1 . In the eyes of many environmentalists, the world appears to be getting worse. They believe, the natural resources are running out and the air and water are becoming ever more polluted. But if we check the facts, things look different. Energy has become more abundant, not less so. Fewer people are starving. What seems to cause this gap between perception and reality?

One factor is the prejudice in scientific research. Scientific funding goes mainly to areas with many problems. That may be wise policy, but it will also create an impression that there are more potential problems than actually exist.

Secondly, environmental groups seek attention from the mass media. They also need to get continuous financial support. Understandably, perhaps, they sometimes exaggerate (夸大) their arguments. In 1997, for example, the World Wide Fund for Nature issued a statement titled: “Two thirds of the world’s forests lost forever”. The truth turns out to be near 20%.

The media can add to confusion too. People tend to be more curious about bad news than good. Newspapers and broadcasters are there to provide what the public wants. That, however, can lead to significant misinterpretations. For example, when a natural disaster happens, the media usually highlights the negative parts, giving more attention to the disaster’s details and what happens afterward. This flood of bad news can make people think that such events are more frequent or serious than they actually are. Consequently, people may develop a sense of insecurity, despite statistically low probabilities of similar events happening to them.

Another factor is people’s poor perception. People worry that vaccines can cause severe side effects or long-term health problems. Despite extensive scientific evidence demonstrating their safety and effectiveness, some individuals remain hesitant due to unfounded fears.

It is crucial that we look at the facts if we want to make the best possible decisions for the future. It may be costly to be overly optimistic – but more costly still to be too pessimistic.

2 . Is art boring? It’s not, really. I don’t think so, at least. But there’s a problem with how we look at art, how we approach it.

Museums are formal and strangely dry. There’s no embrace. Barriers prevent us from leaving the path set by the curator (馆长). Glass traps the paintings permanently in their frames – an invisible barrier that prevents us from ever getting close to the art, from touching it, feeling it. Guides and guards are constantly observing us, stopping us from taking photos, or using selfie sticks, or talking too loud. Museums have too many rules. And they’ve made our art boring.

We should be able to see art, to sometimes touch it. How can we feel any connection to the world? Art is a way to connect to the world, and yet so much of our art (and it is our art, not theirs, not yours — but ours) is unreachable.

Why can’t we laugh in museums? Why can’t we take silly selfies in front of art, our tongues sticking out, our hands in the air? Art is not boring and yet, we as a society, have made it so. We’ve trapped incredible artists behind glass boxes, with random rules governing noise levels, lights, flashes, sounds, photos, selfies, pens & pencils.

I love art. I think it has this incredible power to change our world. It can move us — as individuals, or as a collective society. Art is so often a window to something else. And yet we’ve allowed museums and galleries and collectors to prevent us from ever opening those windows.

Don’t get me wrong. I enjoy art museums. There are many fantastic ones around the world. And without so many wonderful curators and collectors, we wouldn’t be able to enjoy much of the art that is created -the masterpieces and the newer, more contemporary (and sometimes crazy) art. But at the same time, we’ ve allowed museums too much control.

They’ve taken our art. They’ve controlled our world. And our world, our art — it’s not meant to be controlled. It’s meant to be experienced — however that may be. It’s an individual, personal choice. Let’s take back our art, our museums. And take some selfies.

5 . The clock rules our lives. The more we try to save time, the less time we seem to have. In every area of our lives we are doing things faster. And many of us live in towns and cities which are getting noisier and more stressful as each day passes. But now a worldwide movement, whose aim is to slow life down, has started. Its supporters are people who believe that a happier and healthier way of life is possible.

The Slow Food movement was founded the day that an Italian journalist, Carlo Petrini, saw that McDonald’s had opened a restaurant in a beautiful square in Rome. He thought it was sad that many people today live too quickly to sit down for a proper meal and only eat much fast food. He decided that he had to try to do something about it and so he started the Slow Food movement. Slow Food has become a global organization ever since and now has more than 80,000 members in 100 countries.

