# data[].attributes.body
Your Existing Situation

"Searching for a close bond with others which are accepting and kind. Needs a safe, peaceful atmosphere."

Your Stress Sources

"Feels empty and isolated from others and wishes to overcome this feeling. Believes life has more to offer her than what she was experienced thus far, and doesn't want to miss out on anything. she purses all her goals and dreams, fearful that any missed opportunity will cause her to miss out on even more. Quickly becomes an expert in any field she pursues and can sometimes come off as overbearing and nosy."

Your Restrained Characteristics

Current events leave her feeling forced into compromise in order to avoid being cut off from affection or future cooperation.

"Self-centered, tends to take this personally and is easily offended, which leaves her feeling isolated."

"Although she is able to find contentment through sexual activity, she feels hopeless to change her problems and difficulties and continues to make the best of what she has."

Is feeling emotionally drained from stressful and tense situations. she is in need of peace and quiet in order to overcome her lack of energy and may become irritable if she does not recover.

Your Desired Objective

"Feels stressed due to her current situation or relationships, and needs to make changes. Looking for a solution that will increase her chances of fulfilling her current hopes and dreams."

Your Actual Problem

"Fears she will be held back from achieving things she really wants, leading her to search endlessly for satisfaction and become involved in activities which are pointless."

Your Actual Problem #2

"Feeling held back and restricted from moving forward, looking for a solution that will give her more freedom and less obstacles."

# data[].attributes.body
Perfectionist

# data[].attributes.headline
Compare and contrast the Human and Natural Sciences

# data[].attributes.subject
Compare and contrast the Human and Natural Sciences

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.readable_text
Advertisement

Editor's note: The following is an excerpt from Extreme Fear: The Science of Your Mind in Danger by Jeff Wise, published on December 8 by Palgrave Macmillan (Scientific American is a Macmillan publication). Extreme Fear explores the neural underpinnings of this powerful and primitive emotion by relating instances in which people were forced to act under duress and presenting the latest findings from cognitive science. In the following passage from the chapter
entitled "Superhuman" a seemingly ordinary man performs an extraordinary feat of strength to rescue a cyclist who has been run over by a car.

Here's how it is: one minute, you're going through your daily routine, only half paying attention. And the next you're sucked into a vivid, intense world, where time seems to move slower, colors are brighter, sounds more perceptible, as though the whole universe has suddenly come into focus.

It was about 8:30 P.M. on a warm summer evening in Tucson. Tom Boyle, Jr., was sitting in the passenger's seat of his pickup truck, his wife Elizabeth at the wheel, waiting to pull out into traffic from the shopping mall where they'd just had dinner. The Camaro ahead of them hit the gas, spun his wheels, and jerked out onto the avenue with a squeal of rubber. "Oh my God," Elizabeth said. "Do you see that?"

Boyle glanced up to see a shower of red sparks flying up from beneath the chassis of the Camaro. And something else: A bike, folded up from impact. The Camaro had hit a cyclist, and the rider was pinned underneath the car. Boyle threw open the door of the truck and started running after the car.

For a few gruesome seconds, the Camaro plunged on, dragging along the rider, 18-year-old Kyle Holtrust, with it. One of Holtrust's legs was pinned between chassis of the car and the frame of his bike, the other jammed between the bike and the asphalt. After 20 or 30 feet, the Camaro slowed and stopped. Holtrust screamed in agony, pounding on the side of the car with his free hand.

Without stopping to think, Boyle reached under the frame of the car and lifted. With a sound of groaning metal, the chassis eased upward a few inches. "Mister, mister, higher, higher," Holtrust screamed.

Boyle braced himself, took a deep breath, and heaved. The front end lifted a few more inches. "'OK, it's off me," they boy called out, his voice tight with pain. "But I can't move. Get me out!" The driver of the car, 40-year-old John Baggett, pulled Holtrust free. At last, about 45 seconds after he'd first heaved the car upward, Boyle set it back down.

The biker was badly hurt, in a lot of pain, and frightened. Blood was pouring out of his wounds. Boyle knelt down and wrapped the young man in his arms, comforting him until the police and fire department arrived.

The local media celebrated Boyle's feat of compassion. The YMCA gave him an award. Newspapers and TV stations interviewed him. The fanfare flattered him and he felt extremely proud of himself. Yet to this day there's something about that evening that he can't figure out. It's no mystery to him why he did what he did-"I would be such a horrible human being to watch someone suffer like that and not even try to help," he says-but he can't quite figure out how.

"There's no way I could lift that car right now," he says.

Boyle, it should be pointed out, is no pantywaist. He carries 280 pounds on a six-foot-four-inch frame. But think about this: The heaviest barbell that Boyle ever dead-lifted weighed 700 pounds. The world record is 1,008 pounds. A stock Camaro weighs 3,000 pounds. Even factoring leverage, something extraordinary was going on that night.

That something was the body's fear response. When we find ourselves under intense pressure, fear unleashes reserves of energy that normally remain inaccessible. We become, in effect, superhuman.

Under acute stress, the body's sympathetic nervous system prepares the body for sustained, vigorous action. The adrenal gland dumps cortisol and adrenaline into the blood stream. Blood pressure surges and the heart races, delivering oxygen and energy to the muscles. It's the biological equivalent of opening the throttle of an engine.

Vladimir Zatsiorsky, a professor of kinesiology at Penn State who has extensively studied the biomechanics of weightlifting, draws the distinction between the force that our muscles are able to theoretically apply, which he calls "absolute strength," and the maximum force that they can generate through the conscious exertion of will, which he calls "maximal strength." An ordinary person, he has found, can only summon about 65 percent of their absolute power in a training session, while a trained weightlifter can exceed 80 percent.

Under conditions of competition a trained athlete can improve as much as 12 percent above that figure. Zatsiorsky calls this higher level of performance "competitive maximum strength." This parameter is not a fixed number-the more intense the competition, the higher it can go, as the brain's fear centers progressively remove any restraint against performance.

It's no coincidence that world records in athletic events tend to get broken at major events like the Olympics, where the stakes are highest and the pressure is the greatest. Of the eight gold medals that Michael Phelps won at the 2008 Olympics, for instance, seven were world records. Not only that, but when he crossed the finish line in the men's 100-meter butterfly in 50.58 seconds, breaking the previous Olympic record, three of the other seven swimmers who finished after him also came in ahead of the previous record.

But there's a limit to how fast and how strong fear can make us. We've all heard stories about panicked mothers lifting cars off their trapped babies. They've been circulating for so long that many of us assume that they must be true. Zatsiorsky's work, however, suggests that while fear can indeed motivate us to approach more closely to our absolute power level than even the fiercest competition, there's no way to exceed it. A woman who can lift 100 pounds at the gym might, according to Zatsiorsky, be able to lift 135 pounds in a frenzy of maternal fear. But she's not going to suddenly be able to lift a 3,000-pound car. Tom Boyle was an experienced weight lifter. The adrenaline of that June night gave him an edge, but it didn't turn him into the Incredible Hulk.

The mechanisms by which the brain is able to summon greater reserves of power have not been well explored, but it may be related to another of fear's superpowers: analgesia, or the inability to feel pain. When I'm at the gym, straining to complete the last rep of a dumbbell exercise, it's pretty hard to imagine that my muscles have the capacity to work half again harder than they already are. What I feel is screaming agony.

But under intense pressure-whether it's a bodybuilding competition, a kid trapped under a car, or an attacking bear-you just won't feel that pain. The body pulls out all the stops and lets you turn up the dial up to "11". You don't feel the ache of your muscles. You don't feel the pain. You just do what needs to be done.

ABOUT THE AUTHOR(S)

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.description
Editor's note: The following is an excerpt from Extreme Fear: The Science of Your Mind in Danger by Jeff Wise, published on December 8 by Palgrave Macmillan (Scientific American is a Macmillan publication). Extreme Fear explores the neural underpinnings of this powerful and primitive emotion by relating instances in which people were forced to act under duress and presenting the latest findings from cognitive science.

# data[].attributes.headline
To what extent do you conform in the presence of others?

# data[].attributes.subject
To what extent do you conform in the presence of others?

# data[].attributes.body
To what extent would you obey a figure of authority?

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.title
The Milgram Experiment | THE HEIST | Derren Brown

# data[].attributes.headline
Natural Sciences or Human Sciences... or both?

# data[].attributes.subject
Natural Sciences or Human Sciences... or both?

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.readable_text
Put down the straw. It's time to start chewing our food again.

That's right, folks: After two decades as the must-have health accessory - a cult of nutrition junkies trailing in its wake - fancy juice has reached its peak.

Perhaps it was the recent news of juice-cleanse evangelist Gwyneth Paltrow's $500 breakfast smoothie - the one made of milk, almond butter and sparkly magic pixie moon dust. Though not technically a juice, per se, it's still an exorbitantly priced beverage with a lot of dubious-sounding health claims.

