I’m not gonna lie- I’m a shopaholic. Whether it’s for clothes, accessories, décor, school supplies, food- literally anything, I will do it with you. After a few busy weeks, I like to treat myself to a little shopping spree. I’m sure you’ve heard the term “retail therapy” as a way to improve mood through shopping. Is this just an excuse to go shopping, or does the activity really relieve stress? I think that it does.

A study was done in a shopping mall to evaluate the difference (if any) in the mood of the shoppers after they spontaneously bought something. Two hundred and twenty adult shoppers were asked to participate in the study as they entered the mall. At the beginning of the shopping trip, consumers were given statements to rank their mood, such as “Currently, I am in a good mood” and “At this moment, I feel edgy and irritable”. According to the study, “This scale is designed to measure temporary differences in mood and not enduring differences.” Additionally, they were asked to make a list of their intended purchases for the day. At the end of their shopping trip, they reported which purchases were actually made, and if any were bought as “treats”.

Of the 220 participants, 158 of them made purchases that day. Fifty-six percent, or 88 of them, had bought an item that they designated as a “treat”. Sixty-three percent of the “treats” were purchases that were unplanned. Those who splurged on such “treats” identified themselves as less happy at the beginning of the shopping trip. The results yielded that those in a temporary bad mood were more likely to spontaneously purchase more “treats” for themselves. These impulse-buys were purchased in light of improving mood, and therefore count as a form of retail therapy.

Kit Yarrow, a professor of psychology and marketing at Golden Gate University, has narrowed down five therapeutic benefits of shopping, after years of research and interviews with consumers. Shopping can be a way to ease transitions in life, as a form of mental preparation. As individuals buy things, they are envisioning the new objects in the future, and how they will fit into their new lives. People often buy new clothes for events, like job interviews, starting a new school, or going out one night. Dressing well increases confidence, and according to a study published by The Journal of Experimental Social Psychology, dressing appropriately can help improve performance. For some, buying things for the appreciation of design and aesthetics is self-fulfilling. Like vacation, shopping can provide an escape from reality. Whether online shopping, window-shopping, or burying yourself in clothes in a dressing room, shopping can be used as a way to take your mind off of your daily life. Lastly, some people frequent certain stores or shopping centers for the mere reason of connecting with others that appreciate the same things. Social connection is crucial in life, and shopping can be a way to accommodate that aspect.

Based on the research done and the psychology behind it, I believe retail therapy can improve one’s mood. As long as the shopping doesn’t get out of hand, a little shopping spree here and there might make you happier, more confident, and connected to others.

You’ve probably heard the saying “an apple a day keeps the doctor away.” I always took it as a way for my parents to get me to eat healthier considering I hated going to the doctor. But does eating an apple a day really keep the doctor away? I think it is a myth, as eating apples is good for you, they will not keep the doctor away.

Pritikin reports that several studies have found correlations between the consumption of apples and cancer, “In the Nurses Health Study, involving more than 77,000 women in the United States, those who consumed at least one serving per day of apples and/or pears had a reduced risk of lung cancer.” Another study surveyed 40,000 women and found that those who ate an apple each day had a 13-22 % decrease in risk of cardiovascular disease. So, perhaps eating an apple a day can keep you from having to go see the doctor (for life-threatening diseases, anyway)!

Director of the Department of Nutrition at Harvard-affiliated Brigham and Women’s Hospital, Kathy McManus, says that, “There is good data to show that the soluble fiber in apples can help prevent cholesterol from building up on artery walls. Apples contain a good amount of potassium, which can be beneficial for those who are watching their blood pressure.” If you are at risk for these health concerns, apples are definitely beneficial for you. However, they will not keep the doctor away. Although they are healthy, apples are no matches to doctors!

UAMS family physician, Dr. Daniel Knight, explains that replacing unhealthy foods with an apple is always a great idea. He says, “apples are a good source of fiber, are helpful for keeping good colon health, and can help in weight control.” These fruits have many positive aspects to them and can improve your health.

Although apples are a great source of a variety of nutrients, they won’t keep the doctor away. Even if you are perfectly healthy, it is still a good idea to visit a doctor regularly to ensure your vitals are up-to-par. Additionally, if you have any family history of genetic diseases, an apple a day cannot protect you from them. Visit a doctor to make sure you are healthy.

