NCBI ROFL: The big benefits of being bald.

post from Discoblog » NCBI ROFL on 13 August 2012 07:00:10 PM. © Discoblog » NCBI ROFL

Shorn Scalps and Perceptions of Male Dominance.

“Three studies contribute to the literature on dominance and nonverbal behavior (Ellyson & Dovidio, 1985) by examining how a man?s choice to shave his head influences person perception. In Study 1, men with shaved heads were rated as more dominant than similar men with full heads of hair. In Study 2, men whose hair was digitally removed were perceived as more dominant, taller, and stronger than their authentic selves. Study 3 extends these results with nonphotographic stimuli and demonstrates how men experiencing natural hair loss may improve their interpersonal standing by shaving. Theories of signaling, norm violation, and stereotypes are examined as explanations for the effect. Practical implications for men?s psychological, social, and economic outlooks are also discussed.”

Photo: flickr/*bri*

NCBI ROFL. Real articles. Funny subjects.
Read our FAQ!

Read The Full Article:
http://feedproxy.google.com/~r/NcbiRofl/~3/8smSAxBP7HE/

Digg this

UHS celebrates Hospital Week 2012

post from University of the Philippines Los Baños on 13 August 2012 05:42:36 PM. © University of the Philippines Los Baños

The University Health Service (UHS) will be celebrating its Hospital Week from Aug.15 to Aug.24. Several activities have been lined up primarily to serve UPLB mandated constituents.

Read The Full Article:
http://rdenews.uplb.edu.ph/index.php/what-s-new/646-uhs-celebrates-hospital-week-
2012

Digg this

Risks and Rewards of arXiv Reporting

post from Physics Buzz on 13 August 2012 05:17:07 PM. © Physics Buzz

Earlier today, some big names in the world of science journalism started a fascinating discussion on Twitter about reporting from the arXiv preprint server for physics papers. Because these papers usually have yet to be peer-reviewed (or may never be peer-reviewed), several questions naturally arose during the discussion.

How can a journalist trust one of these papers? What steps should reporters take to verify the claims in an arXiv paper, and should the process differ from reporting on a peer-reviewed article? How much faith should reporters place in the peer-review process?

As a writer who frequently writes about papers from the arXiv, I've grown to appreciate this gold mine of often undiscovered physics research. But it can also be a tomb for dubious papers and speculative musings. Consequently, I decided to do a quick (non-scientific) analysis of arXiv articles to see which categories (e.g. astrophysics or high energy physics) may have more articles that are eventually peer-reviewed. This is certainly not the best test of "trustworthiness" for arXiv papers, but it may help us better answer some of the aforementioned questions.

Sometimes, arXiv articles confuse Fry. We're here to help. Image from Futurama.

Papers submitted to the arXiv are not required to be reviewed by other scientists before they appear online, but submission requires having an email address associated with a research institution. Some of the papers include notes from the authors about an article's future publication, and these comments revealed nuances between three different sub-fields in physics.

For the charts below, I categorized the 25 most recent articles for three different areas of arXiv physics articles (this may not represent a random sample, but it's convenient for these purposes). I categorized articles as accepted/published, submitted to a journal, not specified or conference talks, based on the author-submitted comments. Here's the results:

Astrophysics

Out of the three groups that I analyzed, astrophysics had the most papers accepted or published in a reputable scientific journal. Submitted articles came in second, while unspecified papers and conference proceedings tied for the bottom spot.

High Energy Physics: Experiment (Think LHC/Fermilab research)

Among high energy physics experimental papers, less than half had a specified publication category, which contrasts sharply with the astrophysical papers.

Condensed Matter (Think superconductors or magnetism)

Over three quarters of the condensed matter papers were unspecified and no conference proceedings were in the latest batch of 25 papers.

What Does This Mean?

I wouldn't read too much into these numbers, but it reveals a little bit about the variety of papers submitted to the arXiv. Astrophysics papers tend to be ready for publication (at least in format), whereas high energy physics and condensed matter articles take on a different form. Or maybe their authors are too lazy to tag their papers in the comments.

