<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?>
<rss version="2.0"
	xmlns:content="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/content/"
	xmlns:wfw="http://wellformedweb.org/CommentAPI/"
	xmlns:dc="http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/"
	xmlns:atom="http://www.w3.org/2005/Atom"
	xmlns:sy="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/syndication/"
	xmlns:slash="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/slash/"
	>

<channel>
	<title>Salon.com > study</title>
	<atom:link href="http://www.salon.com/topic/study/feed/" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml" />
	<link>http://www.salon.com</link>
	<description></description>
	<lastBuildDate>Wed, 03 Jul 2013 01:14:35 +0000</lastBuildDate>
	<language>en</language>
	<sy:updatePeriod>hourly</sy:updatePeriod>
	<sy:updateFrequency>1</sy:updateFrequency>
	<generator>http://wordpress.org/?v=3.2.1</generator>
		<item>
		<title>Study: Mozart helps you focus</title>
		<link>http://www.salon.com/2013/06/26/study_mozart_helps_you_focus_partner/</link>
		<comments>http://www.salon.com/2013/06/26/study_mozart_helps_you_focus_partner/#comments</comments>
		<pubDate>Wed, 26 Jun 2013 18:07:00 +0000</pubDate>
		<dc:creator></dc:creator>
				<category><![CDATA[Life]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Entertainment]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[All Salon]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Pacific Standard]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Mozart]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[study]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Music]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Neuroscience]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Brain]]></category>

		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.railrode.net/?p=13337838</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[New research shows people work better and faster when listening to the soothing sounds of his minuets]]></description>
			<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p><a href="http://www.psmag.com/"><img style="margin: 0pt 10px 0pt 0pt;" src="http://media.salon.com/2012/08/PacificStandard.color_1.gif" alt="Pacific Standard" align="left" /></a></p><p>Score another one for Wolfgang Amadeus. <a href="http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/23778307" target="_blank">Researchers report</a> the soothing sounds of a Mozart minuet boosts the ability of children and seniors to focus on a task and ignore extraneous information.</p><p>Dissonant music has the opposite effect, according to <a href="http://community.frontiersin.org/people/_NobuoMasataka/11411" target="_blank">Nobuo Masataka</a> of Japan’s Kyoto University and <a href="http://www.leonid-perlovsky.com/" target="_blank">Leonard Perlovsky</a> of Harvard University. Their findings help make the case that music, sometimes thought of as a pleasant byproduct of evolution, has in fact played an active role in human development.</p><p><a href="http://www.salon.com/2013/06/26/study_mozart_helps_you_focus_partner/">Continue Reading...</a></p>]]></content:encoded>
			<wfw:commentRss>http://www.salon.com/2013/06/26/study_mozart_helps_you_focus_partner/feed/</wfw:commentRss>
		<slash:comments>5</slash:comments>
		</item>
		<item>
		<title>Study: Reading novels makes us better thinkers</title>
		<link>http://www.salon.com/2013/06/15/book_nerds_make_better_decisions_partner/</link>
		<comments>http://www.salon.com/2013/06/15/book_nerds_make_better_decisions_partner/#comments</comments>
		<pubDate>Sat, 15 Jun 2013 13:00:00 +0000</pubDate>
		<dc:creator></dc:creator>
				<category><![CDATA[Entertainment]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[All Salon]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Pacific Standard]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Fiction]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[study]]></category>