Or perhaps it was when so-called "raw-food evangelist" Doug Evans raised $120 million from Silicon Valley investors to fund a . Nothing could make the Juicero press worth its ridiculous cost - not even the fact that it has its own app, or that you don't have to clean the damn thing.

Now, the New York Times - who once referred to the cold-pressed juice industry as an " entrepreneurial gold rush" - is calling bullshit on fancy juices' purported health benefits - namely, the widely-held belief that juices cleanse the body of toxins.

"To say that drinking juice detoxifies the body isn't quite the same as claiming leeches suck out poisons, but it's fairly close," an April 20 Times declared.

Juice companies will have you think otherwise. Juice Press claims that if you don't "feel fabulous" after a juice cleanse, it's because you still "have more to detox from." Liquiteria suggests "cleansing allows you to naturally energize, replenish and detoxify your body at the cellular level." Juice Generation charges for a drink called "Daily Detox."

We don't need help: As the Times' most recent story points out, your body rids itself of harmful toxins, like alcohol, all on its own - regardless of how much kale-ginger-beet elixir you drink.

"The human body is well designed to eliminate wastes and toxins, and a number of organs play a role," Dr. James H. Grendell, chief of the division of gastroenterology, hepatology and nutrition at Winthrop-University Hospital in Mineola, New York, told the Times.

It's the same reason hot yoga's alleged benefits . Our body has a natural detoxification system, and it begins with the liver.

Our body has a natural detoxification system, and it begins with the liver.

The liver acts as a filter for our blood. When it finds nutrients in our blood, it either converts them into energy or stores them for future use. When it finds toxins, it sends them to be eliminated via the intestines and kidneys.

The Times might have mentioned that to Paltrow, who told the paper in March that she visits saunas to "sweat out" airplane germs. Eliminating toxins has nothing to do with sweat; they exit the body via poop and pee.

"It's hard to understand" why people think juice aids in the process, Dr. Grendell told the Times, "because there is no good scientific evidence that a juice cleanse, or any other food for that matter, is particularly relevant to removing toxins."

Juice still has its benefits. Juice squeezed from fresh fruits and vegetables is more nutritious than sugary, whipped-cream-topped Frappuccinos. It's also a convenient way to consume healthy foods on-the-go: I wouldn't gnaw on a carrot or a beet on my morning commute to work, but I'd certainly sip them through a straw.

But if you're forking over your life savings to detoxify with kale juice, don't do it. You have a liver, and it's free.

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.title
Science Just Confirmed Your Expensive Juice Cleanse Is Officially Bullshit

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.description
Put down the straw. It's time to start chewing our food again. That's right, folks: After two decades as the must-have health accessory - a cult of nutrition junkies trailing in its wake - fancy juice has reached its peak.

# data[].attributes.headline
So when you finish deconstructing the human sciences, lets reflect on the extent to which those same criticisms relate to the natural sciences. 

# data[].attributes.subject
So when you finish deconstructing the human sciences, lets reflect on the extent to which those same criticisms relate to the natural sciences. 

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.readable_text
The problem with science is that so much of it simply isn't. Last summer, the Open Science Collaboration announced that it had tried to replicate one hundred published psychology experiments sampled from three of the most prestigious journals in the field. Scientific claims rest on the idea that experiments repeated under nearly identical conditions ought to yield approximately the same results, but until very recently, very few had bothered to check in a systematic way whether this was actually the case. The OSC was the biggest attempt yet to check a field's results, and the most shocking. In many cases, they had used original experimental materials, and sometimes even performed the experiments under the guidance of the original researchers. Of the studies that had originally reported positive results, an astonishing 65 percent failed to show statistical significance on replication, and many of the remainder showed greatly reduced effect sizes.

Their findings made the news, and quickly became a club with which to bash the social sciences. But the problem isn't just with psychology. There's an unspoken rule in the pharmaceutical industry that half of all academic biomedical research will ultimately prove false, and in 2011 a group of researchers at Bayer decided to test it. Looking at sixty-seven recent drug discovery projects based on preclinical cancer biology research, they found that in more than 75 percent of cases the published data did not match up with their in-house attempts to replicate. These were not studies published in fly-by-night oncology journals, but blockbuster research featured in Science, Nature, Cell, and the like. The Bayer researchers were drowning in bad studies, and it was to this, in part, that they attributed the mysteriously declining yields of drug pipelines. Perhaps so many of these new drugs fail to have an effect because the basic research on which their development was based isn't valid.

When a study fails to replicate, there are two possible interpretations. The first is that, unbeknownst to the investigators, there was a real difference in experimental setup between the original investigation and the failed replication. These are colloquially referred to as "wallpaper effects," the joke being that the experiment was affected by the color of the wallpaper in the room. This is the happiest possible explanation for failure to reproduce: It means that both experiments have revealed facts about the universe, and we now have the opportunity to learn what the difference was between them and to incorporate a new and subtler distinction into our theories.

The other interpretation is that the original finding was false. Unfortunately, an ingenious statistical argument shows that this second interpretation is far more likely. First articulated by John Ioannidis, a professor at Stanford University's School of Medicine, this argument proceeds by a simple application of Bayesian statistics. Suppose that there are a hundred and one stones in a certain field. One of them has a diamond inside it, and, luckily, you have a diamond-detecting device that advertises 99 percent accuracy. After an hour or so of moving the device around, examining each stone in turn, suddenly alarms flash and sirens wail while the device is pointed at a promising-looking stone. What is the probability that the stone contains a diamond?

Most would say that if the device advertises 99 percent accuracy, then there is a 99 percent chance that the device is correctly discerning a diamond, and a 1 percent chance that it has given a false positive reading. But consider: Of the one hundred and one stones in the field, only one is truly a diamond. Granted, our machine has a very high probability of correctly declaring it to be a diamond. But there are many more diamond-free stones, and while the machine only has a 1 percent chance of falsely declaring each of them to be a diamond, there are a hundred of them. So if we were to wave the detector over every stone in the field, it would, on average, sound twice-once for the real diamond, and once when a false reading was triggered by a stone. If we know only that the alarm has sounded, these two possibilities are roughly equally probable, giving us an approximately 50 percent chance that the stone really contains a diamond.

This is a simplified version of the argument that Ioannidis applies to the process of science itself. The stones in the field are the set of all possible testable hypotheses, the diamond is a hypothesized connection or effect that happens to be true, and the diamond-detecting device is the scientific method. A tremendous amount depends on the proportion of possible hypotheses which turn out to be true, and on the accuracy with which an experiment can discern truth from falsehood. Ioannidis shows that for a wide variety of scientific settings and fields, the values of these two parameters are not at all favorable.

For instance, consider a team of molecular biologists investigating whether a mutation in one of the countless thousands of human genes is linked to an increased risk of Alzheimer's. The probability of a randomly selected mutation in a randomly selected gene having precisely that effect is quite low, so just as with the stones in the field, a positive finding is more likely than not to be spurious-unless the experiment is unbelievably successful at sorting the wheat from the chaff. Indeed, Ioannidis finds that in many cases, approaching even 50 percent true positives requires unimaginable accuracy. Hence the eye-catching title of his paper: "Why Most Published Research Findings Are False."

What about accuracy? Here, too, the news is not good. First, it is a de facto standard in many fields to use one in twenty as an acceptable cutoff for the rate of false positives. To the naive ear, that may sound promising: Surely it means that just 5 percent of scientific studies report a false positive? But this is precisely the same mistake as thinking that a stone has a 99 percent chance of containing a diamond just because the detector has sounded. What it really means is that for each of the countless false hypotheses that are contemplated by researchers, we accept a 5 percent chance that it will be falsely counted as true-a decision with a considerably more deleterious effect on the proportion of correct studies.

Paradoxically, the situation is actually made worse by the fact that a promising connection is often studied by several independent teams. To see why, suppose that three groups of researchers are studying a phenomenon, and when all the data are analyzed, one group announces that it has discovered a connection, but the other two find nothing of note. Assuming that all the tests involved have a high statistical power, the lone positive finding is almost certainly the spurious one. However, when it comes time to report these findings, what happens? The teams that found a negative result may not even bother to write up their non-discovery. After all, a report that a fanciful connection probably isn't true is not the stuff of which scientific prizes, grant money, and tenure decisions are made.

And even if they did write it up, it probably wouldn't be accepted for publication. Journals are in competition with one another for attention and "impact factor," and are always more eager to report a new, exciting finding than a killjoy failure to find an association. In fact, both of these effects can be quantified. Since the majority of all investigated hypotheses are false, if positive and negative evidence were written up and accepted for publication in equal proportions, then the majority of articles in scientific journals should report no findings. When tallies are actually made, though, the precise opposite turns out to be true: Nearly every published scientific article reports the presence of an association. There must be massive bias at work.