Nonetheless, it seems that physicists from different fields take different approaches to using the arXiv. So how should journalists or members of the public interpret these open access results? Most importantly, know what you're reading.

Scientific results can be presented in a variety of formats other than journal papers, and they can be revealed at different stages. ArXiv articles are more likely to be preliminary, and there may not be as much detail (or maybe more detail) than a typical journal paper.

Also, my preliminary investigation suggests that there may be a big difference between the types of papers from two different fields within physics. Astrophysical papers tend to follow the more standard format that journalists are accustomed to, but that may not be the case for other areas.

For instance, some papers on the arXiv are just small snippets of research worth sharing but perhaps not worth reporting more widely. Longer review papers can be deceiving as well. Although these papers may appear to be unveiling new research to the untrained eye, the authors are usually giving an overview of the field to physicists in other specialties. Both of these types of papers may account for many of the unspecified papers.

So should science journalists change their approach to covering arXiv papers before they're "officially" published. Probably not, as long as they follow good journalistic practices such as contacting independent experts and relaying the source of these results.

If a paper sounds too good to be true, then it probably is, whether or not it's on the arXiv. Applying the crackpot index to a paper always helps, and I think journalists covering the arXiv can develop good instincts over time.

Maybe someone with some more patience and coding practice could do a thorough, scientific analysis of arXiv papers to see if and where they are eventually published. For now, Physics Buzz readers, check the source whenever possible.

-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

If you want to keep up with Hyperspace, AKA Brian, you can follow him on Twitter.

Read The Full Article:
http://feedproxy.google.com/~r/physicscentral/PhysicsBuzz/~3/2f8hBd07l_A/risks-an
d-rewards-of-arxiv-reporting.html

Digg this

Project HMX the Boom Stick

post from CR4 - Recent Blog Entries on 13 August 2012 04:15:00 PM. © CR4 - Recent Blog Entries

Along with fine-tuning the stroker, I've also lately been focusing on refining the installation of the engine into the Spirit AMX body. When I originally installed it and got it running, I threw together a quickie air intake setup that got the job done, but had its drawbacks.All I really d

Read The Full Article:
http://cr4.globalspec.com/blogentry/20794/Project-HMX-the-Boom-Stick?from_rss=1

Digg this

Pretty picture: Vesta's crater Aelia in high
resolution

post from Planetary Society Blog on 13 August 2012 03:59:00 PM. © Planetary Society Blog

I think my favorite features on Vesta are its streaky craters. Today's image release shows one of the streakiest: Aelia, a little crater on the flank of a larger one, near Vesta's equator.

Read The Full Article:
http://www.planetary.org/blogs/emily-lakdawalla/2012/08131221-dawn-vesta-hamo-ael
ia.html

Digg this

Turbo Charge Your Western Blots

post from Canadian BioTechnologist2.0 on 13 August 2012 03:25:25 PM. © Canadian BioTechnologist2.0

Filed under: Bio-Rad Product Highlight Tagged: Bio-Rad Laboratories, trans-blot turbo

Read The Full Article:
http://cbt20.wordpress.com/2012/08/13/trans-blot-turbo/

Digg this

No, thats not a picture of a double sunset on
Mars

post from Bad Astronomy on 13 August 2012 02:52:48 PM. © Bad Astronomy

So Curiosity’s been on the Martian surface for a week, and we’re already seeing faked images touted as being real. The other day it was a more-or-less honest mistake of people spreading around a computer-generated view from Mars –[...]

Read The Full Article:
http://feedproxy.google.com/~r/BadAstronomyBlog/~3/-9sGJhUVUIg/

Digg this

See Whats New on GlobalSpec!

Deep in the gut of GlobalSpec, we've been brewing up some new ideas to make things better for our users. The goal of all of our Selection Guides is to offer users comprehensive and easy-to-read documents that they can use when researching or selecting products for work or home repair. We post the

Read The Full Article:
http://cr4.globalspec.com/blogentry/20792/See-What-s-New-on-GlobalSpec?from_rss=1

Digg this