Last month I wrote a blog evaluating the effects looking down at your cell phone has on your neck and back. Now, I have another question: can texting cause tendonitis in your fingers? I think the answer is a definite yes.

A study by the Kaiser Family Foundation assessed the texting habits of middle-school and high-school students, and found that they average 95 minutes of texting per day. Dr. Nanavati, an orthopedic specialist, says that, “One of the most common places where we see arthritis from repetitive hand use is at the base of the thumb.” We use our thumbs to text, so seeing pain radiating from there makes sense.

Hand surgeon and associate professor of orthopedic and plastic surgery at UCLA, Prosper Benhaim, MD, says that repeating a specific motion can cause pains in various ways. Moreover, he says, “But thumb typing is very repetitive, and the keys are so small it makes it difficult to navigate around easily. Because it is so small, people are likely to press harder vs. a larger keyboard.” According to Experian, U.S. smartphone users ages 18-24 send an average of 67 texts per day. From my own experience, I know that I send far more than that. The consistent movement of the thumbs stresses the tendons, thus causing joint pain. Even typing this blog on my computer is hurting my thumbs and hands.

Average number of texts sent and received per month

If an experiment were to be conducted on whether or not texting causing tendonitis, I would gather a group of younger people (those not at-risk for tendonitis) and have them fill out a survey evaluating their current texting habits, and then rank the pain (if any) that they feel in their thumbs and hands. Then, I would have them send the average of 67 text messages per day, and make sure they don’t use their thumbs for any other similar, tedious activities. I would run this experiment for six months. At the end of the time period, I would have them take the same survey evaluating their pain, and see if it changed from before the experiment was conducted. If it did, I would have a doctor evaluate them for tendonitis. I think this would yield some interesting results showing that texting may cause tendonitis.

Growing up, my parents never let me eat foods with a lot of sugar right before bed because they said they would make me restless. Naturally, I used that excuse when babysitting kids. If they asked for a sugary snack, I would come up with every excuse not to give it to them in hopes to avoid unnecessary hyperactivity. But does sugar actually cause hyperactivity? Or is it a myth our parents created in order to keep us healthier?

A study was done in which experimenters evaluated the behavior of children on diets composed of high levels of sucrose, aspartame, or saccharin. Two groups of children were tested: 23 kids aged 6-10 years, who were described by their parents to have responded adversely to sugar, and a group of 25 normal kids, ages 3-5. In order to control the children’s diets, the experimenters removed all the food from the kids’ homes and replaced them with the experimental diets weekly. These diets were, “designed to keep the appearance of the sweetened products similar, regardless of the sweetener used.” Additionally, things that are typically believed to influence behavior, such as caffeine, were kept at low levels throughout the diets. The children were observed on these diets for three weeks. They were rated by parents, teachers, and the experimenters using the following criteria: “attention, hyperactivity, impulsivity, destructive-aggressive acts, and motor behavior scores on standardized cognitive tests, and by self-reports of mood and physical state.” At the end of each dietary period, the kids were also given an oral sucrose tolerance test.

The experiment uncovered that sugar has no significant effect on behavioral or cognitive abilities. Sugar intake may be correlated with alterations in behavior in some children, but overall it does not cause hyperactivity.

The problem I have with this study is the fact that it was done on such young children. Young kids tend to be hyper by nature. So, how could they accurately measure hyperactivity if the experimenters did not observe the kids when they were not on the special diets? If the experimenters observed the children prior to the experiment in their natural states, and then changed their diets and increased their sugar intake, they would be able to see if their hyperactivity truly increased. This is what they should have done in their experiment. Therefore, I cannot accept these results.

Growing up, I often noticed how my friends’ parents had different parenting styles than my parents. Some would hit their children, reward them with extravagant gifts, or just sometimes flat-out ignore them. With education and intelligence being a large factor in everyday life, I am lead to wonder: do parenting styles influence the cognitive ability of children? I think the answer is yes.

Psychologist Diana Baumrind studied different parenting styles, the main three being: authoritarian, permissive, and authoritative. Authoritarian parents enforce strict, rigid rules and demand strict obedience to authority. Permissive parents tend to give little and inconsistent guidance, give children excessive freedom, and lack good communication. Authoritative parents give firm and consistent guidance, communicate effectively, have reasonable expectations, and are caring and responsive.