Ioannidis's argument would be potent even if all scientists were angels motivated by the best of intentions, but when the human element is considered, the picture becomes truly dismal. Scientists have long been aware of something euphemistically called the "experimenter effect": the curious fact that when a phenomenon is investigated by a researcher who happens to believe in the phenomenon, it is far more likely to be detected. Much of the effect can likely be explained by researchers unconsciously giving hints or suggestions to their human or animal subjects, perhaps in something as subtle as body language or tone of voice. Even those with the best of intentions have been caught fudging measurements, or making small errors in rounding or in statistical analysis that happen to give a more favorable result. Very often, this is just the result of an honest statistical error that leads to a desirable outcome, and therefore it isn't checked as deliberately as it might have been had it pointed in the opposite direction.

But, and there is no putting it nicely, deliberate fraud is far more widespread than the scientific establishment is generally willing to admit. One way we know that there's a great deal of fraud occurring is that if you phrase your question the right way, scientists will confess to it. In a survey of two thousand research psychologists conducted in 2011, over half of those surveyed admitted outright to selectively reporting those experiments which gave the result they were after. Then the investigators asked respondents anonymously to estimate how many of their fellow scientists had engaged in fraudulent behavior, and promised them that the more accurate their guesses, the larger a contribution would be made to the charity of their choice. Through several rounds of anonymous guessing, refined using the number of scientists who would admit their own fraud and other indirect measurements, the investigators concluded that around 10 percent of research psychologists have engaged in outright falsification of data, and more than half have engaged in less brazen but still fraudulent behavior such as reporting that a result was statistically significant when it was not, or deciding between two different data analysis techniques after looking at the results of each and choosing the more favorable.

Many forms of statistical falsification are devilishly difficult to catch, or close enough to a genuine judgment call to provide plausible deniability. Data analysis is very much an art, and one that affords even its most scrupulous practitioners a wide degree of latitude. Which of these two statistical tests, both applicable to this situation, should be used? Should a subpopulation of the research sample with some common criterion be picked out and reanalyzed as if it were the totality? Which of the hundreds of coincident factors measured should be controlled for, and how? The same freedom that empowers a statistician to pick a true signal out of the noise also enables a dishonest scientist to manufacture nearly any result he or she wishes. Cajoling statistical significance where in reality there is none, a practice commonly known as "p-hacking," is particularly easy to accomplish and difficult to detect on a case-by-case basis. And since the vast majority of studies still do not report their raw data along with their findings, there is often nothing to re-analyze and check even if there were volunteers with the time and inclination to do so.

One creative attempt to estimate how widespread such dishonesty really is involves comparisons between fields of varying "hardness." The author, Daniele Fanelli, theorized that the farther from physics one gets, the more freedom creeps into one's experimental methodology, and the fewer constraints there are on a scientist's conscious and unconscious biases. If all scientists were constantly attempting to influence the results of their analyses, but had more opportunities to do so the "softer" the science, then we might expect that the social sciences have more papers that confirm a sought-after hypothesis than do the physical sciences, with medicine and biology somewhere in the middle. This is exactly what the study discovered: A paper in psychology or psychiatry is about five times as likely to report a positive result as one in astrophysics. This is not necessarily evidence that psychologists are all consciously or unconsciously manipulating their data-it could also be evidence of massive publication bias-but either way, the result is disturbing.

Speaking of physics, how do things go with this hardest of all hard sciences? Better than elsewhere, it would appear, and it's unsurprising that those who claim all is well in the world of science reach so reliably and so insistently for examples from physics, preferably of the most theoretical sort. Folk histories of physics combine borrowed mathematical luster and Whiggish triumphalism in a way that journalists seem powerless to resist. The outcomes of physics experiments and astronomical observations seem so matter-of-fact, so concretely and immediately connected to underlying reality, that they might let us gingerly sidestep all of these issues concerning motivated or sloppy analysis and interpretation. " E pur si muove," Galileo is said to have remarked, and one can almost hear in his sigh the hopes of a hundred science journalists for whom it would be all too convenient if Nature were always willing to tell us whose theory is more correct.

And yet the flight to physics rather gives the game away, since measured any way you like-volume of papers, number of working researchers, total amount of funding-deductive, theory-building physics in the mold of Newton and Lagrange, Maxwell and Einstein, is a tiny fraction of modern science as a whole. In fact, it also makes up a tiny fraction of modern physics. Far more common is the delicate and subtle art of scouring inconceivably vast volumes of noise with advanced software and mathematical tools in search of the faintest signal of some hypothesized but never before observed phenomenon, whether an astrophysical event or the decay of a subatomic particle. This sort of work is difficult and beautiful in its own way, but it is not at all self-evident in the manner of a falling apple or an elliptical planetary orbit, and it is very sensitive to the same sorts of accidental contamination, deliberate fraud, and unconscious bias as the medical and social-scientific studies we have discussed. Two of the most vaunted physics results of the past few years-the announced discovery of both cosmic inflation and gravitational waves at the BICEP2 experiment in Antarctica, and the supposed discovery of superluminal neutrinos at the Swiss-Italian border-have now been retracted, with far less fanfare than when they were first published.

Many defenders of the scientific establishment will admit to this problem, then offer hymns to the self-correcting nature of the scientific method. Yes, the path is rocky, they say, but peer review, competition between researchers, and the comforting fact that there is an objective reality out there whose test every theory must withstand or fail, all conspire to mean that sloppiness, bad luck, and even fraud are exposed and swept away by the advances of the field.

So the dogma goes. But these claims are rarely treated like hypotheses to be tested. Partisans of the new scientism are fond of recounting the "Sokal hoax"-physicist Alan Sokal submitted a paper heavy on jargon but full of false and meaningless statements to the postmodern cultural studies journal Social Text, which accepted and published it without quibble-but are unlikely to mention a similar experiment conducted on reviewers of the prestigious British Medical Journal.The experimenters deliberately modified a paper to include eight different major errors in study design, methodology, data analysis, and interpretation of results, and not a single one of the 221 reviewers who participated caught all of the errors. On average, they caught fewer than two-and, unbelievably, these results held up even in the subset of reviewers who had been specifically warned that they were participating in a study and that there might be something a little odd in the paper that they were reviewing. In all, only 30 percent of reviewers recommended that the intentionally flawed paper be rejected.

If peer review is good at anything, it appears to be keeping unpopular ideas from being published. Consider the finding of another (yes, another) of these replicability studies, this time from a group of cancer researchers. In addition to reaching the now unsurprising conclusion that only a dismal 11 percent of the preclinical cancer research they examined could be validated after the fact, the authors identified another horrifying pattern: The "bad" papers that failed to replicate were, on average, cited far more often than the papers that did! As the authors put it, "some non-reproducible preclinical papers had spawned an entire field, with hundreds of secondary publications that expanded on elements of the original observation, but did not actually seek to confirm or falsify its fundamental basis."

What they do not mention is that once an entire field has been created-with careers, funding, appointments, and prestige all premised upon an experimental result which was utterly false due either to fraud or to plain bad luck-pointing this fact out is not likely to be very popular. Peer review switches from merely useless to actively harmful. It may be ineffective at keeping papers with analytic or methodological flaws from being published, but it can be deadly effective at suppressing criticism of a dominant research paradigm. Even if a critic is able to get his work published, pointing out that the house you've built together is situated over a chasm will not endear him to his colleagues or, more importantly, to his mentors and patrons.

Older scientists contribute to the propagation of scientific fields in ways that go beyond educating and mentoring a new generation. In many fields, it's common for an established and respected researcher to serve as "senior author" on a bright young star's first few publications, lending his prestige and credibility to the result, and signaling to reviewers that he stands behind it. In the natural sciences and medicine, senior scientists are frequently the controllers of laboratory resources-which these days include not just scientific instruments, but dedicated staffs of grant proposal writers and regulatory compliance experts-without which a young scientist has no hope of accomplishing significant research. Older scientists control access to scientific prestige by serving on the editorial boards of major journals and on university tenure-review committees. Finally, the government bodies that award the vast majority of scientific funding are either staffed or advised by distinguished practitioners in the field.

All of which makes it rather more bothersome that older scientists are the most likely to be invested in the regnant research paradigm, whatever it is, even if it's based on an old experiment that has never successfully been replicated. The quantum physicist Max Planck famously quipped: "A new scientific truth does not triumph by convincing its opponents and making them see the light, but rather because its opponents eventually die, and a new generation grows up that is familiar with it." Planck may have been too optimistic. A recent paper from the National Bureau of Economic Research studied what happens to scientific subfields when star researchers die suddenly and at the peak of their abilities, and finds that while there is considerable evidence that young researchers are reluctant to challenge scientific superstars, a sudden and unexpected death does not significantly improve the situation, particularly when "key collaborators of the star are in a position to channel resources (such as editorial goodwill or funding) to insiders."

In the idealized Popperian view of scientific progress, new theories are proposed to explain new evidence that contradicts the predictions of old theories. The heretical philosopher of science Paul Feyerabend, on the other hand, claimed that new theories frequently contradict the best available evidence-at least at first. Often, the old observations were inaccurate or irrelevant, and it was the invention of a new theory that stimulated experimentalists to go hunting for new observational techniques to test it. But the success of this "unofficial" process depends on a blithe disregard for evidence while the vulnerable young theory weathers an initial storm of skepticism. Yet if Feyerabend is correct, and an unpopular new theory can ignore or reject experimental data long enough to get its footing, how much longer can an old and creaky theory, buttressed by the reputations and influence and political power of hundreds of established practitioners, continue to hang in the air even when the results upon which it is premised are exposed as false?

