In our daily life, we have developed a lot of habits, such as, eating habit, study habit, reading habit, etc. However, taking the time to develop a sleep habit is probably the last thing on your mind and some sleep advice simply can't be forgotten. {#blank#}1{#/blank#}.

Watching TV until you fall asleep

    It has nothing to do with what you watch —TV news isn't a better pre-sleep choice than TV series. {#blank#}2{#/blank#}. The bright light keeps you awake all the night. So even if you nod off (in front of the TV, for example), you probably won't stay asleep for long.

Sleeping with pets

    {#blank#}3{#/blank#}. They get comfortable, and then they move. This goes on all night, and whether you admit it or not, it interrupts your ability to get the level of sleep needed to feel rested.

Eating fatty, heavy foods too close to bedtime

    Heartburn (烧心，胃痛) strikes anyone of any age, but it's the most common GI disorder (胃肠失调) in older adults. If you've ever tried to go to sleep after eating a fatty meal, you've probably found the discomfort of stomach preventing you from falling asleep or staying asleep.

{#blank#}4{#/blank#}

    Remember how poorly you sleep when you have a fever—turning over and over again, never really feeling rested? Well, heavy exercise too close to bedtime has the same effect — it raises your body temperature so that your sleep is disturbed until your body temperature drops to normal, which may take several hours.

Accepting snoring (打呼噜) as normal sleep behavior

    Snoring may seem as common as breathing, but it's considered the biggest sleep killer, and it's linked to several causes: sleeping on your back, being overweight, having a cold, drinking, or taking drugs. {#blank#}5{#/blank#}. For the snorer, it disturbs sleep by awakening him/her every so often in order to breathe normally. For the partner, the noise can be unbearable.

    Most academics would view a post at an elite university like Oxford or Harvard as the crowning achievement of a career—bringing both honour and access to better wine cellars. But scholars desire such places for reasons beyond glory. They believe perching on one of the topmost branches of the academic tree will also improve the quality of their work, by bringing them together with other geniuses with whom they can collaborate and who may help spark new ideas. This sounds reasonable. Unfortunately，as Albert Laszlo Barabasi of Northeastern University，in Boston (and also, it must be said, of Harvard), shows in a study published in Scientific Reports, it is not true.

    Dr Barabasi and his team examined the careers of physicists who began publishing between 1950 and 1980 and continued to do so for at least 20 years. They ranked the impact of the institutions these people attended by counting the number of citations each institution's papers received within five years of publication. By tracking the association of individual physicists and counting their citations in a similar way, Dr Barabasi was able to work out whether moving from a low to a high-ranking university improved a physicist's impact. In total, he and his team analysed 2,725 careers.

    They found that, though an average physicist moved once or twice during his career, moving from a low-rank university to an elite one did not increase his scientific impact. Going in the opposite direction, however, did have a small negative influence. The consequence is that elite university do not，at least as far as physicists are concerned，add value to output. That surprising conclusion is one which the authorities in countries such as Britain, who are seeking to concentrate expensive subjects such as physics in fewer, more elite institutions—partly to save money, but also to create what are seen as centers of excellence—might wish to consider.

    Some of the best research on daily experience is rooted in rates of positive and negative interactions, which has proved that being blindly positive or negative can cause others to be frustrated or annoyed or to simply tune out.

    Over the last two decades, scientists have made remarkable predictions simply by watching people interact with one another and then scoring the conversations based on the rate of positive and negative interactions. Researchers have used the findings to predict everything from the likelihood that a couple will divorce to the chances of a work team with high customer satisfaction and productivity levels.

    More recent research helps explain why these brief exchanges matter so much. When you experience negative emotions as a result of criticism or rejection, for example, your body produces higher levels of the stress hormone, which shuts down much of your thinking and activates (激活) conflict and defense mechanisms (机制). You assume that situations are worse than they actually are.

    When you experience a positive interaction, it activates a very different response. Positive exchanges increase your body's production of oxytocin, a feel-good that increases your ability to communicate with, cooperate with and trust others. But the effects of a positive occurrence are less dramatic and lasting than they are for a negative one.

    We need at least three to five positive interactions to outweigh every one negative exchange. Bad moments simply outweigh good ones. Whether you're having a conversation, keep this simple short cut in mind: At least 80 percent of your conversations should be focused on what's going right.

    Workplaces, for example, often see this. During performance reviews, managers routinely spend 80 percent of their time on weaknesses and “areas for improvement”. They spend roughly 20 percent of the time on strengths and positive aspects. Any time you have discussions with a person or group, spend the vast majority of the time talking about what is working, and use the remaining time to address weaknesses.

