Two summers ago I was about to turn fifty and wanted to do something I'd never done before. My daughter Bailey thought skydiving (跳伞) would be perfect for me. I can promise you that of all the things I was thinking of doing, jumping out of an airplane never came close to making the list. As I age, I seem to have developed a growing fear of heights.

    After several requests from my daughter, I finally said yes and she looked almost shocked. I told a friend what we were doing, then we set off. We had a 3-hour drive to the jump site. We drove through some beautiful countryside, but then we passed a small cemetery(墓地). Then we passed another cemetery and another one. I asked if so many people died jumping out of airplanes in this area that they needed to keep building more cemeteries to bury all the bodies!

    As we squeezed into the little plane, I tightly held the right hand of my partner Ronnie. The short ride to altitude was cruel for me. As Bailey stepped to the door, she looked back at me and said “Dad, I'm sure you can do it!” I said yes as she rolled out. I immediately looked behind me and said “RONNIE I AM NOT FEELING GOOD!” He said, “It's going to be great. Besides, it's too late now anyway”, and we jumped out.

    The next five minutes were some of the most amazing of my life. It was so beautiful and peaceful—except for the parts where I was screaming. I prayed to God for the parachute (降落伞) to open, but mostly I told Him how thankful I was for my life and being with me through good and bad.

    Self-driving vehicles have been proposed as a solution for the rapidly increasing number of fatal traffic accidents, which now cause 1.3 million deaths each year.

    While we have made great progress in advancing self-driving technology, we have yet to explore how autonomous vehicles will be programmed to deal with situations that endanger human life, according to a new study published in Frontiers in Behavioral Neuroscience.

    To understand how self-driving cars might make these judgments, the researchers looked at how humans deal with similar driving dilemmas.

    When faced with driving dilemmas, people show a high willingness to sacrifice themselves for others, make decisions based on the victim's age and turn onto sidewalks to minimize the number of lives lost. Ethical（伦理的）guidelines tend to disagree with human instincts（本能） in this case, saying that no life should be valued above another.

    “The technological advancement and adoption of autonomous vehicles are moving quickly but the social and ethical discussions about their behavior are lagging behind,” says lead author Lasse T. Bergmann from University of Osnabrück, Germany.

    Automated vehicles will eventually outperform their human counterparts, but there will still be circumstances where the cars must make an ethical decision to save or possibly risk losing a human life.

    The study is especially relevant considering earlier this year a self-driving Uber car struck and killed a passenger in Arizona, in an incident widely regarded as the first death resulting from an autonomous vehicle.

    An ethics commission launched by the German Ministry for Transportation has created a set of guidelines, representing its members' best judgement on a variety of issues concerning self-driving cars. These expert judgments may, however, not reflect human instinct.

    Bergmann and colleagues developed a virtual reality experiment to examine human instinct in a variety of possible driving situations. It was based on the well-known ethical thought experiment—the trolley problem.

    In this experiment, there is a trolley running down the railway tracks. Ahead, on the tracks, there are five people tied up, unable to move, and the trolley is headed straight for them. A person is standing some distance off in the train yard, next to a lever（操作杆）.If he pulls this lever, the trolley will turn to a different set of tracks. However, there is one person tied up on the side track. Does the person choose to pull the lever and kill one person, or do nothing and let five people die?

    Bergmann recognized that the majority of people would not approve of the proposal made by the ethics commission that a passenger in the vehicle should not be sacrificed to save more people. “We find people chose to save more lives, even if this involves turning onto the sidewalk, endangering people uninvolved in the traffic incident,” said Bergmann, “Furthermore, subjects considered the factor of age, for example, choosing to save children over the elderly.” He also realized further discussion and research were needed. “Driving requires a complex weighing of risks versus rewards, for example, speed versus the danger of a critical situation,” Bergmann explained.

    No one likes to make mistakes. But a new study says organizations learn more from their failures than from their successes, and keep that knowledge longer.