The hagiographies of science are full of paeans to the self-correcting, self-healing nature of the enterprise. But if raw results are so often false, the filtering mechanisms so ineffective, and the self-correcting mechanisms so compromised and slow, then science's approach to truth may not even be monotonic. That is, past theories, now "refuted" by evidence and replaced with new approaches, may be closer to the truth than what we think now. Such regress has happened before: In the nineteenth century, the (correct) vitamin C deficiency theory of scurvy was replaced by the false belief that scurvy was caused by proximity to spoiled foods. Many ancient astronomers believed the heliocentric model of the solar system before it was supplanted by the geocentric theory of Ptolemy. The Whiggish view of scientific history is so dominant today that this possibility is spoken of only in hushed whispers, but ours is a world in which things once known can be lost and buried.

And even if self-correction does occur and theories move strictly along a lifecycle from less to more accurate, what if the unremitting flood of new, mostly false, results pours in faster? Too fast for the sclerotic, compromised truth-discerning mechanisms of science to operate? The result could be a growing body of true theories completely overwhelmed by an ever-larger thicket of baseless theories, such that the proportion of true scientific beliefs shrinks even while the absolute number of them continues to rise. Borges's Library of Babel contained every true book that could ever be written, but it was useless because it also contained every false book, and both true and false were lost within an ocean of nonsense.

Which brings us to the odd moment in which we live. At the same time as an ever more bloated scientific bureaucracy churns out masses of research results, the majority of which are likely outright false, scientists themselves are lauded as heroes and science is upheld as the only legitimate basis for policy-making. There's reason to believe that these phenomena are linked. When a formerly ascetic discipline suddenly attains a measure of influence, it is bound to be flooded by opportunists and charlatans, whether it's the National Academy of Science or the monastery of Cluny.

This comparison is not as outrageous as it seems: Like monasticism, science is an enterprise with a superhuman aim whose achievement is forever beyond the capacities of the flawed humans who aspire toward it. The best scientists know that they must practice a sort of mortification of the ego and cultivate a dispassion that allows them to report their findings, even when those findings might mean the dashing of hopes, the drying up of financial resources, and the loss of professional prestige. It should be no surprise that even after outgrowing the monasteries, the practice of science has attracted souls driven to seek the truth regardless of personal cost and despite, for most of its history, a distinct lack of financial or status reward. Now, however, science and especially science bureaucracy is a career, and one amenable to social climbing. Careers attract careerists, in Feyerabend's words: "devoid of ideas, full of fear, intent on producing some paltry result so that they can add to the flood of inane papers that now constitutes 'scientific progress' in many areas."

If science was unprepared for the influx of careerists, it was even less prepared for the blossoming of the Cult of Science. The Cult is related to the phenomenon described as "scientism"; both have a tendency to treat the body of scientific knowledge as a holy book or an a-religious revelation that offers simple and decisive resolutions to deep questions. But it adds to this a pinch of glib frivolity and a dash of unembarrassed ignorance. Its rhetorical tics include a forced enthusiasm (a search on Twitter for the hashtag "#sciencedancing" speaks volumes) and a penchant for profanity. Here in Silicon Valley, one can scarcely go a day without seeing a t-shirt reading "Science: It works, b-es!" The hero of the recent popular movie The Martian boasts that he will "science the sh- out of" a situation. One of the largest groups on Facebook is titled "I f-ing love Science!" (a name which, combined with the group's penchant for posting scarcely any actual scientific material but a lot of pictures of natural phenomena, has prompted more than one actual scientist of my acquaintance to mutter under her breath, "What you truly love is pictures "). Some of the Cult's leaders like to play dress-up as scientists-Bill Nye and Neil deGrasse Tyson are two particularly prominent examples- but hardly any of them have contributed any research results of note. Rather, Cult leadership trends heavily in the direction of educators, popularizers, and journalists.

At its best, science is a human enterprise with a superhuman aim: the discovery of regularities in the order of nature, and the discerning of the consequences of those regularities. We've seen example after example of how the human element of this enterprise harms and damages its progress, through incompetence, fraud, selfishness, prejudice, or the simple combination of an honest oversight or slip with plain bad luck. These failings need not hobble the scientific enterprise broadly conceived, but only if scientists are hyper-aware of and endlessly vigilant about the errors of their colleagues . . . and of themselves. When cultural trends attempt to render science a sort of religion-less clericalism, scientists are apt to forget that they are made of the same crooked timber as the rest of humanity and will necessarily imperil the work that they do. The greatest friends of the Cult of Science are the worst enemies of science's actual practice.

William A. Wilson is a software engineer in the San Francisco Bay Area.

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.description
The problem with ­science is that so much of it simply isn't. Last summer, the Open Science Collaboration announced that it had tried to replicate one hundred published psychology experiments sampled from three of the most prestigious journals in the field.

# data[].attributes.body
None 0-30 points
18

# data[].attributes.headline
Could this real life situation be explored effectivley using  only the natural sciences?

# data[].attributes.subject
Could this real life situation be explored effectivley using  only the natural sciences?

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.readable_text
On the wall of Dr. Evdokia Anagnostou's office hangs a framed photo of a lone toddler. The boy, a patient of hers, is captured pedalling away from the camera on a plastic orange tricycle.

A quote attributed to U.S. journalist Hodding Carter Jr. floats above his head, and Dr. Anagnostou reads it out loud: "There are only two lasting bequests we can hope to give our children. One of these is roots; the other wings."

It's a gift she received years ago from the boy's father, she explains. It's also a reminder of the challenge she faces. Roots and wings are a tall order for a doctor who's striving to understand and find new treatments for autism spectrum disorder. Dr. Anagnostou, a senior clinician scientist at Toronto's Holland Bloorview Kids Rehabilitation Hospital, has spent more than a decade trying to unearth the causes of autism, with the aim of improving the lives of children affected by it.

But it's become clear that she and others in her field have hit a wall, the soft-spoken child neurologist tells me.

Although her young patients share the same diagnostic criteria for autism spectrum disorder, including difficulties with social interactions and communication and repetitive behaviours, individual cases often look very different. One child might thrive at school, while another might be nonverbal and prone to hitting himself. And almost all the children she sees also have additional disorders, like attention-deficit hyperactivity disorder (ADHD), obsessive-compulsive disorder (OCD), and intellectual disability.

Further confounding her: In study after study, potential therapies that have shown promise in some children fail to yield the same results when applied to larger groups of individuals with the same diagnosis. And not a single drug has been approved that could treat the core symptoms of autism, which by some projections affect as many as one in 63 people.

"I am frustrated," she says, then adds with a puckish smile, "but I am also feeling that this is the right time to do something different."

About five years ago, Dr. Anagnostou began to consider some unsettling questions: What if she and her colleagues had it all wrong? What if by grouping all their patients under an autism or ADHD or OCD label, they were missing critical clues about the roots of their symptoms? What if they needed to rethink their diagnostic categories?

She and her colleagues are now taking a new tack. In a trailblazing project called the Province of Ontario Neurodevelopmental Disorders (POND) Network, sponsored by the provincially funded Ontario Brain Institute, they're studying multiple disorders together, with the hope that such an approach will lead to a better understanding of their biology.

"We basically say that these concepts may be overlapping. So autism spectrum disorder may not be a distinct biological entity," Dr. Anagnostou, principal investigator of POND and Canada Research Chair in translational therapeutics in autism, explains.

The POND Network is part of a paradigm shift in how researchers around the world are beginning to examine mental and neurological disorders. Many are finding the current diagnostic categories don't quite reflect what genetics and neuroscience suggest about the underlying biology of dysfunction. So rather than study each disorder in isolation, they're compiling wide pools of data and seeing where the patterns emerge.

If they are on the right path, this approach may lead to more effective, targeted treatments and, ultimately, to entirely new ways of classifying the disorders. But a diagnosis is more than just a label for a set of symptoms. For some patients, it's a core part of their identity. What would new diagnostic categories mean for them?
'The big poke in the eye'
When I first heard Dr. Anagnostou discuss her work at an Ontario Brain Institute presentation in December, my mind reeled. Does this mean, I thought, dumbstruck, autism spectrum disorder may not exist?

On the contrary, the symptoms of autism obviously exist. Dr. Anagnostou and her colleagues are clear on that. The issue is they may not exist in isolation. "So the construct [of autism] may not be very useful as a diagnostic category," Dr. Anagnostou explains.

I'm reminded of childhood sorting games, where a category such as "things that hop" might include kangaroos, frogs and grasshoppers, even though to get a better grasp of the nature of each creature, you're better off grouping them with other mammals, insects and amphibians. This oversimplifies the matter, of course. But throughout history, people have categorized mental illness and neurological conditions in various ways that don't necessarily best reflect their nature. The ancient Greeks, for example, explained them as an imbalance of bodily humours or fluids.