		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.railrode.net/?p=13324327</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[New research says reading literary fiction helps people embrace ambiguous ideas and avoid snap judgments]]></description>
			<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p><a href="http://www.psmag.com/"><img style="margin: 0pt 10px 0pt 0pt;" src="http://media.salon.com/2012/08/PacificStandard.color_1.gif" alt="Pacific Standard" align="left" /></a></p><p>Are you uncomfortable with ambiguity? It’s a common condition, but a highly problematic one. The compulsion to quell that unease can inspire snap judgments, rigid thinking, and bad decision-making.</p><p>Fortunately, <a href="http://www.tandfonline.com/doi/abs/10.1080/10400419.2013.783735#preview" target="_blank">new research</a> suggests a simple anecdote for this affliction: Read more literary fiction.</p><p>A trio of University of Toronto scholars, led by psychologist <a href="http://www.rotman.utoronto.ca/FacultyAndResearch/Faculty/InstructorBios/Maja%20Djikic.aspx" target="_blank">Maja Djikic</a>, report that people who have just read a short story have less need for what psychologists call “cognitive closure.” Compared with peers who have just read an essay, they expressed more comfort with disorder and uncertainty—attitudes that allow for both sophisticated thinking and greater creativity.</p><p>“Exposure to literature,” the researchers write in the <em>Creativity Research Journal,</em> “may offer a (way for people) to become more likely to open their minds.”</p><p><a href="http://www.salon.com/2013/06/15/book_nerds_make_better_decisions_partner/">Continue Reading...</a></p>]]></content:encoded>
			<wfw:commentRss>http://www.salon.com/2013/06/15/book_nerds_make_better_decisions_partner/feed/</wfw:commentRss>
		<slash:comments>28</slash:comments>
		</item>
		<item>
		<title>Study: Muscle men more politically conservative</title>
		<link>http://www.salon.com/2013/05/16/study_muscle_men_more_politically_conservative_than_others/</link>
		<comments>http://www.salon.com/2013/05/16/study_muscle_men_more_politically_conservative_than_others/#comments</comments>
		<pubDate>Thu, 16 May 2013 15:32:00 +0000</pubDate>
		<dc:creator></dc:creator>
				<category><![CDATA[Social]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Business]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Life]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[News]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[All Salon]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Video]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Science]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Wealth]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[rich people]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[study]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Economics]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[economy]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Denmark]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[warren buffet]]></category>

		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.railrode.net/?p=13300448</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[Researchers in Denmark report a relationship between bicep size and support for progressive economic policies ]]></description>
			<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Researchers from Denmark's Aarhus University found that the more upper body strength a wealthy man has, the more likely he is to support conservative, self-interested economic and social policies. Conversely, similarly wealthy but not-similarly-stacked men were more likely to support policies in favor of wealth redistribution, such as higher taxes on the very rich. (Related: Does anyone know how much <a href="http://www.nytimes.com/2012/11/26/opinion/buffett-a-minimum-tax-for-the-wealthy.html?_r=0" target="_blank">Warren Buffet</a> is benching these days?)</p><p>The scientists say they based their hypothesis on evolutionary theory, as Science 2.0 <a href="http://www.science20.com/news_articles/physical_strength_and_political_conservatism_coevolved_say_social_scientists-112048" target="_blank">reports</a>:</p><p><a href="http://www.salon.com/2013/05/16/study_muscle_men_more_politically_conservative_than_others/">Continue Reading...</a></p>]]></content:encoded>
			<wfw:commentRss>http://www.salon.com/2013/05/16/study_muscle_men_more_politically_conservative_than_others/feed/</wfw:commentRss>
		<slash:comments>13</slash:comments>
		</item>
		<item>
		<title>Salt isn&#8217;t so bad</title>
		<link>http://www.salon.com/2013/05/14/major_study_questions_health_benefits_of_low_sodium_diet/</link>
		<comments>http://www.salon.com/2013/05/14/major_study_questions_health_benefits_of_low_sodium_diet/#comments</comments>
		<pubDate>Tue, 14 May 2013 21:44:00 +0000</pubDate>
		<dc:creator></dc:creator>
				<category><![CDATA[Life]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[News]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[All Salon]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Salt]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[sodium]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Health]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Diet]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[low-sodium diet]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Science]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Research]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[study]]></category>

