ellauri020.html on line 376: Trump has been married three times, for those of you keeping score at home. Each of Trump´s weddings was memorable in its own way, in keeping with Trump´s penchant for the extravagant. In his 1993 nuptials at his second wedding, the caviar alone cost $60,000, a small sum compared to the $2 million tiara she borrowed; and his third marriage to Melania, in 2005, included a 200-pound wedding cake, one of the most expensive known cakes in modern history. The bride´s $100,000 Christian Dior gown was adorned with 1,500 crystals, rendering it so heavy that Melania was told to be sure to eat before the wedding, per Vogue, so she´d have the strength to wear it.
ellauri022.html on line 353: But callers by the score
ellauri035.html on line 309: I might have lived singing to three score.
ellauri045.html on line 818: PsychCentralin 40 kysymyxen testistä sain aivan pohjat, 0-11 pojoa, ei yhtään narsistisia piirteitä. Tosin kysymyxistä näki heti, mihin ne tähtäävät. Silti vastasin suurin piirtein "rehellisesti". Paska testi, tämäkin. Between 12 and 15 is average. Celebrities often score closer to 18. Narcissists score over 20.
ellauri080.html on line 693: “There seems to be a strong genetic overlap between ADHD and autism,” De Alwis said. “And it’s very common for people with ADHD to have autistic traits. These individuals may not have an autism spectrum disorder, but they typically score high on measurements of autistic traits.”
ellauri082.html on line 304: Helmi sanoo etmä kirjoitan kuin score">boomeri. Suattaapi olla. Mutta mähän oonkin boomeri!
ellauri082.html on line 757: They found that Victim Signaling scores highly correlated with dark triad scores (r = .35). This association held after controlling for gender, ethnicity, income, and other factors that might make people vulnerable to mistreatment.
ellauri082.html on line 761: They also found that Virtue Signaling was significantly correlated with dark triad scores (r = .18).
ellauri082.html on line 768: Regardless of personal characteristics, those who scored higher on dark triad traits were more likely to be victim signalers. And may be more likely to deceive others for material gain.
ellauri082.html on line 769: The researchers then ran a study testing whether people who score highly on victim signaling were more likely to exaggerate reports of mistreatment from a colleague to gain an advantage over them.
ellauri082.html on line 788: “Confirming past research, there was a strong correlation (r = .69) between a country´s sex differences in personality and their Gender Equality Index. Additional analyses showed that women typically score higher than men on all five trait factors (Pessimism, Extraversion, Openness, Agreeableness and Conscientiousness), and that these relative differences are larger in more gender equal countries.”
ellauri100.html on line 301: Intelligence (for those who might care) and its application: Graduate Record Examinations scores: verbal aptitude, 96th percentile; quantitative aptitude, 99th percentile; advanced test in economics, 99th percentile. Combined verbal and quantitative scores qualify me for membership (which I do not seek) in the Triple-Nine Society, whose members “have tested at or above the 99.9th percentile on at least one of several standardized adult intelligence tests”. But I am much older now — more than thrice the age I was when I took the GREs — so I do not claim to be “brilliant”. On the other hand, I know a lot more now than I did then, and the more one knows the better one gets at assembling information into meaningful patterns and sorting bad ideas from good ones.
ellauri100.html on line 375: I am an INTJ, and an especially strong I, T, and J. Here are my latest scores (02/16/17) on the Keirsey Temperament Sorter (KTS), which is similar to the Myers-Briggs Type Indicator (MBTI). The descriptive excerpts are from David Keirsey and Marilyn Bates’s Please Understand Me.
ellauri100.html on line 403: My scores are in green; the average scores of all other test-takers are in purple. The five traits are defined as follows:
ellauri100.html on line 405: 1. Openness to experience: High scorers are described as “Open to new experiences. You have broad interests and are very imaginative.” Low scorers are described as “Down-to-earth, practical, traditional, and pretty much set in your ways.” This is the sub-scale that shows the strongest relationship to politics: liberals generally score high on this trait; they like change and variety, sometimes just for the sake of change and variety. Conservatives generally score lower on this trait. (Just think about the kinds of foods likely to be served at very liberal or very conservative social events.)