Slow Food also encourages people to eat local and regional food, to use local shops and markets, to eat out in small family restaurants, and to cook with traditional recipes.

The idea of Slow Cities was inspired by the Slow Food movement. The aim of Slow Cities is to improve people’s quality of life. Towns which want to become a Slow City have to reduce traffic and noise, increase the number of green areas, plant trees, build pedestrian zones, and promote local businesses and traditions. Now it has spread to other countries all over the world, from the UK to Japan and Australia. There are now 135 Slow Cities in 24 countries across the world that have been named since founding of the organization in 1999. Gao Chun County, in east China’s Jiangsu Province, is expected to be named the first “Slow City” in China next year.

“Slow Cities are about having a community life in the town,” said a local resident. “It is not ‘slow’ as in ‘stupid’. It is ‘slow’ as in the opposite of ‘worried’ and ‘stressful’.”

But not everybody is happy. For teenagers, who have to go 25km to Norwich, the nearest city, to buy CDs, living in a Slow City is not very attractive. “It’s all right here for adults,” says Lewis Cook, 16. “But if you want excitement, you have to go to Norwich. We need more things here for young people.”

7 . Initial conversations can have a huge impact on how relationships develop over time. People are often stuck in the impressions they think they might have made the minute they finish speaking with someone for the first time: “Did they like me or were they just being polite?” “Were they deep in thought or deeply bored?”

To find out whether these worries are necessary, we have conducted nearly 10 years of research. In our studies, participants in the UK talked with someone they had never met before. Afterward, they were asked how much they liked their conversation partner and how much they believed that their conversation partner liked them. This allowed us to compare how much people believed they were liked to how much they were actually liked.

Time and time again, we found that people left their conversations with negative feelings about the impression they made. That is, people systematically underestimate how much their conversation partners like them and enjoy their company — a false belief we call the “liking gap”.

This bias (偏见) may seem like something that would occur only in initial interactions, but its effects extend far beyond a first impression. Surprisingly, the liking gap can constantly affect a variety of relationships, including interactions with coworkers, long after the initial conversations have taken place. Having a larger liking gap is associated with being less willing to ask workmates for help, less willing to provide workmates with open and honest feedback, and less willing to work on another project together.

There are numerous strategies to minimize your biased feelings. One place to start is shifting your focus of attention. Try to direct your attention to your conversation partner, be genuinely curious about them, ask them more questions, and really listen to their answers. The more you’re zeroed in on the other person, and the less you’re focused on yourself, the better your conversation will be and the less your mind will turn to all the things you think you didn’t do well.

10 . With growing awareness of the gender gap in STEM (science, technology, engineering, mathematics) fields, where women hold only 27% of jobs, Chinese researchers have explored a cause influencing women’s participation in STEM careers. They studied how teen girls can be influenced by their own peers who believe the inaccurate stereotype (刻板印象) that boys are better at math.

The study found that when surrounded by peers holding this stereotype, middle-school girls scored lower on math tests. This influence even persisted into college, impacting women’s math performance and self-confidence. The researchers suggest dealing with this issue during the middle school period to reduce the negative impact on women’s long-term STEM engagement.

Middle school is considered a critical developmental stage where teens are forming a stronger sense of self separate from their parents. This change often makes teens more likely to be influenced by the opinions of their peers. It’s also a period when, objectively measured by standardized tests, girls on average have better math skills than boys. However, teens may not realize it.

In some middle schools in China, the researchers studied the potential role of peer-pressure beliefs of the gendered math stereotype. In classrooms where the belief that “boys” natural ability in studying math is greater than that of girls” was significantly higher than the standard, girls’ later performance on math tests was lower than the results for boys. Moreover, girls in these classrooms were less likely to participate in math-related out-of-class activities. They were also less likely to feel that their teachers paid attention to them and offered praise, leading to lower math-related self-confidence.

The researchers conclude that preventing the harm from gender math stereotyping requires a change of the social environment for children and young adults, in addition to focusing on changing girls’ attitudes and choices.