"It's human nature to try to categorize things because lumping helps us understand, especially in the face of great diversity," says Dr. Russell Schachar, a co-investigator of POND and senior scientist at Toronto's SickKids hospital.

Lumping things together may seem like an intellectual exercise, but the ramifications of doing so are very real. Current diagnostic categories, developed over the past century, have provided criteria for distinguishing one type of disorder from another: autism from intellectual deficiency, schizophrenia from bipolar disorder, and ADHD from conduct disorder. And it has allowed doctors to communicate and policymakers to collect statistics and determine public-health strategies. "That helped us in every which way," Dr. Schachar says.

But the discovery in recent years of genetic mutations that cut across disorders have presented "the big poke in the eye, if you will - the thing that made it impossible to go any further," he says.

Genome sequencing, for instance, has pointed to not just one autism mutation, nor even a manageable handful, but hundreds of possible mutations that could be interacting with an infinite number of environmental factors to determine whether an individual develops the disorder. What's more, these mutations aren't exclusive to autism. Many of them also appear to be involved in a variety of other neurodevelopmental disorders.

To get anywhere in understanding what's going on in these neurodevelopmental disorders, Dr. Schachar says, scientists must figure out what is shared among them and what is distinct.

Instead of conducting separate studies on each disorder, POND's approach breaks down the boundaries between them. For example, a POND study published in the Journal of the American Academy of Child and Adolescent Psychiatry last year examined how well participants diagnosed with OCD, ADHD, and autism could read other people's emotions by looking at their eyes. Although the inability to read emotions is assumed to be an autistic trait, Dr. Anagnostou explains the researchers found it is common among children with ADHD too.

"It looks like it has nothing to do with disorder," she says. "If you're an ADHD kid with impaired social function, your ability to read emotions is as bad as a kid with ASD [autism spectrum disorder]. So it cuts across disorders."

POND researchers are also beginning to find similar structural connectivity in the brains of children who have ADHD and autism.

Other studies within POND are looking at participants' cognitive processes, neurochemistry, and the role of epigenetics or how environmental exposures and other factors may interact with genes.

Now in its third year, the POND project is collecting data on the genetics, behaviours and brain imaging of children with various disorders, including autism spectrum disorder, ADHD, OCD, intellectual disability, Rett syndrome, Tourette syndrome, Fragile X syndrome or Down syndrome. It's a whole new approach to conceptualizing the problem and conducting research, Schacher says.

Thus far, investigators from several participating institutions, including Holland Bloorview and SickKids in Toronto, and McMaster University and University of Western Ontario, have recruited some 1,300 children. Their goal is to bring that to a total of 2,500 within the next two years.
Reliable but not valid?
This new approach to research is like tackling a puzzle from the opposite end. Traditionally, investigators have asked "what can we find out about a specific disorder?" whereas the paradigm shift involves sorting through all the various puzzle pieces - the genetics, neuroscience and behaviours - and asking, "what categories do these form?"

The POND investigators aren't the only ones finding that current diagnostic constructs don't seem to align with the latest findings in genetics and neuroscience.

In the United States, the National Institute of Mental Health is taking a similar approach. Its Research Domain Criteria, an initiative launched in 2009, encourages investigators seeking research funding to think beyond the existing diagnostic categories of mental disorders of all kinds.

"Nature, the brain, behaviour, symptoms don't abide by those categories, and so we shouldn't pretend that they do any more because it's getting in the way of progress," says Dr. Sarah Morris, acting director of the initiative.

Dr. Morris says she and her colleagues acknowledge that the Diagnostic and Statistical Manual of Mental Disorders (DSM) and the International Classification of Diseases (ICD) are the standard diagnostic tools for clinical care. But they hope that by opening up the research to other conceptualizations of mental disorders, the results may inform better diagnostic practices. So, for example, instead of conducting a study on depression, a research team might focus on the various genes, molecules, brain circuits or behaviours that may interfere with people's responses to reward.

The thing about the existing categories, whether it's autism, ADHD, depression or schizophrenia, is they're reliable in a scientific sense, Dr. Morris notes, meaning the same results can be generated repeatedly. Individuals with a specific set of symptoms, for instance, can reliably be diagnosed with the same disorder by multiple doctors. But, she says, the real question is whether the current diagnostic categories are valid in terms of understanding the nature of mental illness. That is, do they accurately reflect the phenomenon being studied?

"There's evidence to think that they're not," Morris says.
Neurodiversity and Identity
In recent years, the concept of "neurodiversity" has grown as a movement in the world of autism advocacy. Neurodiversity - the idea that autism and other neurological differences are normal variations of human life - has gained widespread public attention, thanks to the likes of renowned autism activist Temple Grandin, whose 2010 TED Talk on the importance of autistic minds such as her own has received more than 3.7 million online views, and journalist Steve Silberman, author of the recent best-seller NeuroTribes: The Legacy of Autism and the Future of Neurodiversity. Many proponents of neurodiversity view autism and ADHD not as deficiencies that require fixes or cures, but as natural differences that require acceptance and inclusion in society.

Susan Cosgrove, a Toronto autism advocate who has three children with neurodevelopmental disorders, says she fully believes in neurodiversity. But at the same time, she says, her children need treatment to be able to cope with the world around them. The city won't get any quieter just because they're overwhelmed by sounds, she says, nor will buses clear out just because they find it too crowded.

"I absolutely, 100 per cent believe in accepting them for who they are, but the society is not built for them right now," she says. "Therapy and treatment is super important and is just as important now as it was before neurodiversity was accepted."

Cosgrove says the questions the POND researchers are posing make sense to her. Her family offers proof that the lines between neurodevelopmental disorders are hazy.

Between her two sons, Liam, 12 and Phoenix, 2, both diagnosed with autism, "there are definitely more differences than similarities," she says. At the same time, both also share symptoms with their sister, Kaya, 10, who has been diagnosed with ADHD. Those include difficulty with sensory processing and working memory. At Phoenix's age, for example, Liam barely spoke. And when he did, he mostly uttered words he made up himself. By contrast, Phoenix has an astonishingly precocious ability to read and an uncanny affinity for numbers.

During a recent visit to the family's apartment, Liam, a shy, sweet preteen, quietly watches his favourite YouTube video on the features of a model excavator. For him, having autism means "I'm scared of strangers," he explains to me, and "it can be hard to communicate."

Meanwhile, Phoenix, an energetic, cherubic toddler reads from a stack of pictureless flashcards, shown to him in random order. Without even having to sound the letters out, he bounced happily as he declared in rapid-fire: "Truck!" "Orange!" Hockey!" "Fifty" "Dinosaur!" "Clown!" "Diamond!" "Egg roll!"

So, if it turns out their diagnostic labels aren't valid, what does this mean for her children's care?
A new classification
Dr. Anagnostou emphasizes POND has a long way to go before it can offer any answers. But eventually, she says, if it turns out the researchers can conclude they "have no confidence that our constructs exist," it could lead to new diagnostic labels.

"Maybe instead of having autism, ADHD, intellectual disability, OCD, we may have [separate clusters of patients with] these types of mutations, these types of brain findings, and these types of behaviours. And they're more likely to respond to medications A, B, C," Dr. Anagnostou says.

This will, however, have significant consequences for patients and those who provide services for them, she says.

At present, for instance, even though there is great variability between children with autism, a school teacher may at least have a general idea of what to expect of a student with an autism diagnosis, Dr. Anagnostou says. "But if I told them this child has mutation X, Y, Z in this particular cluster, what will the teacher do with that?"

In addition, she says, people often incorporate their diagnoses as part of their identity.

"So what happens if somebody identifies as an autistic person and we come out and say, 'We don't know that autism exists as an entity'? That would be something we need to figure out as we proceed."

The aim, she says, is not to take away patients' diagnoses, but to take away their suffering.

Cosgrove, whose two sons are enrolled in the POND study, says she isn't holding her breath, but she would have no hesitation accepting new diagnostic labels, as long as they meant her children would receive more appropriate treatment that would improve the quality of their lives.

"Whatever gives them the best chance of a successful future," she says.

In Britain, Dr. Declan Murphy, managing director of the European Autism Interventions - A Multicentre Study for Developing New Medications (EU-AIMS), doesn't believe doctors will stop diagnosing people with autism in the future. Rather, he says, sub-types of autism may eventually emerge, which will allow for better targeted treatments.

"It wouldn't be that someone who is autistic today would be... no longer called autistic," Dr. Murphy says.

But, he says, what has become clear is that researchers need to collaborate to collect and share data, since it's only by studying large numbers of individuals that meaningful subgroups can be identified. "The days of small studies are just over, really. They've gone far enough."
From research to patient
For families and advocacy groups, the promise of better treatments and explanations seems to outweigh any complications that may arise out of reconsidering diagnostic constructs.