		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.railrode.net/?p=13298615</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[Expert panel concludes that national dietary guidelines on sodium consumption levels are unnecessarily low ]]></description>
			<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>A new study commissioned by the Institute of Medicine and Centers for Disease Control and Prevention reveals that, for many Americans, there is no real reason to seriously restrict salt consumption. The expert panel concluded that sodium consumption levels currently recommended by national dietary guidelines are unnecessarily low, and questioned the health benefits of sharply reducing salt intake.</p><p>While recommending that Americans avoid "excessive" sodium intake, the panel also stated that there is no evidence to suggest that no-sodium and very low-sodium diets are good for you, as the Associated Press <a href="http://abcnews.go.com/Health/wireStory/study-questions-sharply-us-cut-salt-19176402#.UZKmcSs-bfM" target="_blank">reports</a>:</p><p><a href="http://www.salon.com/2013/05/14/major_study_questions_health_benefits_of_low_sodium_diet/">Continue Reading...</a></p>]]></content:encoded>
			<wfw:commentRss>http://www.salon.com/2013/05/14/major_study_questions_health_benefits_of_low_sodium_diet/feed/</wfw:commentRss>
		<slash:comments>8</slash:comments>
		</item>
		<item>
		<title>Are millennials delusional?</title>
		<link>http://www.salon.com/2013/05/02/study_millennials_are_lazy_have_unrealistic_expectations_partner/</link>
		<comments>http://www.salon.com/2013/05/02/study_millennials_are_lazy_have_unrealistic_expectations_partner/#comments</comments>
		<pubDate>Thu, 02 May 2013 18:25:00 +0000</pubDate>
		<dc:creator></dc:creator>
				<category><![CDATA[Social]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Life]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[All Salon]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Pacific Standard]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[millennials]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Research]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[study]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Psychology]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Work]]></category>

		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.railrode.net/?p=13287757</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[New research suggests that members of "Generation Me" are warped by a profound sense of entitlement]]></description>
			<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p><a href="http://www.psmag.com/"><img style="margin: 0pt 10px 0pt 0pt;" src="http://media.salon.com/2012/08/PacificStandard.color_1.gif" alt="Pacific Standard" align="left" /></a>Young people coming of age over the past decade or so have been referred to as Millennials, or, in a nod to their individualistic nature, <a href="http://eubie.com/genme.pdf" target="_blank">Generation Me</a>.</p><p><a href="http://psp.sagepub.com/content/early/2013/05/01/0146167213484586.abstract" target="_blank">Newly published research</a> suggests they could also be called the generation with unrealistic expectations.</p><p>An analysis of the values and ambitions of American 12th graders finds “a growing discrepancy between the desire for material rewards and the willingness to do the work usually required to earn them.” Psychologists <a href="http://www.psychology.sdsu.edu/people/jean-twenge/" target="_blank">Jean Twenge</a> of San Diego State University and <a href="http://www.knox.edu/academics/faculty/kasser-tim.html" target="_blank">Tim Kasser</a> of Knox College report that, for high school seniors in 2005, 2006, and 2007, materialism remained at historically high levels, even as commitment to hard work declined.</p><p><a href="http://www.salon.com/2013/05/02/study_millennials_are_lazy_have_unrealistic_expectations_partner/">Continue Reading...</a></p>]]></content:encoded>
			<wfw:commentRss>http://www.salon.com/2013/05/02/study_millennials_are_lazy_have_unrealistic_expectations_partner/feed/</wfw:commentRss>
		<slash:comments>207</slash:comments>
		</item>
		<item>
		<title>Study: Talking about a female candidate&#8217;s appearance hurts her chances of winning</title>
		<link>http://www.salon.com/2013/04/08/study_talking_about_a_female_candidates_appearance_hurts_her_chances_of_winning/</link>
		<comments>http://www.salon.com/2013/04/08/study_talking_about_a_female_candidates_appearance_hurts_her_chances_of_winning/#comments</comments>
		<pubDate>Mon, 08 Apr 2013 15:53:00 +0000</pubDate>
		<dc:creator></dc:creator>
				<category><![CDATA[Life]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[News]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Politics]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[All Salon]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[women]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Gender]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Women in politics]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[study]]></category>

