The WordPress.com stats helper monkeys prepared a 2011 annual report for this blog.
Here’s an excerpt:
A San Francisco cable car holds 60 people. This blog was viewed about 1,600 times in 2011. If it were a cable car, it would take about 27 trips to carry that many people.
今天是圣诞，几个小时后，我会搭Bob的车离开星城这个看上去非常荒凉的地方，到亚特兰大乘班机回国。圣诞本是个喜气洋洋的节日，而我选择在这个时间离开，实属不得已、不情愿。说来话长，但是这种似忧伤的情绪，却因离别前两周的休息而变得极淡了，取而代之的是一种收获感，这种感觉多年来似从未经历过。于是，我打算在年末回家之后慢慢的写一些我这半年来的经历，以作一回顾，并作为一整年的总结。
Actually this article issued by Dr. Sullivan quite some time ago talks about strategies of taking and preparing for tests. I turned it up when arranging my review materials this morning. Since reading is not that frightening now, and I am to take a high-stakes exam, I see this take-away-tip article necessary for me as well as for all that suffer from test taking.
The author suggested a few tips backed up by research data. First is about knowledge retrieval and arranging knowledge points in your memory. The author proposed a logical way to memorize as practicing “explaining how it works from start to finish”, rather than treating the process as it were in the textbook. This practice helps the test taker comprehensively understand the principles and causality of the phenomenon. The process, when taken in a vividly explained manner, can be imprinted on test takers’ minds. Also, such a simulative practice will be helpful in controlling pacing.
Next, the author stressed the importance of adequate sleep by listing a few risks as consequences of insufficient or improper sleeping. Harmful styles of sleeping, for example, early-wake-up, interferes with the rapid-eye-movement stage that aids memory of previous evening’s review. The all-nighter style, if lasting for four days, will impairs reasoning and memorizing capabilities.This is true from my personal test-taking experiences. Less sufficient rest and energe refill may even muddle your brain and delay your inspiration.
The diet issue may be the one that easily ignored by people. What are recommended include high-carb, high-fiber, slow-digesting foods as best breakfast option.
In response to a commonly agreed argument that students aren’t really distracted by music when reviewing information, the author referred to the field experiment and real cases to show the opposite effect.
In addition, some valueable tactics are provided for the test day in the last part of the article. These tactics are for reducing anxiety and couldn’t improve test-takers’ performance, but they are useful even if the test takers are fully-prepared because these tips are focusing on mitigating negative effects, that is to say, preventing test-takers’ unnecessarily losing scores.
There should be no best way to study, if study is not to be measured by the test scores. However, one of the advantages of taking a test and judging by test results is the improved scores can boost your confidence on continuous study. This is believed to be the best way to study.
http://is.gd/ahequj
从前所了解的中西方学习方式上的不同在于东方是由总至分（演绎），西方是由分至总（归纳）。最近在读Aczel的《商务统计》，对西方的知识学习和理论建立过程有了一个新的认识。
这部《商务统计》先由概率、随机数、正态分布开始，讲到取样、置信区间，再讲到假设检验……等等。假设检验涉及到生活和工作中的选择和决断，即当面对或是或非的不同情况，我们如何进行正确的选择，这里有四种可能。一是选取了正确的结果，一是放弃了错误的结果，这两种都是正确的选择。另外两种是错误的选择，即选取了错误的结果，或放弃了正确的结果，只是相比之下，选取错误的结果可能危害性更大一些。为了获得正确的选择结果，就需要排除被证伪的假设（严密的逻辑认为，通过列举出独立互斥命题的伪来证明某个命题为真的方式更可信），而为了证伪，就需要从实践中获取真实。由于在实践中获取真实的成本往往比较大，比如时间成本、能力成本、经济性成本等，就需要通过从可获取的部分实践数据（也就是样本）来推断总体实践真实。由于部分与总体之间往往不可能绝对一致，因此就产生了一个可信度的问题，即样本在多大程度上代表了总体，这就是取样和置信区间的问题。要了解样本和置信区间，则又涉及到样本的分布，这是正态分布所涵盖的内容（多数样本都可考虑为正态分布型）。为什么自然界里进行样本选取总是会有钟型的正态分布的趋势？必要的一个前提是在一个数据集里进行随机抽样，只有这样的不断抽样才在样本不断增大时使样本数据接近总体数据，这就涉及到随机选取和概率的知识了。把以上过程反过来看，便是这本书的章节顺序。
都说西方社会科学与大陆的社会科学研究方法不一样，这个不一样主要体现在西方社会科学研究人员在思维和推导上有着严密的科学过程，而这个过程所依靠的武器就是统计学。在统计学的背后，则是完整的对以人为主体的外界客观事实的认识过程。以中国大陆为代表的东方在近代科学发展上落后于西方国家，这也许是原因之一。
I have been in the states for nearly two months. Life here is quiet and (for some) monotonous, as even a Mid-autumn Festival party so loosely planned and organized could attract local Chinese residents said by one of the CSSA members. But America is the America, never to be re-shaped or perceived as you like as the one that fits your prototype or presumed model.
