ellauri017.html on line 45: Alan huastoo näen tuttavallisesti, sillä tuttujahan myö ollaan Mini ja Sini. Out siderhan tokkiisa nähnä näköratiossa minun eläimellisen kerraston Apessiniassa, Tiipeti muassa taikka Aahrikan uarniometissä. Ja out sider varmaana tykännä minun toilauxistan - kaek apinathaa niistä tykkövää, sehän on selevä. Enhän minä muuten oeskaan Puovo Lipponen, rinssieversti, kiljuvan nälän komentaja ja ylpiäjohtaja. Nyt minusta kaekenlisäkkeex on tullunna piäylitoimittaja tämän minun iänenkannattimeni palstoelle. Koko ikän minä oun mualimaa kiertännä - ihan siitä lähin kun Pörsänmäiltä läxin. Minä oun ollunna vaikka missä ja vähån siellä muuallai. Ohaan se Kalle-Kustaa X:ki ollunna atjutanttina, mutta minun käissän ovat ohjaxet aiena olleet - ahvääriä tehessä ja muita konnia kurittaessa. Niin ne ovat tässä lehessäi. Minä palkkasin tämän Lauri pojan eli Outsiderin aputoimittajax - hiän kun tuntoo minut ihan rippikoulupoijaasta lähin ja on ollunna minun kirjurinan koko aijan. Minä huastelen niistä seikkaelustan Lapalle ja hiän pannoo nettiin - mie kun oun enemmän ahväärimies ku kirjaelija ja huastelen mieluite vuan tätä Juantehtaan murretta.
ellauri088.html on line 86: Gustav Fechner (1801-1887) argued for psychophysical parallelism, according to which the mental and physical worlds run parallel to each other but do not interact. Fechner developed the Weber-Fechner law, according to which the perceived intensity of a stimulus increases arithmetically as a constant multiple of the physical intensity of the stimulus or in other words, changes of physical intensity gallop along at a brisk pace while the corresponding changes of perceived intensity creep along. The Weber and the Weber-Fechner laws were the first laws to provide a mathematical statement of the relationship between the mind and the body. Another significant contribution when S. S. Stevens (1906-1973) demonstrated that psychological intensity grows as an exponential function of physical stimulus intensity, that is, equal stimulus ratios always produce equal sensory ratios although different ratios hold for different sensory modalities. (Siis mitä? Aritmeettisesti vai logaritmisesti?)
ellauri100.html on line 539: The other scale is the Subjective Numeracy Scale by Angela Fagerlin and colleagues, which measures individuals’ preference for numerical information. Numeracy (adapted from the term ‘literacy’) represents individuals’ ability to comprehend and use probabilities, ratios, and fractions. Traditional measures of numeracy ask people to perform mathematical operations, such as ‘If person A’s risk of getting a disease is 1% in 10 years, and person B’s risk is double that of A’s, what is B’s risk?’ However, some participants find these types of problems stressful and unpleasant, plus they are difficult to score in online studies. Subjective numeracy measures (like the scale you just took) are shown to be equally good measures of numeracy, without burdening participants.
ellauri285.html on line 763: Building on research by Barbara Fredrickson suggesting that individuals with a higher ratio of positive to negative emotions tend to have more successful life outcomes, and on studies by Marcial Losada applying differential equations from fluid dynamics to human emotions,[citation needed] Fredrickson and Losada proposed as informative a ratio of positive to negative affect derived from nonlinear dynamics modelling (based on Lorenz systems), which appeared in 2005 in a paper in American Psychologist. The derived combination of expressions and default parameters led them to conclude that a critical ratio of positive to negative affect of exactly 2.9013 separated flourishing from languishing individuals, and to argue that the ideal positivity/negativity ratio lies between 2.9013 and an upper limit ratio of 11.6346. Hence, they claimed that their model predicted cut-off points for the minimum and maximum positivity ratios within which one should observe qualitative changes in an individual´s level of flourishing, specifically, that those within this range of ratios would "flourish", and those outside would "languish".[non-primary source needed] As of January 2014, the 2005 Fredrickson and Losada´s paper had been cited more than 320 times in the psychology literature.
ellauri285.html on line 770: use of different arbitrary parameters would give different positivity ratios, thus the precise values for the lower and upper critical ratios based on the arbitrary parameters, Fredrickson and Losada´s 2.9013 to 11.6346 ratios, are meaningless;
ellauri285.html on line 772: the butterfly-like first figure provided by Fredrickson and Losada is not a model of the data taken from their human participants, but "the results of computer simulations of the Lorenz equations, nothing more"; and based on the maths, even if precise positivity/negativity ratios could be derived, several "windows" of desirable and undesirable positivity/negativity ratios above a certain value should exist, rather than a simple range of ratios in which "flourishing" should occur.
ellauri285.html on line 777: Fredrickson responded to the critique by agreeing that Losada´s mathematical modelling was "questionable" and did not show that there are precise values of the ratio, but also arguing that the evidence for the benefits of a high positivity/negativity ratio is solid. Fredrickson noted that Losada declined to respond to the criticism.[11] The American Psychologist proceeded to formally retract as invalid the mathematical modeling elements of Fredrickson and Losada´s paper, including the specific critical positivity ratios of 2.9013 and its upper limit.
ellauri339.html on line 601: Americans will be forgiven if they never hear this bad news, never mind be surprised by it if they did. The narrative which drove sports teams to wear blue and yellow patches and E Street Band member Steve Van Zandt to paint his guitar the Ukrainian colors was simple. Amidst a flood of propaganda, the story was always the same: Ukraine was pushing back the Russians with weapons provided by a broad range of agreeable NATO benefactors. Between Ukrainian jet fighter aces with improbable kill ratios to patriotic female sniper teams with improbable hair and makeup, Russia was losing. It would be a difficult but noble slog for “as long as it takes” to drive the Russians out.
8