Could the device, smartphone or PC，which you're using affect the moral decisions you make when using it? To test it, researchers presented multiple dilemmas to a sample set of 1,010 people. The participants were assigned a device at random.

    One case of the questions participants were asked is the classic “trolley (有轨电车) problem”: A runaway trolley is headed towards five people tied up on a set of train tracks. You can do nothing, resulting in the deaths of five people, or push a man off a bridge, which will stop the trolley. The practical response is to kill one man to save five lives, which 33.5 percent of smartphone users chose, compared to 22.3 percent of PC users.

    “What we found in our study is that when people used a smartphone to view classic moral problems, they were more likely to make more unemotional, reasonable decisions when presented with a highly emotional dilemma, ”Dr Albert Barque-Duran, the lead author of the study, told City, University of London. “This could be due to the increased time pressure often present with smartphones and also the increased psychological distance which can occur when we use such devices compared to PCs.”

    As for why the researchers started this study, Dr Barque-Duran noted, “Due to the fact that our social lives, work and even shopping take place online, it is important to think about how the contexts where we typically face moral decisions and are asked to engage in moral behavior have changed, and the impact this could have on the hundreds of millions of people who use such devices daily.” It's clear that we need more research on how our devices affect our moral decision making because we're using screens at an ever-increasing rate.

    Smoking is harmful. But as soon as you quit the habit, everything will be OK, right?

    Wrong

    New research has found that even if you give up smoking, the damage it has done to your genes(基因) will stay there for a much longer time. In the research, a team of US scientists studied the blood of 16,000 people. Among them, some were smokers, some used to smoke, and the rest were non-smokers. Scientists compared their genes and found that more than 7,000 genes of smokers had changed—a number that is one-third of known human genes.

    According to NBC News, both heart disease and cancer are caused by genetic changes. Some people may have had the changes when they were born, but most people get them in their day-to-day lives while doing things like smoking.

    When you stop smoking, a lot of these genes will return to normal within five years.

    This means your body is trying to heal (治愈) itself of the harmful effects of smoking. But the changes in some of the genes stay for longer. They can stay for as long as 30 years. It's almost like leaving a footprint on wet cement (水泥)—it will always be there, even when you've walked away and when the cement becomes dry.

    Although the study results may make people unhappy, there is a bright side: the findings could help scientists invent medicine to treat genetic damage caused by smoking or find ways to tell which people have heart disease or cancer risks.

    Have you ever noticed what happens to an idea once you express it? Just talking about it or writing it down causes you to make it clear in your own mind. How can you use this to increase your brain power? Start writing.

    By putting thoughts into words, you are telling yourself the logic (逻辑) behind what you think, feel, or only partly understand. Often, explaining a thought is the process of understanding. In other words, you increase your brain power by exercising your “explain power.”

    Try this experiment. Explain how you'll increase your brain power, even if you have no idea right now. Just start with anything, and create an explanation. For example, start with “I'll learn chess,” or “I'll read an article on the mind every week.” Explain how that will help. You'll be surprised how often this becomes a workable plan, and if you actually do this, you'll have a better understanding of your brain from now.

    Another benefit of writing is that it helps you remember. Many, if not most, highly productive people are always taking notes. You can try keeping it all in your head, but if you keep a journal of your ideas the next time you're working on a big project, you'll probably have more success.

    Want to understand a topic? Write a book about it. That's an extreme example, but if you are learning something new, write a letter to a friend about it, and you will understand it better. Want to invent something? Write an explanation of the problem, why you want to solve it, and why it is worth solving, and you're half-way there.

    Writers don't always write because they clearly understand something beforehand. Often, they write about something because they want to understand it. You can do the same. Writing will help bring you to an understanding. Give it a try.

    Two friends have an argument that bleaks up their friendship forever, even though neither one can remember how the whole thing got started. Such sad events happen over and over in high schools across the country. In fact, according to an official report on youth violence, "In our country today, the greatest threat to the lives of children and adolescents is not disease or starvation or abandonment, but the terrible reality of violence". Given that this is the case, why aren't students taught to manage conflict the way they are taught to solve math problems, drive cars, or stay physically fit?

    First of all, students need to realize that conflict is unavoidable. A report on violence among middle school and high school students indicates that most violent incidents between students begin with a relatively minor insult (侮辱). For example, a fight could start over the fact that one student eats a peanut butter sandwich each lunchtime. Laughter over the sandwich can lead to insults, which in turn can lead to violence. The problem isn't in the sandwich, but in the way students deal with the conflict.