    Learning is so complex that there are many different psychological theories to explain how people learn. A psychologist named Albert Bandura suggested a social learning theory which shows that observation, imitation (模仿), and modeling play a primary role in this process.

    In Albert Bandura's opinion, people can learn through observation. Observational learning doesn't even necessarily require watching another person join in an activity. We can also learn by reading, hearing, or watching the actions of characters in books and films. However, just observing someone else's actions isn't always enough to lead to learning. Your own mental state also plays an important role in determining whether a behavior is learned or not. In addition, though in many cases, learning can be seen immediately when the new behavior is displayed, yet sometimes we can learn things even though that learning might not be immediately obvious, which means people can learn new information without showing new behaviors.

    Not all observed behaviors are effectively learned. Certain requirements need to be related to the observational learning process. For example, you need to be paying attention. Also your retention is an important part of observational learning as you need to pull up information later and act on it during the process. Once you've paid attention to the model and kept the information, it's time to actually perform the behavior you observed. Further practice of the learned behavior leads to improvement. Finally, you have to be motivated to imitate the behavior that has been modeled.

    Social learning theory have many real-world applications. For example, researchers employ it to look into and understand ways that positive role models can be used to encourage desirable behaviors. Besides, it's also applied in the field of education, and today, both teachers and parents recognize how important it is to model appropriate behaviors.

    US inventor Thomas Alva Edison once said: "Genius is one percent inspiration and 99 percent perspiration." He was not exaggerating. Perspiration, indeed, plays a very important role in Chinese scientist Tu Youyou's success.

    Tu was given the Nobel Prize in Physio logy or Medicine in 2015 for discovering a new drug for malaria, a deadly disease caused by the bite of some types of mosquito. She is the first Chinese citizen to win a Nobel Prize in science. "It is the pride of the whole Chinese science community, which will inspire more Chinese scientists," China Daily noted.

    Malaria is a disease that infects around 200 million people and k ills about half a million people each year, according to the Economist. Tu's discovery has saved millions of lives, especially in the developing world. According to the World Health Organization, by 2013 malaria deaths had fallen by 47 percent compared with 2000.

    But the road to this achievement was a tough one to travel. In the late 1960s, during the "cultural revolution" (1966-1976), Tu joined a government project on which she began research on a new malaria drug.

    In the beginning, Tu read a lot of old folk remedies(药方), searched texts that w ere hundreds or thousands of years old and traveled to remote places.

    Over several months, Tu and her team collected over 600 plants and created a list of almost 380 possible remedies.

    "This w as the most challenging stage of the project," Tu told The Beijing News. "It was a very labor-demanding and dull job, in particular when you faced one failure after another."

    But the hard work and the dullness failed to break the team's spirit. In the following months, she and her team tested the remedies on malaria- infected mice and they found that an extract(提取物)from the plant qinghao seemed to work w ell.

    Not that the work was easier after that. The fact that the extract didn't always work against malaria discouraged some of her teammates. But Tu was ambitious to make a contribution to the world and so she encouraged her teammates to keep going. They decided to start again from the beginning.

    In 1971, they were rewarded for their efforts. After nearly 200 failures, Tu finally made an extract that was 100 percent effective  against malaria parasites.The extract was called "Artemisin in"(青蒿素).

    Thanks to decades of hard work, Tu and her team had "provided humankind with powerful new means to combat these diseases that affect hundreds of millions of people every year," said the Nobel Prize Committee. "It has greatly improved human health and reduced suffering."

    I became a magician by accident. When I was nine years old, I learned how to make a coin disappear. I'd read The Lord of the Rings and risked coming into the adult section of the library to search for a book of spells (魔法) — nine being that curious age at which you're old enough to work through more than 1, 200 pages of mysterious fantasy literature but young enough to still hold out hope that you might find a book of real, actual magic in the library. The book I found instead taught basic sleight-of-hand (戏法) technique, and I devoted the next months to practice.

    Initially, the magic wasn't any good. At first it wasn't even magic; it was just a trick — a bad trick. I spent hours each day in the bathroom running through the secret moves in front of the mirror. I dropped the coin over and over, a thousand times in a day, and after two weeks of this my mom got a carpet sample from the store and placed it under the mirror to eradicate the sound of the coin falling again and again.

    I had heard my dad work through passages of new music on the piano, so I knew how to practice — slowly, deliberately, going for precision rather than speed. And then I tried the illusion (错觉) in the mirror and an unbelievable scene took place. It did not look like a magic trick. It looked like a miracle. I knew that I had got what I wanted.

    One day I made the performance on the playground. We had been playing football and were standing by the backstop in the field behind the school. A dozen people were watching. I showed the coin to everyone. Then it disappeared. The kids screamed. They yelled, laughed, scrambled away. Everyone went crazy. This was brilliant.