As Internet users become more dependent on the Internet to store information, are people remember less? If you know your computer will save information, why store it in your own personal memory, your brain? Experts are wondering if the Internet is changing what we remember and how.

       In a recent study, Professor Betsy Sparrow conducted some experiments. She and her research team wanted to know the Internet is changing memory. In the first experiment, they gave people 40 unimportant facts to type into a computer. The first group of people understood thatthe computer would save the information. The second group understood that the computer would not save it. Later, the second group remembered the information better. People in the first group knew they could find the information again, so they did not try to remember it.

       In another experiment, the researchers gave people facts to remember, and told them where to find the information on the Internet. The information was in a specific computer folder (文件夹). Surprisingly, people later remember the folder location (位置) better than the facts. When people use the Internet, they do not remember the information. Rather, they remember how to find it. This is called "transactive memory (交互记忆)".

       According to Sparrow, we are not becoming people with poor memories as a result of the Internet. Instead, computer users are developing stronger transactive memories; that is, people are learning how to organize huge quantities of information so that they are able to access it at a later date. This doesn't mean we are becoming either more or less intelligent, but there is no doubt that the way we use memory is changing.

    The ability to speak more than one language certainly has its special benefits.It enables you to work in another country or interact with people whose language is different from your mother tongue.Cognitive（认知的）  psychologists have been interested in how bilingualism（双语能力）shapes the mind for almost a century.There are those who suggest that in order to speak one language,bilinguals have to suppress（抑制）the influence of the other.In the past three decades,research had argued that this unique form of language processing trains the brain in the use of abilities known as "executive（执行的）functions" such as ignoring irrelevant information or shifting attention. Bilinguals of different ages and cultural backgrounds have been shown to be faster and more accurate than their monolingual（单语的）peers when performing cognitive tasks demanding these abilities.Furthermore,it has been argued that bilingualism may lead to a delayed onset（发作）of symptoms associated with dementia（痴呆）.

    But the scientific community recently has become increasingly skeptical of the bilingual advantage.One of the main points of criticism is that differences between monolinguals and bilinguals when it comes to executive functions are not always apparent.It appears that research on bilingualism is at a turning point.We need to pursue a new approach to understand,beyond those individual examples of executive functions,how the bilingual mind works. We have attempted to address this challenge by testing whether bilinguals and monolinguals differ in terms of how accurately they can assess their own performances.This ability is called meta cognition and is associated with other areas where bilinguals have been shown to have an advantage.

    In our research,we presented participants with a situation in which they had to observe two circles on a screen and guess which one contained more dots.Sometimes the difference was obvious,making the decision easy,while at other times the decision was very difficult (for example,one circle contained 50 dots and the other 49).Participants were then asked to determine how confident they were in their decision on a scale from less to more confident than normal.

    During the course of two experiments,we found that bilinguals and monolinguals were equally likely to choose the circle containing the highest number of dots.However,monolinguals were better able than bilinguals to discriminate between when they were right and when they were wrong.In other words,bilinguals had less insight into their performance than monolinguals.This went against our initial predictions,as we expected to find a bilingual advantage in meta cognitive processing.These results indicate that bilingualism may be associated with cognitive disadvantages as well as benefits.

    A big bowl of milk can be a great way to start the day. Many snack bars contain nutrients that help our bodies stay strong and healthy. But some of these foods are packed with too many vitamins and minerals. According to a new study by the Environmental Working Group (EWG), this extra fortification may be more harmful than helpful.

    Of the tested snack bars, 27 have more than 50% of the recommended amounts of vitamin A, niacin and zinc. Nutrition facts listed on packages are based on recommended daily values for adults, who are physically larger and require more vitamins and minerals. So when kids eat these cereals (麦片) and snack bars, they are getting more nutrients than they need.

    Vitamin A, niacin (烟酸) and zinc (锌) are best in fresh and unprocessed foods that are in their natural state. Vitamin A helps you see at night. It occurs naturally in eggs, meat and carrots. Niacin is a vitamin that helps our bodies make energy. It is found in foods like fish, seeds, and peanuts, as well as in whole grains like wheat and brown rice. Zinc helps our bodies fight off infection. It is found in many foods, including wheat-based products, meats, beans and nuts.

    Children typically eat more than one serving of cereal or snack bars a day, in addition to taking vitamin supplements. Eating large amounts of these nutrients can be dangerous to kids' health. Too much vitamin A can cause liver damage, and high levels of zinc can destroy the body's natural immunity, or power to fight infection.

    The EWG authors are calling for the FDA to make changes to its guidelines for nutrient intake and revise its daily values to match kids' diets.