Once students recognize that conflict is unavoidable, they can practice the golden rule of conflict resolution—stay calm. Once the student feels calmer, he or she should choose words that will calm the other person down as well. Rude words, name-calling, and accusation only add fuel to the emotional fire. On the other hand, soft words spoken at a normal sound level can put out the fire before it explodes out of control.

    After both sides have calmed down, they can use another key strategy for conflict resolution: listening. Listening allows the two sides to understand each other. One person should describe his or her side, and the other person should listen without interrupting. Afterward, the listener can ask non-threatening questions to clarify the speaker's position. Then the two people should change roles.

    Finally, students need consider what they are hearing. This doesn't mean trying to figure out what's wrong with the other person. It means understanding what the real issue is and what both sides are trying to accomplish. For example, a shouting match over a peanut butter sandwich might happen because one person thinks the other person is unwilling to try new things. Students need to ask themselves questions such as these: How did this start? What do I really want? What am I afraid off? As the issue becomes clearer, the conflict often simply becomes smaller. Even if it doesn't, careful thought helps both sides figure out a mutual solution.

    There will always be conflict in schools, but that doesn't mean there needs to be violence. After students in Atlanta started a conflict resolution program, according to Educators for Social Responsibility, "64 percent of the teachers reported less physical violence in the classroom; 75 percent of the teachers reported an increase in student cooperation; and 92 percent of the students felt better about themselves". Learning to resolve conflicts can help students deal with friends, teachers, parents, bosses, and coworkers. In that way, conflict resolution is a basic life skill that should be taught in schools across the country.

    Sixty-four-year-old Pierre Deom has spent his entire life close to the woods and fields that he loves. Twice a year, his magazine, La Hulotte, focuses on an animal or plant native to the French countryside.

    The 100th edition was published in November. The magazine counts more than 150, 000 subscribers in many countries, and is doing very well financially. Deom says it all began in January 1972, when he was teaching science in a one-room schoolhouse here." It upset me how the forests and swamps were beginning to be ruined. The word 'ecology' didn't really exist yet. Some friends and I wanted to call attention to the issue. So we said, let's educate the kids. They're ready to hear our message." So he took a step into the unknown, planning to publish his nature journal.

    Deom does all the research and writing and the illustrations (插图) of the magazine by hand. He combines science and humor in his writing and drawing to describe the daily life and sufferings of his creatures. Animals you might overlook or consider dull are magically and vividly brought to life in La Hulotte. "I try to write about animals and plants that are easy to find because I want kids to put on boots, take a magnifying glass, go to the woods and fields to observe and be amazed by what they find," Deom says.

    And it seems to work. Biologist Jerome Fournier began subscribing to La Hulotte when he was just eight years old. "For me it was the first contact with nature when I was a child. And maybe it's the beginning for my life of scientist. I think so."

    What's amazing is its approach. The magazine has realistic drawings and also a little cast of cartoon creatures who comment on things and give a different views. You can read it as an adult or a child; it can be understood on two different levels. So scientists, regular people and children all get something out of it. "It's extraordinary." Fournier says, who works at the Museum of Natural History in Paris, where he says La Hulotte has a crazy following.

    When the weather is good, most children would like to play outside. So we asked some kids and their parents whether the following toys kept them happy.

    All Surface Swingball, $35.99

    Played by Martin, nine, and five-year-old Alex in Crewe, Cheshire.

    Mother Jennifer says, "The boys thought the toy was excellent and really wanted to play with it. It can be played with alone or with another child. It's for the right age range but I believe the toy can be played with by all ages and is suitable for the whole family."

    Rubberwood Quoits Set, $13.99

    Played by Jessica, four.

    Mother Lucy Hayburst, 37, in Chichester, West Sussex, says, "Jessica played with this toy for a few minutes but quickly stopped playing with it. Since we bought this toy for her, she only played several times. The quality is very good. It can be played with by one child or more. Besides, I believe it's more suitable for older kids."

    Wooden Animal Skittles, $14.99

    Played by Matthew, two.

    Father Richard Lee, 36, from Dartford, Kent, says, "Matthew was very interested in the toys and liked to play with them, but that only lasted for around five minutes. The skittles were fun at first but that feeling soon disappeared. Two or more children can play with the toy together. And I think they are most suitable for kids aged between three and seven. Our youngest son, Ethan, just kept trying to eat the lion's head."

    First Tailball Net Set, $22

    Played by James, five.

    Mother Sarah Schwar, 39, from Grays, Essex, says, "James loved the toy." He enjoyed balls so it was perfect for him. We used it in the summer as it was easy to take on trips. It is suitable for kids over five years old. I think the price is fair and your children deserve it."