Diana Baumrind

A study, which you can review here, was conducted examining my question. It consisted of surveys distributed to parents, and interviews conducted with children. The participants were taken from families with children in first and third grade from a medium-sized southern town in America. The families were offered $25 to participate in the study. The final sample size yielded 267 mother-child pairs and 127 father-child pairs. Variables regarding the parent’s such as income, past schooling, marital status and race were evaluated and controlled throughout the study.

The results showed a strong correlation between the mother’s socioeconomic-demographic characteristics and the cognitive ability of the children stating, “These findings indicate that children with White married mothers with higher levels of education and from families with higher levels of income have higher cognitive ability scores.” Furthermore, the mother’s parenting styles correlated with cognitive ability stating, “Both authoritarian and permissive parenting styles were negatively related to children’s cognitive ability indicating that children with mothers who report higher levels of authoritarian and permissive parenting practices have lower cognitive ability scores.”

The father’s socioeconomic-demographic characteristics yielded the same results as the mother’s. Children of White married fathers who completed a higher form of education and come from higher socio-economic classes had higher cognitive ability scores. However, the father’s responses yielded that only one of the parenting styles, permissive, was negatively related to the child’s cognitive performance.

This particular study showed that the control variables (socio-economic demographic characteristics) were more correlated with a child’s cognitive ability than parenting styles. I believe this study could have yielded better results if it used different techniques. Primarily, surveys give the participant the liberty to record anything they want. Also, because they were given an incentive to participate in the study, the parents could have filled out random answers in the survey just to get it over with and collect their money, instead of accurately filling it out. Additionally, the participants studied were from the same area. The sample size should have been composed of people from different parts of the country, from different races, and from different socioeconomic backgrounds. This would have provided a more accurate representation of the population of our country, thus making the results more inclusive. Once chosen, scientists should monitor the parenting styles and children’s cognitive ability from the time the children are infants, to the time they reach college. This longitudinal study approach would allow the observers to follow their subjects as their cognitive ability develops, and then they could see from there how parenting styles may correlate with cognitive ability. Observing families in this fashion would help narrow the study to strictly how parenting styles influence cognitive ability.

Last night I was watching the Penn State vs Ohio State football game (which I ended up turning off after a terrible first half). As I was watching, I thought about all the time that practices, travelling, press, game days, etc. take up in a player’s life. How do they have time to do their schoolwork and do it well? The reason I didn’t play sports in high school was because I was afraid it would interfere with my schoolwork in a negative way. I still believe that it does. I believe that student athletes’ grades must be significantly lower than those of students who do not play sports.

In 1986, a study was done to examine the relationship between sports and academic achievement. The grades of 24,000 students were examined. Out of these students, the records of 1,500 student athletes and 4,553 records of students not on sports teams were reviewed. The research shows evidence against my claim. The average GPA of student athletes was 2.67, while the average GPA of non-participating students was a 2.12.

The study then looked at the receiving failing grades for student athletes. During the season, 23 percent of the possible F’s able to be given were given then. During the off-season, 35 percent of the possible F’s were given then. More student athletes were failing during the off-season than when they were participating in their sport.

Although the data from this study seems strong, I do not believe it is enough. In order to make the evidence stronger, I think a survey should have been given to all the students asking them to describe the courses they are taking and how many they are taking. Student athletes, because of their rigorous schedules, may be taking less classes, and/or “easier” courses. Additionally, the survey should include whether or not their sport has a minimum GPA requirement. Are student-athletes only obtaining higher GPA’s in order to avoid getting kicked off the team, or do they really care about their grades? This question could stem further into the rate of cheating among athletes. If they need a minimum GPA to stay on their sports team, how far would they go to maintain that score between their own busy schedules? Evaluating these variables would make the study much more interesting and convincing.

For the past week, it has been impossible for me to fall asleep before 3 am unless I take ZzzQuil. I’ve heard that using electronics before bed can impact your ability to fall asleep, but it has never taken me so long to get some rest. I want to find out what else may be causing my restlessness.