Dr. Suzanne Lewis, chair of the professional advisory committee for the advocacy group Autism Canada, which is not involved in POND, says she applauds POND's approach.

"It's not so much what it means to those who are defining the labels. It really is: What does it mean to those individuals and families living with the condition?" Dr. Lewis says, adding she has no doubt that research into the biology of the condition will benefit families. "It'll remove burdens of them wondering 'What did I do or what didn't I do that may have contributed to my child having autism or schizophrenia or whatever?' "

Back at Holland Bloorview, Dr. Anagnostou acknowledges the POND project is a gamble. While she is confident they're onto something, she admits it's possible she and her colleagues may end up being wrong about their assumption that the differences and similiarites among neurodevelopmental disorders will lead to any breakthrough in treatments.

"We may fail," she says. But, she notes, in the end, whatever data they end up with will help inform future research one way or another.

"If we haven't made a big difference with an alternative approach, we'll have learned something so we aren't where we started. But the kids are where they were," she says.

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.keywords[]
province of ontario neurodevelopmental disorders network

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.title
ADHD, OCD, autism: Is it time to redraw the boundaries separating childhood behavioural disorders?

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.description
On the wall of Dr. Evdokia Anagnostou's office hangs a framed photo of a lone toddler. The boy, a patient of hers, is captured pedalling away from the camera on a plastic orange tricycle. A quote attributed to U.S. journalist Hodding Carter Jr.

# data[].attributes.body
MILD 31- 49 points: You are an average online user. You may surf the Web a bit too long at times, but you have control over your usage.
46

# data[].attributes.body
76/100

# data[].attributes.body
"Looking to stand out in the crowd and wanting to keep his rank and status. His current situation is irritating him because he can't seem to find anybody out there who values the same high standards he does. He is feeling isolated and wants to give in to his carnal urges, but can't bring himself to appear weak in the eyes of others. Wants others to see his unique qualities and character but can't stand to come off as needy, so instead he has an ""I don't care"" attitude and pushing people away. He turns his back on those who criticizes his behavior, but beneath his indifference is a person who is in desperate need of approval."

# data[].attributes.body
Perfectionist

# data[].attributes.body
Mild: 31-49 points

# data[].attributes.body
Your Existing Situation

"Is strong willed and unwilling to take advice from others; however, finds himself currently in a dangerous situation which finding a solution should be top priority."

Your Stress Sources

"Unhappy in his current situation or relationship, but is unwilling to change things due to his need for acceptance and belonging. Refuses to be seen as weak and although he is resistant to give too much to the relationship, he stays committed in order to feel the attachment. The situation depresses and irritates him, causing restlessness and impatience. He is seeking some sort of escape from the situation either physically or mentally, which affects his ability to concentrate."

Your Restrained Characteristics

"His desire to avoid open conflict and tension forces him to put his desires on hold, even though he is feeling restrained and uneasy."

Is bothered when his needs and desires are misunderstood and he feels there is no one to turn to or rely on. His self-centered attitude can cause him to be easily offended.

Is bothered when his needs and desires are misunderstood and he feels there is no one to turn to or rely on. His self-centered attitude can cause him to be easily offended.

"Believes his hopes and dreams are realistic and sticks to them stubbornly, even though circumstances are forcing him to compromise. Very precise in the qualities he seeks in a partner."

Your Desired Objective

Longs to be accepted and recognized. Needs to impress others and be respected. He feels separated from others and wishes to belong.

Your Actual Problem

"Feeling anxious and restless frustration toward current situation or unfulfilled emotional requirements are causing stress. He tries escaping from those emotions by denying the exist at all. Hides his dissatisfaction at the situation behind a proud, but false independence."

# data[].attributes.headline
Probability testing as a mechanism for determining truth in the human sciences

# data[].attributes.subject
Probability testing as a mechanism for determining truth in the human sciences

# data[].attributes.body
Watch this clip to help you understand the importance of probability testing in the human sciences... and in life.

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.title
Wireless Philosophy | Bayes' Theorem | Wi Phi

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.description
In this Wireless Philosophy video, Ian Olasov (CUNY) introduces Bayes' Theorem of conditional probability, and the related Base Rate Fallacy.

# data[].attributes.body
69/100

# data[].attributes.body
NONE 0 – 30 points

# data[].attributes.body
our Existing Situation

"Outgoing but unpredictable and unstable. Likes things to go her way, otherwise she becomes agitated, indecisive, and fake in her activities."

Your Stress Sources

"Wishes for freedom and independence, free from limitations and restrictions except for the ones she choices to give himself."

Your Restrained Characteristics

"Feels she is not receiving her fair share and is unable to rely on anyone for support or sympathy. she keeps her emotions bottled up, leaving her quick to take offense to small things. she tries to make the best of her situation."

"Seeking to broaden her horizons and believes her hopes and dreams are realistic. Worries she may not be able to do the things she wants and needs to escape to a peaceful, quiet environment in order to restore her confidence."

Conceited and is easily insulted. Holds back emotionally but is able to find satisfaction through sexual activity.

Conceited and is easily insulted. Holds back emotionally but is able to find satisfaction through sexual activity.

Your Desired Objective

"Looking for affectionate, fulfilling, and friendly relationships. Seeks intimacy and personal relationships full of love, self-sacrifice and trust."

Your Actual Problem

"Prefers to be left in peace and avoids arguments, confrontation, and conflicts."

# data[].attributes.body
EQ1: 53/100
EQ2:66/100

# data[].attributes.body
Perfectionist

# data[].attributes.body
62/100

# data[].attributes.body
Your Existing Situation

Desperately needs a close relationship with an affectionate and accepting partner; or some other way to be recognized and known.

Your Stress Sources

"Always trying to make a good impression on others, but doubtful she is succeeding. Feels she has the right to everything she hopes and dreams of and becomes annoyed and helpless when things don't go her way. Is troubled by the very thought of failure which leaves her feeling miserable. Always sees herself as the victim as if everyone treats her poorly and she never is given her fair share. Feels her failures are no fault of her own, but due to the shortcomings of others."

Your Restrained Characteristics

Open and emotionally involved in relationships and easily finds satisfaction through sexual activity.
Current situations force her into compromise and placing her own hopes and desires on hold for the time being.
Applies tough standards to her potential partner and demands an unrealistic perfection in her sex life.
Applies tough standards to her potential partner and demands an unrealistic perfection in her sex life.
Current situation is leaving her doubtful and cautions about becoming intimately involved with others.

Your Desired Objective
"Longs for tenderness and for a feeling of acceptance from a partner. Appreciates things that are beautiful, pleasing to the eye, and stylish."

Your Actual Problem

Disappointed because her hopes have not come to pass and she fears coming up with new goals will only lead to further disappointment. These conflicting emotions lead to a feeling of anxiety and depression. she tries to escape into a peaceful and calm relationship which offers encouragement and protection from further disappointment.

Your Actual Problem #2

Lack of energy leaves her unnoticed to pursue further activities or demands placed on her. she feels powerless which leaves her agitated and depressed. Tries to escape from her struggles by searching for peaceful and restful conditions in which to relax and recover in an atmosphere full of security.

# data[].attributes.body
Perfectionist

# data[].attributes.body
71/100

# data[].attributes.body
61

# data[].attributes.body
Your Existing Situation

"Very emotional and artistic, enjoys being surrounded by beauty and art. Looking for a partner who always has an eye for beauty and who enjoys close, loving relationships."

Your Stress Sources

"Avoids pressure from others and insists on developing her individual independence. Wants to make up her own mind with resistance from others or outside forces, and needs the freedom to make her own decisions. Wants to be looked at as a wise individual whose opinions are respected, and has a hard time admitting she is wrong. Can be reluctant to accept or understand other people's opinions or point of view."

Your Restrained Characteristics

"Feels she is getting less than she deserves for all her hard work; however, she makes no effort to change things and tries to make the best of the situation."

His confidence is low but she is unable to admit that is the reason for her avoidance of conflict. Feels it is a situation out of her control and she is making the best of it.

"Seeking to broaden her horizons and believes her hopes and dreams are realistic. Worries she may not be able to do the things she wants and needs to escape to a peaceful, quiet environment in order to restore her confidence."

"Seeking to broaden her horizons and believes her hopes and dreams are realistic. Worries she may not be able to do the things she wants and needs to escape to a peaceful, quiet environment in order to restore her confidence."

Current events have her feeling forced to make bargains and put aside her own desires for now. she is able to find satisfaction and happiness through sexual activity.

Your Desired Objective

"Longs for a loving, caring, and supportive relationship, and fanaticizes of living in perfect harmony with others. Has a strong desire for tenderness and affection and enjoys things which are artistically pleasing to the eye."

Your Actual Problem

"Impressed by unique and one of a kind things, and by people with exceptional personalities. Tries to takes the characteristics she likes in other people and apply it to herself as well as coming across as a unique individual."

Your Actual Problem #2

Longs the freedom to make her own decisions and plans without the criticism and restrictions of others. Uses her charm to deal with others and get what she wants.

