-
Coping With Verbal Abuse
The Chronicle of Higher Education: The saying "Academic politics are so vicious precisely because the stakes are so small" has been attributed to many different people, including Henry Kissinger, Wallace Sayre, Jesse Unruh, Samuel Johnson, and Laurence J. Peter, among others. Whoever said it first had a point. When you choose a career in academe, you need to be prepared not only for rough-and-tumble politics, but also for the verbal abuse that goes with it.
-
The Mouth Is Mightier Than the Pen
The New York Times: Few methods beat email for sending communication blasts, getting a note in front of a far-flung sales prospect or employer, or attaching pictures and documents. Too bad about the downside: You may not sound your smartest. New research shows that text-based communications may make individuals sound less intelligent and employable than when the same information is communicated orally. The findings imply that old-fashioned phone conversations or in-person visits may be more effective when trying to impress a prospective employer or, perhaps, close a deal. Read the whole story: The New York Times
-
The first imperative: Science that isn’t transparent isn’t science
The Guardian: In today’s issue of Science Magazine we unveil a series of guidelines to promote transparency and reproducibility in research practices - critical aspects of science that are frequently overlooked in the pursuit of novelty and impact. Transparency and reproducibility are the beating heart of the scientific enterprise. Transparency ensures that all aspects of scientific methods and results are available for critique, compliment, or reuse. This not only meets a social imperative, it also allows others to test new questions with existing data, makes it easier to identify and correct errors, and helps unmask academic fraud.
-
The Psychological Case Against Tasty, Tasty Appetizers
New York Magazine: There’s a lot to think about when you go out to eat. Bottled or tap? Red or white? How are we splitting this check? One thing you likely aren’t thinking about, however, is how, when your food eventually comes, your brain will decide whether it’s good or not. After all, it doesn’t seem like something that takes a lot of thought — food either tastes good or it doesn’t, right? That’s a question that’s had scientists’ attention for some time now. And a fair amount of research has suggested that there’s a lot more to how food tastes than … well, how food tastes.
-
Tips for Keeping That Post-Vacation Feeling
The New York Times: A colleague recently returned from a trip to Europe with that unmistakable just-back-from-vacation glow. Striving to hold on to it for as long as possible, she deployed various strategies including placing her used boarding passes front and center on her desk, and leaving receipts from the TV Tower in Berlin and the Eiffel Tower in Paris on a bedroom chest of drawers that she passes each morning. “It just surrounds me,” she said of the strategic placement of her vacation mementos. “It sustains that warm vibe.” She also made a point of incorporating items that she bought during her trip into her daily life back in New York.
-
People Remember What You Say When You Paint a Picture
Harvard Business Review: When leaders communicate a vision of their organization’s future, they tend to emphasize ideals and ideology — the importance of “success,” “stewardship,” or “sustainability.” Leaders are likely to emphasize this type of abstract rhetoric more as businesses become increasingly digital. Given that employees within the same organization increasingly possess distinct types of technical knowledge, it may appear that an abstract, general vision is appropriate in order to gain traction and prevent alienating different constituencies. Yet this type of rhetoric undermines another core objective of vision communication: providing clarity about the future.