One reason, according to WebMD, may be stress, “when you’re stressed out, your adrenal glands release hormones, such as adrenaline and cortisol, which keep you amped up and struggling to snooze.” With school work, extra curricular activities, and all the new experiences college has to offer, I have definitely been stressed and anxious lately.

Additionally, eating too much before bed can cause reflux, according to Alon Avidan, MD, associate professor of neurology and associate director of UCLA’s Sleep Disorders Program. This can lead to coughing, heartburn, and more pain, which all obviously cause discomfort while trying to sleep. I find myself, like most college students, eating late at night while trying to finish up homework, or when I have cravings.

Forbes offers another interesting cause: exercising too late. They say, “If you exercise within three hours of trying to sleep, you’ll overstimulate your metabolism and raise your heart rate causing restlessness and frequent awakenings throughout the night.” As a busy college student, I sometimes find it hard to figure out a time to go to the gym. Thus, I have been going later in the day, sometimes after dinner. This could definitely explain why I am wide awake and energized at night.

Now that I know what may cause my sleeplessness, I want to know how to fix it. CNN offers several tips to help. They say to try the “4-7-8” exercise in which you inhale your breath for four seconds, hold it for seven seconds, and exhale for eight seconds. This will slow down your heart rate and regulate your breathing, helping you sleep faster! A funny tactic is to put on socks when you sleep. Professor Ancoli-Israel says that while sleeping, the perfect temperature is to be cooler in the core and warmer on the outside of your body. Further, “one study revealed that wearing socks dilates your blood vessels and can help blood flow, leading to a more optimal temperature for snoozing.”

From now on, I will watch my exercise, food intake, and stress levels more carefully. Also, when I can’t sleep, I will try these simple tasks and see if they work!

I’m a major foodie. I will eat anything at any time, and try (mostly) anything. I’ve heard of myths that certain foods can cause acne, bad breath, and of course fat, but there’s one thing I never thought of until now: can certain foods make you smell bad?

According to UC Berkley, the answer is yes. Plants in the Brassica genus, like broccoli and cauliflower, have certain sulfuric compounds that can affect body odor. Additionally, foods in the Allium genus, like onion and garlic, can have the same effect.  such as curry and cumin can leave their stenches in your pores for days. In addition to foods, some beverages can make you smell funky. Alcohol can come out of your pores while you sweat, and obviously your breath.

There is a disorder called trimethylaminuria in which people develop a fishy odor after eating fish and other high-protein foods. UC Berkley furthers explains how it happens, “an inability to break down a food-derived compound, which then builds up in the body and is released in sweat, breath and urine.” Many people who don’t know they have the disorder claim to have unexplained body odor.

In order to prevent odor, brush your teeth, wear deodorant, and take frequent showers. Also, if you avoid these foods, you might benefit!

You’ve probably heard that cell phones can cause a range of health problems, from cancer to addiction, but I recently heard of one health hazard that I had not thought of: neck/back pain. Everywhere you look, you will see at least five people with their head down looking at their phone. Not many people seem to realize how bad it can really be for their health.

It’s been said that the average person will spend between 700 and 1,400 hours a year staring down at their phone. While in the natural, upright position, the average adult head weighs between ten and twelve pounds. However, due to gravity, the greater the angle in which you bend your neck, the heavier your head will get. Dr. Kenneth Hansraj, chief of spine surgery at New York Spine Surgery and Rehabilitation Medicine, found that bending your neck at a 60 degree angle puts on 60 pounds of pressure on your cervical spine.

DR. KENNETH HANSRAJ/SURGICAL TECHNOLOGY INTERNATIONAL

But what does this physically do to your body? Experts say the bent neck position can lead to a variety of issues, such as muscle strain, disc herniations and pinched nerves. Additionally, “it can even flatten or reverse the natural curve of your neck,” as time goes on. Dr. Tom DiAngelis, president of the American Physical Therapy Association‘s Private Practice Section, says it is similar to “bending your finger back all the way and holding it there for an hour…  As you stretch the tissue for a long period of time, it gets sore, it gets inflamed.” Dr. Michelle Collie, director of Performance Physical Therapy in Rhode Island, said it can also cause metabolic issues. Dr. Larry Bompiani, a chiropractor from Virginia, said, “the joints as well as the disks become degenerated from over period of years of that repetitive stress.”

