2 . Science reporting on climate change does lead Americans to adopt more accurate beliefs and support government action on the issue, but these gains are fragile, a new study suggests. Researchers found that these accurate beliefs fade quickly when people are exposed to coverage skeptical of climate change.

“It is not the case that the American public does not respond to scientifically informed reporting when they are exposed to it,” said Thomas Wood, associate professor of political science at the Ohio State University. “But even truly accurate science reporting recedes from people’s frame of reference very quickly.”

Results showed that accurate science reporting didn’t persuade only politicians and people who initially rejected human-caused climate change also had their opinions shifted by reading accurate articles. The study involved 2,898 online participants who participated in four waves of the experiment during the fall of 2020.

In the first wave, they all read authentic articles in the popular media that provided information reflecting the seientifie views on climate change. In the second and third waves, they read either another scientific article, an opinion article that was skeptical of climate science, or an article on an unrelated subjeet. In the fourth wave, the participants simply were asked their beliefs about the science of climate change and their policy attitudes.

To rate participants’ scientific understanding. the researchers asked after each wave if they believed that climate change is happening and has a human cause. To measure their attitudes, researchers asked participants if they favored government action on climate change and if they favored renewable energy.

“What we found suggests that people need to hear the same accurate messages about climate change again and again. If they only hear it once, it recedes very quickly,” Wood said. It was significant that accurate reporting had positive effects on all groups, including those who originally rejected climate change. But it was even more encouraging that it affected attitudes.

3 . Throughout history, many species of animals have been threatened with extinction. When Europeans first arrived in North America, more than 60 million buffalo (水牛) lived on the continent. Yet hunting the buffalo was so popular during the 19th century that by 1900 the animal’s population had fallen to about 400 before the government stepped in to protect the species. In some countries today, the elephant faces a similar challenge, as illegal hunters kill the animals for the ivory in their tusks.

Yet not all animals with commercial value face this threat (威胁).The cow, for example, is a valuable source of food, but no one worries that the cow will soon be extinct. Why does the commercial value of ivory threaten the elephant. while the commercial value of beef protects the cow?

The reason is that elephants are a common resource, while cows are private goods. Elephants wander freely without any owners. The hunter has a strong motivation to kill as many elephants as he can find. Because illegal hunters are numerous, each has only a slight motivation to preserve the elephant population. By contrast, cattle live on farms that are privately owned. Each farmer makes great effort to maintain the cattle population on his farm because he harvests the benefit of these efforts.

Governments have tried to solve the elephant’s problem in two ways. Some countries, such as Kenya and Uganda, have made it illegal to kill elephants and sell their ivory. Yet these laws have been hard to put into effect, and elephant populations have continued to dwindle. By contrast, other countries, such as Malawi and Namibia, have made elephants private goods and allowed people to kill elephants, but only those on their own property.

With private ownership and the profit motive now on its side, the African elephant might someday be as safe from extinction as the cow. The ancient Greek philosopher Aristotle pointed out the problem with common resources: “What is common to many is taken least care of, for all men have greater regard for what is their own than for what they possess in common with others.”

South Koreans have enjoyed their first close-up look of new baby giant pandas at a name-revealing ceremony that is also     1     early celebration of the 100 days since the twins’ birth.

What to name the twin sisters was widely discussed among netizens after they were born on July 7 in theme park Everland. The names were     2     (ultimate) decided on through two public voting     3     (procedure). One is named Rui Bao, which means wise treasure, and the other is Hui Bao or shining treasure. Half a million panda lovers helped choose their names with a handful of lucky fans     4     (invite) to the ceremony. “They are even     5     (cute) in real life than they appear on screen,” said a college student in attendance.

The baby pandas,     6     have just begun teething and crawling, are very healthy. Everland has shared videos documenting the pandas’ growth online. The twins’ birth has gained 640,000 views since it     7     (upload). “This feels like a great opportunity to call for better     8     (preserve) of pandas,” said Donghee Chung, head of the park’s zoo. Chung noted that between 40% and 50% of panda births result     9     twins.

Everland said it would monitor the twins’ health     10     (determine) when the twins are ready to be open to the public.