    Three-quarters of a million tourists flock to the primitive, white beaches every year—but this booming industry has come at a price. When foreigners left the government struggling to cope with a stream of rubbish, their answer was to turn one of these islands into a dumping ground. Clouds of sharp, poisonous smoke rising from open fires, piles of rubbish made up of plastic bottles, crisp packets and consumer junk. It's a far cry from the white sands, crystal-clear waters and gently swaying palm trees that we associate with the Maldives（马尔代夫）, the beautiful paradise island holiday destination set in the Indian Ocean.

    Of its 200 inhabited islands, which are spread across an area of 35,000 square miles, 99 are dedicated resorts. Three-quarters of a million tourists visit every year—more than double the domestic population. Of these, over 100,000 travel from the UK. The capital, Malé, is four times more densely populated than London. Given these facts, it's hardly surprising that the Maldives on which has a waste disposal problem.

    What you are seeing here is a view of the Maldives on which no honeymooners will ever fix eyes. Four miles west of Malé is the country's dumping ground, Thilafushi—or Rubbish Island as it has simply become known.

    The country dumps upwards of 330 tons of rubbish on the island every day, a figure attributed largely to the tourist industry on which the chain of islands relies. Each visitor generates 3.5 kg of waste per day.

    Now, the government of the Maldives has banned the dumping of waste on the island, which is too late, due largely to an increase in the number of waste boats “fly-tipping”（非法倾倒）directly into the sea, fed up with waiting seven hours or more to offload their cargo.

    Binge-watching (刷剧) is when a person watches more than one episode of a TV show one after another. With developments in the speed and connectivity of the Internet, increases in technology and the rise of on-demand entertainment companies, people can now watch their favorite shows directly on the Internet at their convenience.

    This behavior is nothing new. In fact, “binge-watching” has been officially listed in dictionaries since 2015. The entertainment companies recognize this behavior and many take steps to encourage it. Often, instead of releasing each episode on a week-by-week basis, an entire series will become available at the same time. Once the episode finishes, many platforms will display pop-ups with “you might like” suggestions, or will automatically play the next episode.

    However, this wonderful gift may in fact be poisonous. Recent research from British media Ofcom suggests that this behavior may have become a hindrance (障碍). Out of the more than half of British adults who watch more than one episode of a show in a row, almost a third have admitted missing sleep or becoming tired as a result; and one quarter have failed to do their household chores. Next well be missing work!

    Bingeing has other connections—binge eating, binge drinking and binge smoking, all of which are often associated with compulsive (强迫性的) behavior, a lack of control and possible route to addiction. Lindsey Fussell, consumer group director at Ofcom, said, “The days of waiting a week for the next episode are largely gone, with people finding it hard to resist watching multiple episodes around the house or on the move.” If people find binge-watching hard to resist, coupled with the fact that it has shown to lead to negligence (疏忽) in many, are we witnessing the birth of a new type of addiction?

    The large amount of information and entertainment that television and online media can bring us is, many would say, a good thing. It offers us opportunities to better understand the world we live in, educate ourselves and enjoy much needed downtime. However, like any behavior done to an extreme degree, it can become dangerous. And when the activity begins to bleed into other areas, causing us to stop functioning-then it becomes a problem. So, what's the answer? Neither a tiny amount, nor too much. After all, as the old proverb says, a little of what you fancy does you good.

    Although toys packaging says it's educational, it doesn't make it so. That's the finding from a new study in JAMA Pediatrics that found some toys being marketed as language promoters got in the way of learning.

    Research shows that for kids to understand, speak and eventually read or write a language, they need to hear it - lots of it. And it's never too early for parents and to caregivers to get talking. That explains the booming industry in talking electronic toys that claim to help kids learn language.

    Professor Anna Sosa, of Northern Arizona University, led the study and says she gave families three different kinds of toys to play with: books, traditional toys like humble blocks and a shape sorter, and electronic toys. Sosa says she picked those toys because they are advertised in their packaging as language-promoters for babies between the ages of 10 and 16 months.

    "We had a talking on farm-animal names and things," Sosa says of the electronic toys. "We had a baby cell phone. And we had a baby laptop. So you open the cover and start pushing buttons, and it tells you things. The parent-child couples were asked to play separately with each type of toy over the course of three days."

    "When there's something else that's doing some talking, the parents seem to be sitting on the sidelines and letting the toy talk for them and respond for them," Sosa says. "That's bad because the best way a toy can promote language in infants and toddlers is by stimulating interaction between parent and child. There's simply no evidence that a young child can learn language directly from a toy. It isn't responsive enough. It isn't social."

    As for the other toys, traditional blocks and puzzles stimulated more conversation than the electronic toys, and books outscored them all. But don't underestimate the humble block. While traditional toys fell short of books in interaction quantity, Sosa notes, they kept pace in terms of quality.