		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.railrode.net/?p=13264769</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[Researchers found that the more media attention a woman received for her looks, the less likely she was to win ]]></description>
			<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>A <a href="http://www.nameitchangeit.org/blog/entry/name-it.-change-it.-releases-new-research-on-appearance-coverage-of-women-c" target="_blank">study</a> released on Monday by Name It, Change It, a project that monitors media coverage of female political figures, revealed that appearance-focused media attention negatively impacts the likelihood that a female candidate will win an election.</p><p>The survey interviewed 1,500 likely voters about two fictional candidates, "Dan Jones" and "Jane Smith." The interview subjects were split into groups, some of which received materials on both candidates that did not mention any of their physical attributes while others received materials that either included neutral, negative and positive appraisals of Smith's appearance:</p><blockquote><p><strong>Neutral description</strong>: Smith dressed in a brown blouse, black skirt, and modest pumps with a short heel…</p> <p><strong>Positive description</strong>: In person, Smith is fit and attractive and looks even younger than her age. At the press conference, smartly turned out in a ruffled jacket, pencil skirt, and fashionable high heels….</p> <p><strong>Negative description</strong>: Smith unfortunately sported a heavy layer of foundation and powder that had settled into her forehead lines, creating an unflattering look for an otherwise pretty woman, along with her famous fake, tacky nails.</p></blockquote><p><a href="http://www.salon.com/2013/04/08/study_talking_about_a_female_candidates_appearance_hurts_her_chances_of_winning/">Continue Reading...</a></p>]]></content:encoded>
			<wfw:commentRss>http://www.salon.com/2013/04/08/study_talking_about_a_female_candidates_appearance_hurts_her_chances_of_winning/feed/</wfw:commentRss>
		<slash:comments>7</slash:comments>
		</item>
		<item>
		<title>Study: Your Facebook &#8220;likes&#8221; might be overexposing you</title>
		<link>http://www.salon.com/2013/03/12/study_your_facebook_likes_might_be_overexposing_you/</link>
		<comments>http://www.salon.com/2013/03/12/study_your_facebook_likes_might_be_overexposing_you/#comments</comments>
		<pubDate>Tue, 12 Mar 2013 16:56:00 +0000</pubDate>
		<dc:creator></dc:creator>
				<category><![CDATA[Technology]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Life]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[News]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[All Salon]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Facebook]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Privacy]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Science]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[study]]></category>

		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.railrode.net/?p=13226676</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[How a simple click could reveal more than you think ]]></description>
			<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>In a study published this week in Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences, researchers analyzed the "likes" of nearly 60,000 American Facebook users to infer their personality and behavior profiles.</p><p>After comparing the data to responses given by study participants in a personality test, researchers found that "likes" were a fairly reliable predictor of the users's sexual orientation, gender, age, ethnicity, IQ, religion, politics and cigarette, drug, or alcohol use.</p><p>Now, this might seem pretty obvious. If you "like" the National Rifle Association, odds are good that you're a gun enthusiast. If you "like" the <a href="https://www.facebook.com/salon" target="_blank">Salon page</a>, odds are good that you are a super attractive genius with excellent taste in reading material. The findings of the study seems self-evident since users are, after all, building an Internet personality profile by curating their tastes.</p><p>But not everything you give the tiny "thumbs up" to is quite that obvious, and some "likes" reveal more than others.</p><p>As <a href="http://www.pressherald.com/business/like-to-press-away-all-your-privacy__2013-03-12.html" target="_blank">reported</a> by the Associated Press:</p><p><a href="http://www.salon.com/2013/03/12/study_your_facebook_likes_might_be_overexposing_you/">Continue Reading...</a></p>]]></content:encoded>
			<wfw:commentRss>http://www.salon.com/2013/03/12/study_your_facebook_likes_might_be_overexposing_you/feed/</wfw:commentRss>
		<slash:comments>1</slash:comments>
		</item>
		<item>
		<title>The science behind wanting to squeeze adorable things</title>
		<link>http://www.salon.com/2013/01/24/the_science_behind_wanting_to_squeeze_adorable_things/</link>
		<comments>http://www.salon.com/2013/01/24/the_science_behind_wanting_to_squeeze_adorable_things/#comments</comments>
		<pubDate>Thu, 24 Jan 2013 22:34:00 +0000</pubDate>
		<dc:creator></dc:creator>
				<category><![CDATA[Life]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[News]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[All Salon]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Video]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[cute]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Cats]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[cute animals]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Science]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[study]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Research]]></category>

