purposes, namely words and language. Bergen comments, "What evolution has done is to build a new machine, a capacity for language, something that nothing else in the known universe can do," he says. "And it's done so using the spare parts that it had lying around in the old primate brain."

The brains of adolescents are notoriously more receptive to short-term rewards and peer approval, which can lead to risky behavior. But researchers and educators are noticing that young people are also more sensitive to notions of social justice and autonomy. Teenage rebellion can be virtuous - even wholesome - depending on the situation. A new study in the Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences finds that teenagers make wiser choices if they are encouraged to reimagine healthy behavior as an act of defiance.

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."

As anti-Muslim rhetoric increases, American officials are cautioning that it could validate extremists' perceptions that Americans are waging a war on Islam. New research from Northwestern University's Kellogg School of Management lends credence to this fear. Research conducted by Ntour Kteily (Northwestern assistant professor of management and organizations), Gordon Hodson (Canada's Brock University), and Emile Bruneau (U. Penn. neuroscientist) shows that feeling dehumanized by another group can lead you to dehumanize that group in return, which can increase support for aggressive actions against them. Meaning, if Americans think that Muslims see them as savages, Americans will be more likely to return the "favor," perceiving Muslims to be savages. And both groups will be more likely to support aggressive acts-like drone strikes or torture-against the other.

We each absorb select scenes in our environment through which we interpret a situation, creating our own reality by that to which we give attention. Our brain naturally tries to process what could otherwise be overwhelming amounts of information, by reducing it to a simplified story. However, because that story is based on a small sliver of reality, our perception may be incorrect. Thought holes, or cognitive distortions, are skewed perceptions of reality. They are negative interpretations of a situation based on poor assumptions. Studies show self-defeating thoughts (i.e., "I'm a loser") can trigger self-defeating emotions (i.e., pain, anxiety, malaise) that, in turn, cause self-defeating actions (i.e., acting out, skipping school). Left unchecked, this tendency can also lead to more severe conditions, such as depression and anxiety. Accurate thinking--identifying and recognizing one's false assumptions--can help reduce negative thinking. Here are 8 common thought holes: 1. Jumping to conclusions: judging a situation based on assumptions as opposed to definitive facts 2. Mental filtering: paying attention to the negative details in a situation while ignoring the positive 3. Magnifying: magnifying negative aspects in a situation 4. Minimizing: minimizing positive aspects in a situation 5. Personalizing: assuming the blame for problems even when you are not primarily responsible 6. Externalizing: pushing the blame for problems onto others even when you are primarily responsible 7. Overgeneralizing: concluding that one bad incident will lead to a repeated pattern of defeat 8. Emotional reasoning: assuming your negative emotions translate into reality, or confusing feelings with facts

If a man wishes to become a great orator, he must first become a student of the great orators who have come before him. He must immerse himself in their texts, listening for the turns of phrases and textual symmetries, the pauses and crescendos, the metaphors and melodies that have enabled the greatest speeches to [...]

Article discusses the Manti Te'o catfishing incident in historical context, examining the origin of the term "catfish", as well as other lexical terms that've been used to describe the duplicitous mind-games people play.

French and German, like other Romance language, have masculine and feminine forms of nouns, and "when referring to several people by their role... and the gender of that group is either not known, irrelevant or mixed," they will use the masculine form. However, the masculine form used in this way is traditionally thought to be generic - but "the French and German participants took longer to say that the second sentence made sense if it referred to women."

A sportswriter was interviewing a football player about an upcoming game and listening to a by-the-numbers stream of war, soldier and battlefield metaphors. [...] the player said, "You don't understand what it's like to be in a war," and at that, the reporter bristled.

A Master's Thesis about media and public perceptions of rap during its entire history

"In cultures with left-to-right orthography (e.g., English-speaking cultures) time appears to flow rightward, but in cultures with right-to-left orthography (e.g., Arabic-speaking cultures) time flows leftward." Participants who read regular text tended to press the left button for past-oriented phrases and the right button for future-oriented phrases, but participants who read mirrored text did the opposite.

"Consistent with the Sapir-Whorf hypothesis, participants were quicker at distinguishing between a 'green' and a 'blue' than between two 'greens' or two 'blues', but crucially, this advantage only pertained when the colours appeared on the right-hand side of space [when the brain is using the "language-dominant left hemisphere"]."