1 . Psychological science is full of interesting topics, many of which tell a coherent picture of human nature, but some of which create seemingly contradictory stories. A case in point is the misunderstood overlap(交叠) between strength­based science and the research on narcissism (自恋).

There is now convincing evidence to show that narcissism is on the rise, especially in our youth. Some researchers say that about 25% of young people showing symptoms of narcissism.

We are correct to be concerned about this phenomenon, but our fear that all kids are potential narcissists has caused an unhelpful reaction against approaches that seek to make our children and teens feel good about themselves.

In my own research on strength­based parenting, it is common for people to wrongly think this approach to be the cause of narcissism. Their argument seems to be that a child who knows their strengths will automatically view themselves as better than everyone else. It is argued that the self­assurance that comes with identifying and using their positive qualities will make a child selfish and uncaring.

Why does this occur? It’s partly because more is known about narcissism than strengths. While strengths psychology has largely stayed within the limit of academic journals, research on narcissism has made its way into the mass media and our daily life.The New York Times noted that narcissism is a favored topic and that people everywhere are diagnosing others with it.

The fear that a strength­based approach will cause narcissism also occurs because of our binary (非此即彼的) thinking. We mistakenly believe that one cannot be both confident and humble. Without confidence in their strengths, Gandhi and Mother Teresa couldn’t have achieved so much, and yet modesty and selflessness are their qualities.

When we assume that strength­focus is the same as self­focus, we fail to make the idea clear that people who know their strengths are, actually, more likely to be pro­social and ready to help others.

It’s easy to conclude that every young person is at risk of becoming a narcissist but I’d like to stand up for the thousands of young kids I have worked with who are caring, thoughtful and humble—even when they use their strengths.

6 . Teens interested in losing weight, for instance, got advertisements for unhealthy tips on how to become anorexic (厌食者). Such advertisements targeted these kids in hopes of persuading them to try things that were either dangerous or illegal at their age.

Advertisements are just one example of persuasion — trying to change another’s mind. Advertisements may try to convince us to buy something or do something new and different. Marketing is a field of persuasion designed to sell things, notes Jacob Teeny. Persuasion can be used to sell things. At its worst, it can be used to control people. Clearly, persuasion can be used for good and bad.

People open to new experiences tend to be more easily persuaded, Teeny says. But open-minded people can resist some persuasive arguments — such as the idea that eating junk food is cool. And closed-minded people can sometimes be persuaded. “If you haven’t really thought about the arguments” ahead of time, Teeny says, you’re going to be “much more persuadable.”

7 . Television has transformed politics in the United States by changing the way in which information is spread, by altering political campaigns, and by changing citizen’s patterns of response to politics. By giving citizens independent access to the candidates, television reduced the role of the political party in the selection of the major party candidates. By centering politics on the person of the candidate, television accelerated the citizen’s focus on character rather than issues.

Television has altered the forms of political communication as well. The messages on which most of us rely are briefer than they once were. The stump speech, a political speech given by traveling politicians and lasting 1 to 2 hours, which was popular in the nineteenth-century, has given way to the 30-second advertisement and the 10 second “sound bite” in broadcast news. Increasingly the audience for speeches is not that standing in front of the politician but rather the viewing audience who will hear and see a short video of the speech on the news.

In these simplified forms, much of what comprised the traditional political speech of earlier ages has been lost. In 15 or 30 seconds, a speaker cannot establish the historical context that shaped the issue in question, cannot detail the probable causes of the problem, and cannot examine alternative proposals to argue that one is preferable to others. In short videos, politicians assert (断言) but do not argue.

Because television is an intimate (亲密的) medium, speaking through it requires a changed political style that is more conversational, personal, and visual than that of the old-style stump speech. Reliance on television means that increasingly our political world contains memorable pictures rather than memorable words. Schools teach us to analyze words and print. However, in a world in which politics is increasingly visual, informed citizenship requires a new set of skills.

Recognizing the power of television’s pictures, politicians craft televisual, staged events designed to attract media coverage. Much of the political activity we see on television news has been crafted by politicians, their speechwriters, and their public relations advisers for televised consumption. Sound bites in news and answers to questions in debates increasingly sound like advertisements.