In order to help this problem, Collie suggests to be aware of your posture and to invest in a docking station and wrist guards to help support your mobile device. Additionally, holding the phone in front of your face, instead of below it, can help. Even taking time away from your device can help you feel better physically and mentally.

After reading about the serious and long-term effects cell phone usage has on your neck and back, I will definitely be more conscientious about how I use my phone. Additionally, I will start working on better posture, even when I’m not on my phone.

I’ve never really been a tea person, and I absolutely hate coffee. Mornings are usually rough for me as I am groggy and unmotivated. My friends who drink coffee in the morning say the caffeine helps them wake up and get work done, and they tell me I should try drinking tea if I really don’t like coffee. Some tell me to suck it up and drink the coffee anyway because I’ll really feel a difference. But my question is, does caffeine really increase productivity?

Here’s how it works: the caffeine cross the blood-brain barrier, which is designed to protect the CNS, or central nervous system, from harmful chemicals in the bloodstream. It then moves on to block the chemical adenosine, which inhibits the release of a variety of chemicals into the brain, reducing energy levels. When it is blocked, drowsiness and fatigue decrease and physical and cognitive performance are enhanced.

There have been several studies that show caffeine improves alertness and cognitive functioning, and it makes people more encouraging of one another in social circumstances. Furthermore, another study showed that higher caffeine consumption reduced risk of accidents in the workplace.  There is some evidence, though, that increased alertness can be the cause of the placebo effect. A study at the University of East London, 88 habitual coffee drinkers were randomly given cups of coffee, some caffeinated and some decaffeinated. Each individual participated in tasks that evaluated reaction time and more. In the tasks that measured reaction time, those who believed they consumed caffeine were more accurate, even if they had decaf coffee. Those who had caffeine but were told they drank decaf did not show improvement in reaction time.

Although it does have positive effects, caffeine consumption can be harmful. At least 600 mg of it can bring on “the jitters”. Those sensitive to it can feel nervousness and irritability after just a small dose. For those with anxiety, caffeine can decrease productivity, but for those with depression, it could help productivity.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Caffeine

Overall, there are a variety of benefits and costs associated with the consumption of caffeine. Also, it seems to react differently in each individual. After all the research done on this topic, I feel confident to say that caffeine does in fact increase productivity. I guess I should start taking a liking to coffee!

I have two dogs at home, Brady and Rico. Both are Black Labs, and both are as loving, hyper, and cuddly as ever. When I am happy and excited, they seem to reciprocate the emotion, whether they wag their tails and jump around or lick my face. When I am sad, they rest their head on my lap, or nudge me with their noses. I’ve always had a feeling they could read my feelings, but is it true? Can dogs sense humans’ emotions?

Recent studies say that yes, they can. Attila Andics, a neurobiologist at the MTA-ELTE Comparative Ethology Research Group in Budapest, led study in which eleven dogs laid inside an MRI brain scanner for ten minutes at a time as they listened to two hundred noises varying between human and dog voices.

Humans have an area in the brain devoted to recognizing others’ voices and sounds. Instead of interpreting the words someone says, the area takes in account the context of the situation, like who is speaking and the tone of their voice. The researchers in Budapest wanted to see if dogs have a similar part in their brain. They put headphones on the dogs and played three sounds for them: human and dog voices, and environmental noises (like a phone ringing). They then waited to see which areas of the brain responded to the stimuli presented.

The study yielded some interesting finds. Like humans, dogs have a patch of neurons that react to voices of their own kind, like a dog barking or whining. Another region responded to emotional tones in the humans and the dogs. This area in the dog’s brain is located in the back near the ears— just like in the humans’ brain. The similarities suggest that dogs can in fact detect emotions, just like humans can.

Next time you want some love and comfort, a dog will always be there for you! More than likely, they will reciprocate and respond to your emotions and actions accordingly.

source

I am taking this course because my advisor recommended it to me. I was told this course was directed toward people like myself, who are not particulary science-oriented. I also like the idea of thinking critically and outside-the-box, and asking unique questions regarding scientific topics. I am not majoring in science because I’ve never been very good in the subject. Additionally, I’ve never really been interested in it.

The Grand Tetons are my favorite destination in the US.

very important:dorm room microwavable meals