7 . According to a new study from Oxford Economics, a rise in artificial intelligence will result in an increase in “income inequality” as they estimate that 20 million manufacturing jobs will be lost in the next 11 years. In China alone, there could be 14 million robots taking work currently done by humans by 2030. While in the United States, more than 1.5 million workers would have lost their employment to technology by 2030.

The report predicts the use of robots worldwide has increased to 2.25 million over the past two decades. The researchers said, “As a result of robotisation, tens of millions of jobs will be lost, especially in poorer economies that rely on lower-skilled workers, which will therefore translate into an increase in income inequality.”

However, the researchers noted how “robotisation” has the potential to boost productivity and economic growth. They predicted a 5.3 percent rise in global gross domestic product (GDP) in 2030.The report said, “This means adding an extra $4.9 trillion per year to the global economy by 2030(in today’s prices).”

The report remained positive about the use of automation and urged lawmakers not to sand in the way of robots in the workplace, despite the threat of job losses.

The researchers said, “These findings should not lead policy-makers to seek to prevent the adoption of robot technology. Instead, the challenge should be to distribute the robot profits more evenly by helping workers prepare for and adapt to the big changes it will bring about. Explore all policy options from training, initiatives (新方案) and new welfare programs such as universal basic income.”

8 . For all the talk of helicopter parents and their snowflake children, most parents I know are more concerned with whether their children’s development would be considered normal by experts than whether they are raising a prodigy (天才).

When the teen years arrive, the “Is it normal?” instinct can go into overdrive. Adolescence is marked by many changes, including ones that manifest(显示)physically and, their more challenging counterpart, ones that manifest emotionally. The moods and deep feelings are intense, and make many helicopter parents in a state of extreme panic.

But difficult feelings are often not a cause for concern, according to psychologist Lisa Damour in her new book, The Emotional Lives of Teenagers: Raising Connected, Capable, and Compassionate Adolescents. Not only are sadness and worrying healthy and natural parts of being a teenager, but the ability to experience these feelings(without a parent panicking)and to learn how to cope with them is developmentally necessary.

There is a lot of commercial marketing around wellness that can give people the impression that they are only mentally healthy or their kids are mentally healthy if they are feeling good, calm or relaxed. This is not an accurate definition of mental health. Mental distress is not only inevitable—it is part of mental health and experiencing it is part of how kids grow and mature.

There are many other healthy ways kids regulate emotions besides talking. Listening to mood-matching music is a very adaptive way to regulate as the experience of listening to the music catalyzes the emotion out of them. Teenagers also discharge emotions physically—by going through a run, jumping on a trampoline or banging on drums. Sometimes they will discharge them through creative channels like drawing or making music.

As adults, we should not diminish the value of emotional expression that brings relief, even if it doesn’t come in the verbal form to which we are most accustomed. Don’t join in because what we ultimately want is for our teens to become autonomous in dealing with their hard feelings.

9 . Expecting the worst to avoid feeling bad later is known as “bracing”. It may help them prepare for emotionally challenging situations, particularly in the moments before these situations occur. People brace for the worst while waiting for potentially negative outcomes. Someone might also brace for the worst in anticipation of stressful events like giving a presentation at work.

Some psychological theories suggest that bracing should help. For example, “decision affect theory” proposes that how we feel about a situation is determined partly by comparing what actually happened with what could have happened. Based on this, people should be happy when an event goes beyond their expectations, and disappointed when an event falls behind. Therefore, by anticipating the worst, one can safeguard themselves against future disappointment, as any result is likely to surpass their expectations.

But other psychological theories undermine the idea that bracing will be helpful. It has been theorized and scientifically established – that expectations can powerfully influence reality. There are two key ways that expectations can shape reality.

First, people may behave in ways that fit with their expectations. If you expect to fail an upcoming test or interview, then you might not invest efforts in preparation, which in turn reduces your chances of doing well. Second, people may interpret a situation in line with their expectations. Imagine you believe you are insufficiently qualified for a job you’ve applied for. During the job interview, you’re likely to interpret blank expressions from the interviewer in line with this belief, which could negatively affect your performance. In fact, the interviewer did not want to give anything away.

Drawing together the scientific studies, it seems that expecting the worst is anything but a wise way to prepare for upcoming news or results. It might be better to hold positive expectations than to brace for the worst.