		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.origin.railrode.net/?p=13181181</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[Cute aggression is real. That chubby cat jumping through soda boxes could make you a danger to yourself]]></description>
			<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>You know that thing when you see something so cute that you just want to <em>squeeze </em>it? Well now there's a scientific explanation for your semi-aggressive behavior toward all things adorable!</p><p>A recent Yale University study asked 109 people to look at pictures of animals. Some of the photos were cute (like <a href="http://assets.nydailynews.com/polopoly_fs/1.1130619.1357337961!/img/httpImage/image.jpg_gen/derivatives/gallery_635/monkey-checkup.jpg" target="_blank">this</a> baby gorilla!), some were funny (like <a href="http://www.barnorama.com/wp-content/images/2012/03/Why%20Cats%20And%20Dogs%20Need%20To%20Wear%20Socks/01-Why%20Cats%20And%20Dogs%20Need%20To%20Wear%20Socks.jpg" target="_blank">this</a> dog who hates wearing socks!) while others were classified as "neutral" images (maybe like <a href="http://cdn01.cdnwp.thefrisky.com/wp-content/uploads/2012/09/25/unimpressed_cat_092512_m.jpg" target="_blank">this</a> unimpressed cat?). Then researchers asked participants how they felt about the pictures.</p><p>As it turns out, the cuter the animal, the more aggressive the response.</p><p><a href="http://www.salon.com/2013/01/24/the_science_behind_wanting_to_squeeze_adorable_things/">Continue Reading...</a></p>]]></content:encoded>
			<wfw:commentRss>http://www.salon.com/2013/01/24/the_science_behind_wanting_to_squeeze_adorable_things/feed/</wfw:commentRss>
		<slash:comments>8</slash:comments>
		</item>
		<item>
		<title>Study: Don&#8217;t want civilization to collapse? Give women equal rights</title>
		<link>http://www.salon.com/2013/01/15/study_dont_want_civilization_to_collapse_give_women_equal_rights/</link>
		<comments>http://www.salon.com/2013/01/15/study_dont_want_civilization_to_collapse_give_women_equal_rights/#comments</comments>
		<pubDate>Tue, 15 Jan 2013 16:42:00 +0000</pubDate>
		<dc:creator></dc:creator>
				<category><![CDATA[Life]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[News]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[All Salon]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[population]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[overpopulation]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[study]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Research]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Women's Rights]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[women's empowerment]]></category>

		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.origin.railrode.net/?p=13171652</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[A word from Stanford's top population biologists: Gender parity is a crucial step to saving our species ]]></description>
			<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>There are <a href="http://www.census.gov/main/www/popclock.html" target="_blank">more than 7 billion people</a> in the world right now, and the United Nations <a href="http://www.un.org/esa/population/unpop.htm" target="_blank">estimate</a> that number will grow to nearly 9.2 billion by the year 2050. It's a prediction that left Stanford biologists Paul and Anne Ehrlich feeling pretty apocalyptic. Why? The population scientists say that the eventual collapse of our civilization is being driven by overpopulation and overconsumption by -- wait for it -- <em>the very wealthy</em>.</p><p>Their proposed solution? Empower women.</p><p>Studies of the planet's ecological footprint show that sustaining modern rates of consumption will require roughly an additional half planet of resources (or, four to five more Earths if everyone in the world consumed at the level of the United States).</p><p>So give women equal rights, the Ehrlichs say. Not just because women who control their reproductive choices tend to have fewer children, healthier families and greater life expectancy (although <a href="http://www.icrw.org/media/news/yin-and-yang-fertility-decline-and-rise-women" target="_blank">research suggests</a> this is true), but because "This will allow us to include more of their brainpower to help solve these problems," according to the pair.</p><p><a href="http://www.salon.com/2013/01/15/study_dont_want_civilization_to_collapse_give_women_equal_rights/">Continue Reading...</a></p>]]></content:encoded>
			<wfw:commentRss>http://www.salon.com/2013/01/15/study_dont_want_civilization_to_collapse_give_women_equal_rights/feed/</wfw:commentRss>
		<slash:comments>10</slash:comments>
		</item>
		<item>
		<title>Study: Tiny distractions cause double the mistakes</title>
		<link>http://www.salon.com/2013/01/11/study_tiny_distractions_cause_double_the_mistakes/</link>
		<comments>http://www.salon.com/2013/01/11/study_tiny_distractions_cause_double_the_mistakes/#comments</comments>
		<pubDate>Fri, 11 Jan 2013 18:40:00 +0000</pubDate>
		<dc:creator></dc:creator>
				<category><![CDATA[Life]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[News]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[All Salon]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Science]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[study]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Research]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[concentration]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[focus]]></category>