    One of the researchers was Vinit Desai, an assistant professor at the University of Colorado Denver Business School. He worked with Peter Madsen from the Marriott School of Management at Brigham Young University in Utah.

    They did not find much long-term "organizational learning" from success. It is possible, they say. But Professor Desai says they found that knowledge gained from failure lasts for years. He says organizations should treat failures as a learning opportunity and not try to ignore them.

    The study looked at companies and organizations that launch satellites and other space vehicles. Professor Desai compared two shuttle flights. In two thousand two, a piece of insulating (隔热的) material broke off during launch and damaged a rocket on the Atlantis. Still the flight was considered a success. Then in early two thousand three, a piece of insulation struck the Columbia during launch. This time, the shuttle broke apart on re-entry and the seven crew members died. NASA officials suspended all flights and an investigation led to suggested changes.

    Professor Desai says the search for solutions after a failure can make leaders more open-minded. He points to air-lines as an example of an industry that has learned from failures in the past. He advises organizations to look for useful information in small failures and failures they avoided. He also urges leaders to encourage the open sharing of information. The study appeared in the Academy of management Journal.

    The mistakes we learn from do not have to be our own. We recently asked people on our Facebook page to tell us a time they had done something really silly. Fabricio Cmino wrote: Not long ago I wanted to watch TV, but it wouldn't turn on, so I did everything I could to start it. Thirty minutes later my mum showed up and, passing by, said to me "Did you try plugging it?" "I'm just dusting, Mum!" So she wouldn't notice how dumb I am sometimes!

    Bruno Kanieski da Silva told about a time he looked everywhere for his key. It was in his pocket. He wrote: I always promise I will never do it again, but after a few weeks, where is my wallet? For sure it will be in a very logical place.

    When men and women take personality tests, some of the old Mars-Venus stereotypes(定式)keep reappearing. On average, women are more cooperative, kind, cautious and emotionally enthusiastic. Men tend to be more competitive, confident, rude and emotionally flat. Clear differences appear in early childhood and never disappear.

    What's not clear is the origin of these differences. Evolutionary psychologists think that these are natural features from ancient hunters and gatherers. Another school of psychologists argues that both sexes' personalities have been shaped by traditional social roles, and that personality differences will shrink as women spend less time taking care of children and more time in jobs outside the home.

    To test these hypotheses(假设), a series of research teams have repeatedly analyzed personality tests taken by men and women in more than 60 countries around the world. For evolutionary psychologists, the bad news is that the size of the gender gap in personality varies among cultures. For social-role psychologists, the bad news is that the change is going in the wrong direction. It looks as if personality differences between men and women are smaller in traditional cultures like India's or Zimbabwe's than in the Netherlands or the United States. A husband and a stay-at-home wife in a patriarchal(男权的)Botswanan clan(部族)seem to be more alike than a working couple in Denmark or France. The more Venus and Mars have equal rights and similar jobs, the more their personalities seem to separate.

    These findings are so unbelievable that some researchers have argued they must be due to cross-cultural problems with the personality tests. But according to new data from 40.000 men and women on six continents, David P. Schmitt and his colleagues conclude that the trends are real. Dr. Schmitt, a psychologist at Bradley University in Illinois and the director of the International Sexuality Description Project, suggests that as wealthy modern societies level(使平等)the barriers between women and men, some ancient internal differences are being developed.

    The biggest changes recorded by the researchers involve the personalities of men, not women.

    Men in traditional agricultural societies and poorer countries seem more cautious and anxious, less confident and less competitive than men in the most progressive and rich countries of Europe and North America.

    To explain these differences, Dr. Schmitt and his partners from Austria and Estonia point to the hardships of life in poorer countries. They note that in some other species, environmental stress tends to extremely affect the larger sex. And, they say, there are examples of stress decreasing biological sex differences in humans.