# data[].attributes.body
"Enjoys the refined, kind, and sensitive, but can be harshly critical unless he is guaranteed the act is honest and truthful. Keeps his eyes open and his emotions in check so that he always knows where he stands. Tends to be a bit too trusting and therefore expects sincerity and honest from those closest to him."

# data[].attributes.body
Your Existing Situation

Is feeling a large amount of stress due to her inability to achieve goals and her indecisiveness on how to go about changing the situation for the better.

Your Stress Sources

"His current situation or relationship is not up to par, but cannot improve it without help. Hides her vulnerability by holding back affection or being overly expressive. The relationship may be depressing, but the fear of losing too much keeps her around. she wants to be independent and free, but fears the future will be just as disappointing. her situation leaves her sensitive and impatience, seeking a quick escape. her restlessness may destroy the ability to concentrate."

Your Restrained Characteristics

"Current situation makes her feel unable to prove himself, but tries to make the best of things."

Feels trapped in a helpless situation and is desperately seeking relief. she is able to find pleasure and happiness in sexual activity.

"Feels trapped in a helpless situation and is desperately seeking relief. she is able to find pleasure and happiness in sexual activity, as long as there is not a lot of conflict or emotional difficulty."

"Emotionally withdrawn, feels forced to make compromises which makes emotional attachments difficult."

Your Desired Objective

"Seeking an escape from the things that are bringing her down, but is clinging to false hopes and pipe dreams."

Your Actual Problem

"Feeling anxious and restless frustration toward current situation or unfulfilled emotional requirements are causing stress. she feels misunderstood, used, and anxious. she strives to search for new relationships or environment, in the hope they may offer her happiness and peace of mind."

Your Actual Problem #2

"Feeling held back and restricted from moving forward, looking for a solution that will give her more freedom and less obstacles."

- See more at: http://www.colorquiz.com/results.php?code=f,7,1,5,2,0,4,3,6,5,4,0,7,1,2,3,6,7,1,0,2,6,5,3,4,1,7,0,6,1,2,5,3,4,0&p=full#sthash.bcNpAygE.dpuf

# data[].attributes.body
Your Existing Situation

"Is sensitive and easily influenced by other's thoughts and emotions. Looking for friendly, easy-going relationships and jobs that help develop them."

Your Stress Sources

"Needs to meet people who have the same high principals and values as himself, but finds the need unfulfilled. her need to feel dominate and superior leaves her feeling isolated and does not allow for her to give freely of himself. she would like to surrender and let go, but sees that as a weakness she must not give in to. Holding back will allow her to stand out for the crowd and earn a higher status, recognized by others as unique and important."

Your Restrained Characteristics

"Tries to participate and involve herself in things going on around him; however, avoids conflict and arguments to reduce stress and tension."

Has strong emotional demands and is picky when it comes to choosing a partner. she chooses to remain emotionally distant and uninvolved in relationships.

"Struggles to make her demands clear, but feels ignored. Feels resentful, but acts as if she doesn't care, doing what is necessary to keep peace."

Feels as if too many walls and obstacles are standing in her way and that she is being forced to make compromises. she needs to put her own needs on hold for the time being.

Your Desired Objective

Seeks to be known for something she has accomplished and uses her social abilities to win people over. Emotional and sensitive and romantic.

Your Actual Problem

"Impressed by unique and one of a kind things, and by people with exceptional personalities. Tries to takes the characteristics she likes in other people and apply it to herself as well as coming across as a unique individual."

# data[].attributes.body
65/100

# data[].attributes.body
Your Existing Situation

"Works well with others, as long as he doesn't have to take the lead. Longs for relationships which are understanding and relatively conflict-free."

Your Stress Sources

"An emotional relationship is falling apart and disappointing and has become a depressing situation. Would like to free himself from the relationship, but is afraid of losing what could have been or future disappointment down the line. His emotions constantly contradict each other irritating him; he tries to hid his irritation with a distant and harsh attitude."

Your Restrained Characteristics

Open and emotionally involved in relationships and easily finds satisfaction through sexual activity.

"Feels he is not receiving his fair share and is unable to rely on anyone for support or sympathy. He keeps his emotions bottled up, leaving him quick to take offense to small things. He tries to make the best of his situation."

"Is emotionally demanding, especially during intimate moments, which leaves him feeling frustrated because he is unable to find a perfect union."

"Feels he is not receiving his fair share and is unable to rely on anyone for support or sympathy. He keeps his emotions bottled up, leaving him quick to take offense to small things. He tries to make the best of his situation."

Open and emotionally involved in relationships and easily finds satisfaction through sexual activity.

Your Desired Objective

"Strives for full life which includes activities and experiences, as well as, a close relationship offering sexual and emotional satisfaction."

Your Actual Problem

Feeling anxious and restless frustration toward current situation or unfulfilled emotional requirements are causing stress. He tries escaping by throwing himself into activities directed at personal success or experiencing new things.

Your Actual Problem #2

"Is disappointed and let down, feels there is no point in making new goals as they will leave him feeling the same way. Looking for friendly, pleasant relationships with others, who will further develop his intellect. Feels his current relationships are empty and holding him back. Reacting with an intense desire to become involved in various activities aimed at achieving his goals."

# data[].attributes.body
"Very social and needs a highly social environment with people who depend on him, in order to feel safe. He is a go-getter and can adapt to almost any situation. "

# data[].attributes.body
Your Existing Situation

"Looking for a way to overcome his current problems and issues, but finds it difficult to find solutions or choose the best course of action."

Your Stress Sources

"His current situation or relationship is not up to par, but cannot improve it without help.  Hides his vulnerability by holding back affection or being overly expressive.  The relationship may be depressing, but the fear of losing too much keeps him around.  He wants to be independent and free, but fears the future will be just as disappointing.  His situation leaves him sensitive and impatience, seeking a quick escape.  His restlessness may destroy the ability to concentrate."

Your Restrained Characteristics

"Demanding and picky in his relationships, but careful not to bring out conflict or disagreements and this may decrease his chances of achieving his goals and ideas."

"Struggles to make his demands clear, but feels ignored.  Feels resentful, but acts as if he doesn't care, doing what is necessary to keep peace."

"Struggles to make his demands clear, but feels ignored.  Feels resentful, but acts as if he doesn't care, doing what is necessary to keep peace."

"Emotionally withdrawn, feels forced to make compromises which makes emotional attachments difficult."

Your Desired Objective

"Searching for a life free of problems, stress, and drama.  Wishes to find security and peace, so that he may relax."

Your Actual Problem

Searching security and a position in where the demands of others is not put solely on him.

Your Actual Problem #2

Feeling anxious and restless frustration toward current situation or unfulfilled emotional requirements are causing stress.  Tries to escape into a conflict free environment where he feels a sense of security and can relax and recover - See more at: http://www.colorquiz.com/results.php?code=m,1,7,3,2,5,6,0,4,7,6,4,0,3,2,7,1,5,6&p=full#sthash.8sQ5E5gH.dpuf

# data[].attributes.body
MODERATE 50 -79 points: You are experiencing occasional or frequent problems because of the Internet. You should consider their full impact on your life.

Total= 51/100

# data[].attributes.body
Realist

# data[].attributes.body
Your Existing Situation

"Craves change and new things, always looking for new adventures and activities. Becomes restless and frustrated when he has to wait to long for things to develop. His impatience leads to irritability and a desire to move on to the next project."

Your Stress Sources

Feeling empty and isolated from others and trying to bridge the gap between himself and others. Wants to live life to the fullest and experience as much as possible. He cannot stand any restrictions or obstacles put in his way and only longs to be free.

Your Restrained Characteristics

Emotionally distant even from those closest to him.

"Although he is able to find contentment through sexual activity, he feels hopeless to change his problems and difficulties and continues to make the best of what he has."

Current situation is leaving him doubtful and cautions about becoming intimately involved with others.

"Although he is able to find contentment through sexual activity, he feels hopeless to change his problems and difficulties and continues to make the best of what he has."

Current situation is leaving him doubtful and cautions about becoming intimately involved with others.

Your Desired Objective

"Highly optimistic and outgoing personality. Loves to learn new and exciting things, and craves new interests. Looking for a well-rounded life full of success and new experiences. Does not allow himself to be overcome with negative thoughts or self-doubt. Takes life head on, with enthusiasm. "

Your Actual Problem

"Fights resistance or limitations, and insists he is free to develop in his own way. Rewarded by accomplishing things on his own, with little to no help from others."

Your Actual Problem #2

Is afraid he will be held back from obtaining the things he wants leading him to act out with a hectic intensity.