		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.origin.railrode.net/?p=13168380</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[Researchers find that even the smallest disruptions kill concentration -- and cause error rates to spike ]]></description>
			<content:encoded><![CDATA[<div> <p>If you want to get something done, you might want to turn off your phone.</p> <p>A new <a href="http://msutoday.msu.edu/news/2013/brief-interruptions-spawn-errors/" target="_blank">study</a> led by Michigan State University found that even the smallest interruptions -- like that <em>really quick </em>glance at an incoming message -- derail productivity and lead to big mistakes.</p> <p>Researchers asked 300 people to perform a sequence-based task, and found that interruptions lasting just <em>seconds</em> managed to double the error rate.</p> <p>Little distractions are everywhere, from smartphones to chatty co-workers, but the resulting errors can have big consequences. While handing in an expense report a few minutes late isn't the end of the world, small mistakes in high-pressure fields like air traffic control and emergency medicine can be catastrophic.</p> <p>“What this means is that our health and safety is, on some level, contingent on whether the people looking after it have been interrupted,” Erik Altmann, lead researcher and associate professor of psychology, <a href="http://msutoday.msu.edu/news/2013/brief-interruptions-spawn-errors/" target="_blank">told</a> Michigan State University Today.</p> <p>Altmann added that he was surprised to find that the length of a disruption didn't matter, "Even momentary interruptions can seem jarring when they occur during a process that takes considerable thought.”</p> <p>Are there possible solutions <em>other </em>than working in a sensory deprivation tank? If you want to be productive and error-free, turn "all cellphones off at the very least," says Altmann.</p> </div><p><a href="http://www.salon.com/2013/01/11/study_tiny_distractions_cause_double_the_mistakes/">Continue Reading...</a></p>]]></content:encoded>
			<wfw:commentRss>http://www.salon.com/2013/01/11/study_tiny_distractions_cause_double_the_mistakes/feed/</wfw:commentRss>
		<slash:comments>3</slash:comments>
		</item>
		<item>
		<title>U.S. infant mortality rate higher than developed world&#8217;s</title>
		<link>http://www.salon.com/2013/01/09/us_infant_mortality_rate_lags_developed_world/</link>
		<comments>http://www.salon.com/2013/01/09/us_infant_mortality_rate_lags_developed_world/#comments</comments>
		<pubDate>Wed, 09 Jan 2013 23:19:00 +0000</pubDate>
		<dc:creator></dc:creator>
				<category><![CDATA[Life]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[News]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[All Salon]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Health]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Science]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Research]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[study]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[infant mortality]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Health Care]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[health spending]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[United States]]></category>

		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.origin.railrode.net/?p=13166524</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[A new report shows the U.S. lags behind 17 peer countries in infant mortality, but it's unclear why ]]></description>
			<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>A new <a href="http://www.nap.edu/catalog.php?record_id=13497" target="_blank">report</a> from the Institute of Medicine took a long, hard look at the American healthcare system and  found that we lead on healthcare spending but lag on patient outcomes.</p><p>But we knew this already. Many <a href="http://healthland.time.com/2010/06/23/healthcare-u-s-spends-more-but-gets-less/" target="_blank">other reports</a> have found the exact same thing.</p><p>There is, however, some striking -- and troubling -- new research in the report: Our infant mortality rate is nearly double the rate in countries like Japan and Sweden.</p><p><a href="http://www.salon.com/2013/01/09/us_infant_mortality_rate_lags_developed_world/">Continue Reading...</a></p>]]></content:encoded>
			<wfw:commentRss>http://www.salon.com/2013/01/09/us_infant_mortality_rate_lags_developed_world/feed/</wfw:commentRss>
		<slash:comments>60</slash:comments>
		</item>
		<item>
		<title>Study: Female premature orgasm is uncommon but awful</title>
		<link>http://www.salon.com/2013/01/09/study_female_premature_orgasm_is_uncommon_but_awful/</link>
		<comments>http://www.salon.com/2013/01/09/study_female_premature_orgasm_is_uncommon_but_awful/#comments</comments>
		<pubDate>Wed, 09 Jan 2013 21:49:00 +0000</pubDate>
		<dc:creator></dc:creator>
				<category><![CDATA[Life]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[News]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[All Salon]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Sex]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[female sexual dysfunction]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Orgasm]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[climax]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[study]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Science]]></category>