    By now you've probably heard about the "you're not special" speech, when English teacher David McCullough told graduating seniors at Wellesley High School: "Do not get the idea you're anything special, because you're not." Mothers and fathers present at the ceremony 一 and a whole lot of other parents across the Internet — took issue with McCullough's ego-puncturing (伤自尊的) words. But lost in the uproar (喧嚣)was something we really should be taking to heart: our young people actually have no idea whether they're particularly talented or accomplished or not. In our eagerness to elevate their self-esteem, we forgot to teach them how to realistically assess their own abilities, a crucial requirement for getting better at anything from math to music to sports. In fact, it's not just privileged high-school students: we all tend to view ourselves as above average.

    Such inflated self-judgments have been found in study after study and it's often exactly when we're least competent at a given task that we rate our performance most generously, in a 2006 study published in the journal Medical Education, for example, medical students who scored the lowest on an essay test were the most charitable in their self evaluations, while high-scoring students judged themselves much more strictly. Poor students, the authors note, "lack insight" into their own inadequacy. Why should this be? Another study, led by Cornell University psychologist David Dunning, offers an enlightening explanation. People who are incompetent, he writes with coauthor Justin Kruger, suffer from a “dual burden": they're not good at what they do, and their very clumsiness prevents them from recognizing how bad they are.

    In Dunning and Kruger's study, subjects scoring at the bottom on tests of logic, grammar and humor -extremely overestimated'' their talents. Although their test scores put them in the 12th percentile (百分位数) they guessed they were in the 62nd. What these individuals lacked (in addition 9 clear logic, proper grammar and a sense of humor) was "meta cognitive skill" the capacity to monitor how well they're performing. In the absence of that capacity, the subjects arrived at an overly hopeful view of their own abilities. There's a paradox here, the authors note: The skills that lead to competence in a particular domain are often the very same skills necessary to evaluate competence in that field? In other words, to get better at judging how well we're doing at an activity, we have to get better at the activity itself.

    There are a couple of ways out of this double bind. First, we can learn to make honest comparisons with others. Train yourself to recognize excellence, even when you yourself don't possess it, and compare what you can do against what truly excellent individuals are able to accomplish. Second, seek out feedback that is frequent, accurate and specific. Find a critic who will tell you not only how poorly you're doing, but just what it is that you're doing wrong. As Dunning and Kruger note, success indicates to us that everything went right, but failure is more ambiguous: any number of things could have gone wrong. Use this external feedback to figure out exactly where and when you screwed up.

    If we adopt these strategies — and most importantly, teach them to our children — they won't need parents, or a commencement (毕业典礼)speaker, to tell them that they're special. They'll already know that they are, or have a plan to get that way.

    "Don't tell anyone". We hear these words when someone tells a secret to us. But it can be hard to keep a secret. We often tend to "spill the beans", even if we regret it later.

    According to Asim Shah, professor in the Menninger Department of Psychiatry and Behavioral Sciences at Baylor College of Medicine, US, keeping a secret may well" become a burden". This is because people often have an "obsessive (强迫性的) and anxious urge to share it with someone".

    An earlier study, led by Anita E. Kelly, a scientist at the University of Notre Dame, US, suggested that keeping a secret could cause stress. People entrusted with secrets can suffer from depression, anxiety, and body aches, reported the Daily Mail.

    But with secrets so often getting out, why do people share them at all? Shah explained that people often feel that it will help them keep a person as a friend. Another reason people share secrets is guilt over keeping it from someone close to them. A sense of distrust can develop when people who are close do not share it with each other." Keeping or sharing secrets often puts people in a position of either gaining or losing the trust of someone." according to Shah.

    He added that talkative people could let secrets slip out. But this doesn't mean that it is a good idea only to share secrets with quiet people. A quiet person may be someone who keeps everything inside. To tell such a person a secret may cause them stress, and make them talk about the secret.

    Shah said that to judge whether to tell someone a secret, you'd better put yourself in their position. Think about how you would feel to be told that you mustn't give the information away. Shah also recommended that if you accidentally give up someone's secret you should come clean about it. Let the person know that their secret isn't so secret anymore.