I had some experiences after my first arrival some time ago. Some were mistakes I unintentionally make due to cultural difference, yet some were due to mis-implanted impressions before the trip. We have been told even from the first day of school education that what a society of the us is like, what we could expect when communicating with a native us citizen, and what should we react to even a common salutation or a morning greeting. Students have been given prototypes and templates and are expected to react in a uniform way. The education system and philosophy thus restrained our behavior as well as our thinking capability.
One of my QQ friends once asked me about my situation here at MS. I told her that I’d have to have my stomach adjusted to local food and style, cold, high-cholesterol rate, carelessly made lunch, few vegetables with tons of all sorts of meat…I said with my eyebrows frowned, expecting her sympathetic reply. Somewhat to my surprise but yet not astonishment, she replied that that’s what she’s been dreamed of for so long, the western style food, steaks and the kind of things and “it seems the US is a place that greatly suits me”. This is not the first time that she expressed her disappointment. The first time she was dismayed was when I showed her a series of pictures taken around my resident area, the scenery of which implies strong contradiction to that of New York. But isn’t that modern landscape what we are told of by the media before we come across the Pacific?
I did say the same over ten years ago when my father was in NC that I could have enjoyed the living there. Today, when I am in the US, I found myself in a switched role. This is America, a true America. When you are here, it is your American, dependent on what and how you develop the impression, but the same time, it is the American in the first place. You will need adjust yourself to the life here no matter how you’ve been explicitly portraying your assumed picture of America.
The following is a summary for readings undertaken in my OB seminar this afternoon. It is a formal essay submitted for discussions and circulated among the other three PhD students before my posting here in my blog. Should you find any errors, mistakes and/or ideas that discomfort you, don’t be hesitated to drop me a few lines.
Popper’s Deductive Method and Kilduff’s Publishing Theory
To justify inductive inferences, a principle of induction needs to be established. While this principle on a higher level seems to be improbable to some extent, and Popper doesn’t say what this principle is, he does give his own idea on induction as science and everyday life can proceed without using induction. Popper’s method is purely deductive, very strictly following the process of inductive inference and arguing from negative singular to negative universal statement, thus Popper steps further on that verified predictions are “no reason to believe the hypothesis is true or even probable”. Popper also believes that scientific theories can be supported by the evidence, but even with evidence support, theories may not be scientific, thus he argues an acceptable theory in empirical science must conform to three requirements: 1) the theory cannot be judged true of false only by its meaning; 2) the theory can be contradicted by observation; and 3) they theory is corroborated and has passed all its tests.
The importance of Popper’s deductive method is that he points out the weakness of the widely employed inductive methods as we have to regard a universal statement as true from our experience and cannot always find the ultimate highest level of the principle. His method of deductive inference is purely logical and he indicates how people can judge a hypothesis, not by verified predictions even though it may seem to increase the probability. Popper’s requirements of a true theory give us an easy but succinct way to judge its acceptability.
Kilduff’s publishing theory is mainly a guide for people who are interested in publishing in AMR, but his extrapolation means much for starters as well as for veterans as the topic covers theory value enhancement and common mistakes people have been making in submission of papers.
Kilduff argues a good theory paper requires “nurturing, development, and revision before submission”. He suggests ways of a careful development process including 1) offering big ideas, 2) structuring original ideas, and 3) revision to “sharpen the clarity, logic, vividness, precision, succinctness, and surprise of your writing”.
The importance of this article lies in the following aspects. First, it tells the process of all stages that a good and acceptable paper should go through (initial inspiration, discussion with colleagues, formal discussion, critiques from experts and conferences, and submission, and perhaps revision at the next circle) so that people will know how to follow step by step. Second, it explains the importance of each stage and how to complete these stages, for example, the importance of an abstract. Third, this article also lists five major cautions to help avoid rejection at the final phase of publication, which is meaningful to even successful submitters.
Popper and Kilduff both talk about theory development. Popper indicates the false point in developing a good theory, i.e., by using inductive method, proposes his own of deductive method, and finalize by raising examples to help clarify misunderstandings. Kilduff gives recommendations before pointing out major but common mistakes in the process of developing theories and submission. If combined, the two articles show the whole process of doing research.
申请到了MSU的博士项目，过程艰辛不必再说，个中辛酸无须回味，总之，在美国中部时间27日凌晨抵达了星城，开始求学之旅。因住宿问题、注册问题、生活准备等各方面问题的繁杂与难料，至这一刻我也无法静下来以闲静的心态去仔细的写一篇日志，以回顾短短这几天的经历。