# data[].attributes.body
Perfectionist

# data[].attributes.body
Perfectionist

# data[].attributes.body
61/100

# data[].attributes.body
Realist yo!

# data[].attributes.body
Perfectionist

# data[].attributes.body
realist

# data[].attributes.body
67/100

# data[].attributes.body
Realist

# data[].attributes.body
who r u

# data[].attributes.body
MODERATE 50 -79 points: You are experiencing occasional or frequent problems because of the Internet. You should consider their full impact on your life.

total = 50

# data[].attributes.body
MILD 31-49 points: You are an average online user. You may surf the Web a bit too long at times, but you have control over your usage.
Total = 40

# data[].attributes.body
MILD 31- 49 points: You are an average online user. You may surf the Web a bit too long at times, but you have control over your usage.
Total = 36/100

# data[].attributes.body
Realist

# data[].attributes.body
Realist

# data[].attributes.body
"Needs a peaceful and quiet environment. Desires an affectionate and faithful partner who will spoil her and treat her with importance. If she feels mistreated or a lack of attention, she may withdraw."

"Always trying to make a good impression on others, but doubtful she is succeeding. Feels she has the right to everything she hopes and dreams of and becomes annoyed and helpless when things don't go her way. Is troubled by the very thought of failure which leaves her feeling miserable. Always sees herself as the victim as if everyone treats her poorly and she never is given her fair share. Feels her failures are no fault of her own, but due to the shortcomings of others."

Current events leave her feeling forced into compromise in order to avoid being cut off from affection or future cooperation.

"Feels she is not receiving her fair share and is unable to rely on anyone for support or sympathy. she keeps her emotions bottled up, leaving her quick to take offense to small things. she tries to make the best of her situation."

Is in need of immediate rest and relaxation. Longs for peace and a sense they are understood. Feels she has been treated unfairly which makes her angry. Cannot stand to stay in an environment in which she is treated unfairly and with no consideration for her feelings.

Lack of energy leaves her unnoticed to pursue further activities or demands placed on her. she feels powerless which leaves her agitated and depressed. Tries to escape from her struggles by searching for peaceful and restful conditions in which to relax and recover in an atmosphere full of security.

Disappointed because her hopes have not come to pass and she fears coming up with new goals will only lead to further disappointment. These conflicting emotions lead to a feeling of anxiety and depression. she tries to escape into a peaceful and calm relationship which offers encouragement and protection from further disappointment

# data[].attributes.body
Very addicted 98/100

# data[].attributes.body
Realist

# data[].attributes.body
Perfectionist

# data[].attributes.body
Realist

# data[].attributes.body
Perfectionist

# data[].attributes.body
42/100

# data[].attributes.body
34/100

# data[].attributes.body
Realist

# data[].attributes.body
25/100

NONE 0 – 30 points

# data[].attributes.body
Students: please read through the attached article and make notes - be ready to discuss the article on Thursday afternoon.

# data[].attributes.body
Perfectionist

# data[].attributes.body
Perfectionist

# data[].attributes.body
"Feels stressed due to her current situation or relationships, and needs to make changes. Looking for a solution that will increase her chances of fulfilling her current hopes and dreams."

# data[].attributes.body
MILD 31- 49 points: You are an average online user. You may surf the Web a bit too long at times, but you have control over your usage.
Total = 31

# data[].attributes.body
MILD 44/100

# data[].attributes.body
MILD 31- 49 points: You are an average online user. You may surf the Web a bit too long at times, but you have control over your usage.
Total = 31

# data[].attributes.body
Your Existing Situation

"Creative and emotional, looking for ways to further expand those qualities. Looking for a partner who enjoys the same activities. Seeking adventure and new and unusual activities."

Your Stress Sources

"Avoids pressure from others and insists on developing her individual independence. Wants to make up her own mind with resistance from others or outside forces, and needs the freedom to make her own decisions. Wants to be looked at as a wise individual whose opinions are respected, and has a hard time admitting she is wrong. Can be reluctant to accept or understand other people's opinions or point of view."

Your Restrained Characteristics

"His desire to avoid open conflict and tension forces her to put her desires on hold, even though she is feeling restrained and uneasy."

"Finds satisfaction in sexual activity, but is emotionally detached which prevents her from becoming too involved."

Giving more than she is getting back and feels misunderstood and unappreciated. Feels she is being forced into compromising and even her close relationships leave her feeling emotional distant.

"Seeking to broaden her horizons and believes her hopes and dreams are realistic. Worries she may not be able to do the things she wants and needs to escape to a peaceful, quiet environment in order to restore her confidence."

Current events have her feeling forced to make bargains and put aside her own desires for now. she is able to find satisfaction and happiness through sexual activity.

Your Desired Objective

"Wants interesting and exciting things to happen in her life. she is able to make others like him, because of her genuine concern for them. she is charming and open and makes friends easily. she can have an over-active imagination, which leads her to fantasize and daydream."

Your Actual Problem

"Impressed by unique and one of a kind things, and by people with exceptional personalities. Tries to takes the characteristics she likes in other people and apply it to herself as well as coming across as a unique individual."

Your Actual Problem #2

Longs the freedom to make her own decisions and plans without the criticism and restrictions of others. Uses her charm to deal with others and get what she wants.

# data[].attributes.body
MODERATE 50 -79 points: You are experiencing occasional or frequent problems because of the Internet. You should consider their full impact on your life.
Total = 55

# data[].attributes.body
Your Existing Situation

"Is strong willed and unwilling to take advice from others; however, finds himself currently in a dangerous situation which finding a solution should be top priority."

Your Stress Sources

"His normal flexible and stubborn attitude has become weakened because he feels overworked, tired and as if he is stuck in a rut. The situation seems helpless and is causing him to physically feel the strain, he is searching for a solution but he is unable to make a decision on how to go about making the changes. He remains involved in the problem, but is unable to view it rationally or get rid of it. He keeps working at it and cannot let go, feeling as if he will only feel better if he can solve the issue at hand."

Your Restrained Characteristics

Open and emotionally involved in relationships and easily finds satisfaction through sexual activity.

Is bothered when his needs and desires are misunderstood and he feels there is no one to turn to or rely on. His self-centered attitude can cause him to be easily offended.

"Believes his hopes and dreams are realistic and sticks to them stubbornly, even though circumstances are forcing him to compromise. Very precise in the qualities he seeks in a partner."

Conceited and is easily insulted. Holds back emotionally but is able to find satisfaction through sexual activity.

Conceited and is easily insulted. Holds back emotionally but is able to find satisfaction through sexual activity.

Your Desired Objective

Is in need of immediate rest and relaxation. Longs for peace and a sense they are understood. Feels he has been treated unfairly which makes him angry. Cannot stand to stay in an environment in which he is treated unfairly and with no consideration for his feelings.

Your Actual Problem

Needs to find a stable and peaceful environment which will free him of the worries that are preventing him from achieving the things he wants.

Your Actual Problem #2

"Tension and stress is brought on by trying to cope with conditions which are out of his control, using up all his strength and leaving him feeling inadequate. He wishes to escape into a more peaceful and problem-free environment, in which he will no longer have to assert himself or deal with so much pressure."

# data[].attributes.body
65/100

# data[].attributes.body
MILD 31- 49 points: You are an average online user. You may surf the Web a bit too long at times, but you have control over your usage. TOTAL = 40

# data[].attributes.body
73/100

# data[].attributes.body
Realist

# data[].attributes.body
Realist

# data[].attributes.body
Realist

# data[].attributes.body
Realist

# data[].attributes.body
EQ  - 67/100

# data[].attributes.body
EQ 1 - 44/100

# data[].attributes.body
EQ - 54/100
EQ2 - 46/100

# data[].attributes.body
Works well with others. Needs personal relationships which are understanding and relatively conflict-free.

"Looking for affectionate, fulfilling, and friendly relationships. Seeks intimacy and personal relationships full of love, self-sacrifice and trust."

"Wants to be valued and respected, seeks a close and peaceful relationship with a shared respect of each other."

# data[].attributes.body
63/100

# data[].attributes.body
EQ - 71/100

# data[].attributes.body
EQ1 - 40/100
EQ2- 32/100

# data[].attributes.body
EQ 54/100
EQ2 69/100

# data[].attributes.body
EQ 80/100
EQ 87/100

# data[].attributes.body
Your Existing Situation

"Insecure with himself, needs stable roots and emotional security. Seeking an environment which provides comfort and few problems, but is reluctant to put any effort or energy into it."

Your Desired Objective

"Is very intense person who seeks excitement and sexual stimulation. Wants others to see him as an exciting and interesting person, who is also charming and can easily influence others. Uses his charm to increase his chances of success and gain other people's trust."

Your Stress Sources

"Not a team player and is unwilling to be involved in most activities. In the past he was over involved and now emotionally drained. Due to his fear of over involvement, he now chooses to remain uninvolved with the activities around him. "

Your Restrained Characteristics

Current situations force him into compromise and placing his own hopes and desires on hold for the time being.

Current situations force him into compromise and placing his own hopes and desires on hold for the time being.

Your Actual Problem

Is afraid he will be held back from obtaining the things he wants leading him to act out with a hectic intensity.

# data[].attributes.body
perfectionist

# data[].attributes.body
"Seeking for his own identity, is sensitive and seeks close nurturing relationships and environments. Has an eye for beauty and a desire to have his emotions protected and further developed."