		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.origin.railrode.net/?p=13166310</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[First-ever study on the issue finds that 3 percent of women experience chronic premature orgasms]]></description>
			<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Make room! We have another female "<a href="http://www.mayoclinic.com/health/female-sexual-dysfunction/DS00701" target="_blank">sexual dysfunction</a>" to add to the list.</p><p>The first and only <a href="Carvalho, S., Moreira, A., Rosado, M., Correia, D., Maia, D., &amp; Pimentel, P. (2011). Female premature orgasm: Does this exist? Sexologies, 20, 215-220." target="_blank">study</a> on female premature orgasm has found that 40 percent of the women surveyed experienced rapid climax at least once in their sexual life, with around 3 percent chronically reaching orgasm too soon. Researcher Serafim Carvalho of Hospital Magalhães Lemos in Porto, Portugal, was surprised by the findings, but deeply sympathetic, noting, "For this group, female premature orgasm is more than bothersome. We think it's as serious a distress as it is in men."</p><p>As <a href="http://www.livescience.com/16718-premature-orgasm-affects-women.html" target="_blank">reported</a> in Science Daily:</p><p><a href="http://www.salon.com/2013/01/09/study_female_premature_orgasm_is_uncommon_but_awful/">Continue Reading...</a></p>]]></content:encoded>
			<wfw:commentRss>http://www.salon.com/2013/01/09/study_female_premature_orgasm_is_uncommon_but_awful/feed/</wfw:commentRss>
		<slash:comments>30</slash:comments>
		</item>
		<item>
		<title>US suffers far more violent deaths than any other wealthy nation</title>
		<link>http://www.salon.com/2013/01/09/us_suffers_far_more_violent_deaths_than_any_other_wealthy_nation/</link>
		<comments>http://www.salon.com/2013/01/09/us_suffers_far_more_violent_deaths_than_any_other_wealthy_nation/#comments</comments>
		<pubDate>Wed, 09 Jan 2013 19:57:00 +0000</pubDate>
		<dc:creator></dc:creator>
				<category><![CDATA[Life]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[News]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[All Salon]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Gun Control]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Gun Violence]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[study]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Violence]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[violence in the united states]]></category>

		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.origin.railrode.net/?p=13166231</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[It's not the frequency of the attacks that stands out -- it's the lethality ]]></description>
			<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>WASHINGTON (AP) — The United States suffers far more violent deaths than any other wealthy nation, due in part to the widespread possession of firearms and the practice of storing them at home in a place that is often unlocked, according to a report released Wednesday by two of the nation's leading health research institutions.</p><p>Gun violence is just one of many factors contributing to lower U.S. life expectancy, but the finding took on urgency because the report comes less than a month after the shooting deaths of 26 people at an elementary school in Newtown, Conn.</p><p>The United States has about six violent deaths per 100,000 residents. None of the 16 other countries included in the review came anywhere close to that ratio. Finland was closest to the U.S. ranking with slightly more than two violent deaths per 100,000 residents.</p><p>For many years, Americans have been dying at younger ages that people in almost all other wealthy countries. In addition to the impact of gun violence, Americans consume the most calories among peer countries and get involved in more accidents that involve alcohol. The U.S. also suffers higher rates of drug-related deaths, infant mortality and AIDS.</p><p><a href="http://www.salon.com/2013/01/09/us_suffers_far_more_violent_deaths_than_any_other_wealthy_nation/">Continue Reading...</a></p>]]></content:encoded>
			<wfw:commentRss>http://www.salon.com/2013/01/09/us_suffers_far_more_violent_deaths_than_any_other_wealthy_nation/feed/</wfw:commentRss>
		<slash:comments>15</slash:comments>
		</item>
		<item>
		<title>Study: You&#8217;re probably going to break your New Year&#8217;s resolution</title>
		<link>http://www.salon.com/2013/01/02/study_youre_probably_going_to_break_your_new_years_resolution/</link>
		<comments>http://www.salon.com/2013/01/02/study_youre_probably_going_to_break_your_new_years_resolution/#comments</comments>
		<pubDate>Wed, 02 Jan 2013 23:01:00 +0000</pubDate>
		<dc:creator></dc:creator>
				<category><![CDATA[Life]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[News]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[All Salon]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Health]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[wellness]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[new years]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[resolutions]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[self-improvement]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Science]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[study]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[research study]]></category>

		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.origin.railrode.net/?p=13160253</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[But so will 92 percent of the population! ]]></description>
			<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>A new year means a new start, right? According to <a href="http://www.statisticbrain.com/new-years-resolution-statistics/" target="_blank">data</a> collected by the University of Scranton, the answer is: Not really.</p><p>Sure it's <em>possible</em> that you'll stick to that diet or learn a second language in 2013, it's just not <em>probable</em>.</p><p>A report in the university's Journal of Clinical Psychology reveals that most Americans make the same resolutions, with commitments to health, self-improvement and family ranking heavily in the top 10. And most Americans fail miserably at keeping them. How miserably? The data indicates Americans have a success rate of 8 percent when it comes to being our best selves in the new year.</p><p>But don't feel too bad: 75 percent of us keep our resolutions for at least two weeks! And two weeks on the elliptical is better than nothing.</p><p>There's always next year, right?</p><p><a href="http://www.salon.com/2013/01/02/study_youre_probably_going_to_break_your_new_years_resolution/">Continue Reading...</a></p>]]></content:encoded>
			<wfw:commentRss>http://www.salon.com/2013/01/02/study_youre_probably_going_to_break_your_new_years_resolution/feed/</wfw:commentRss>
		<slash:comments>2</slash:comments>
		</item>
		<item>
		<title>Do violent video games actually lead to violence?</title>
		<link>http://www.salon.com/2012/12/10/do_violent_video_games_actually_lead_to_violence/</link>
		<comments>http://www.salon.com/2012/12/10/do_violent_video_games_actually_lead_to_violence/#comments</comments>
		<pubDate>Mon, 10 Dec 2012 16:27:00 +0000</pubDate>
		<dc:creator></dc:creator>
				<category><![CDATA[Life]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[News]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[All Salon]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Video Games]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Violence]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Science]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Research]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[study]]></category>

		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.origin.railrode.net/?p=13120308</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[Study links extended violent gameplay to lasting aggressive tendencies -- but is that the same as violence? ]]></description>
			<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>The jury has long been out on whether playing violent video games leads to violent behavior. For every report that suggests it <a title="Video games cause aggression in children " href="http://www.cnn.com/2008/HEALTH/family/11/03/healthmag.violent.video.kids/index.html" target="_blank">does</a>, another says the <a title="Video games do not cause violent behavior" href="http://articles.nydailynews.com/2012-09-07/news/33682444_1_games-and-aggression-video-games-college-students" target="_blank">opposite</a>. Now let's add this to the pile.</p><p>A recent study published in the Journal of Experimental Social Psychology reports that after three days of playing violent video games like "Call of Duty," research subjects exhibited a spike in "hostile expectations" as compared to the group who played nonviolent games. As Science Daily <a title="Video games linked with longterm aggression " href="http://www.sciencedaily.com/releases/2012/12/121210101344.htm?utm_source=twitterfeed&amp;utm_medium=twitter&amp;utm_campaign=Feed%3A+sciencedaily%2Fmost_popular+%28ScienceDaily%3A+Most+Popular+News%29" target="_blank">reports</a>:</p><p><a href="http://www.salon.com/2012/12/10/do_violent_video_games_actually_lead_to_violence/">Continue Reading...</a></p>]]></content:encoded>
			<wfw:commentRss>http://www.salon.com/2012/12/10/do_violent_video_games_actually_lead_to_violence/feed/</wfw:commentRss>
		<slash:comments>6</slash:comments>
		</item>
	</channel>
</rss>