ellauri100.html on line 407: 2. Conscientiousness: High scorers are described as “conscientious and well organized. They have high standards and always strive to achieve their goals. They sometimes seem uptight. Low scorers are easy going, not very well organized and sometimes rather careless. They prefer not to make plans if they can help it.”
ellauri100.html on line 409: 3. Extraversion: High scorers are described as “Extraverted, outgoing, active, and high-spirited. You prefer to be around people most of the time.” Low scorers are described as “Introverted, reserved, and serious. You prefer to be alone or with a few close friends.” Extraverts are, on average, happier than introverts.
ellauri100.html on line 411: 4. Agreeableness: High scorers are described as “Compassionate, good-natured, and eager to cooperate and avoid conflict.” Low scorers are described as “Hardheaded, skeptical, proud, and competitive. You tend to express your anger directly.”
ellauri100.html on line 413: 5. Neuroticism: High scorers are described as “Sensitive, emotional, and prone to experience feelings that are upsetting.” Low scorers are described as “Secure, hardy, and generally relaxed even under stressful conditions.”
ellauri100.html on line 423: The idea behind the scale is that human morality is the result of biological and cultural evolutionary processes that made human beings very sensitive to many different (and often competing) issues. Some of these issues are about treating other individuals well (the first two foundations – harm and fairness). Other issues are about how to be a good member of a group or supporter of social order and tradition (the last three foundations). Haidt and Graham have found that political liberals generally place a higher value on the first two foundations; they are very concerned about issues of harm and fairness (including issues of inequality and exploitation). Political conservatives care about harm and fairness too, but they generally score slightly lower on those scale items. The big difference between liberals and conservatives seems to be that conservatives score slightly higher on the ingroup/loyalty foundation, and much higher on the authority/respect and purity/sanctity foundations.
ellauri100.html on line 427: In the graph below, your scores on each foundation are shown in green (the 1st bar in each set of 3 bars). The scores of all liberals who have taken it on our site are shown in blue (the 2nd bar), and the scores of all conservatives are shown in red (3rd bar). Scores run from 0 (the lowest possible score, you completely reject that foundation) to 5 (the highest possible score, you very strongly endorse that foundation and build much of your morality on top of it).
ellauri100.html on line 433: The idea behind the IAT is that concepts with very closely related (vs. unrelated) mental representations are more easily and quickly responded to as a single unit. For example, if “me” and “sharing” are strongly associated in one’s mind, it should be relatively easy to respond quickly to this pairing by pressing the “E” or “I” key. If “me” and “sharing” are NOT strongly associated, it should be more difficult to respond quickly to this pairing. By comparing reaction times on this test, the IAT gives a relative measure of how strongly associated the two categories (Me, Not Me) are to mental representations of “ethical” and “unethical”. Each participant receives a single score, and your score appears below.
ellauri100.html on line 435: Note that there is a great deal of controversy as to the exact meaning of what these reaction time associations actually mean, so please take your results with a grain of salt. While a great deal of previous research has validated the use of such procedures to detect associations of group level bias across groups, the use of IAT procedures to measure individual ethicality is still in development and all of these procedures have been validated probibalistically, at the group level, rather than being validated as being absolutely diagnostic for individuals. That being said, many (though not all) people have found validity in their implicit scores and have found there to be some real psychological process that tracks implicit associations.
ellauri100.html on line 437: Your score on the IAT was 1.218.
ellauri100.html on line 439: Positive scores indicate that ethical associations with the self-concept are stronger than negative associations, and a negative score indicates the opposite.
ellauri100.html on line 441: Your score appears in the graph below in green. The score of the average Liberal visitor to this site is shown in blue and the average Conservative visitor’s score is shown in red.
ellauri100.html on line 457: The graph below shows how often people say that they find various everyday ethical situations to be acceptable in everyday life. This business ethics questionnaire includes 5 categories: Usurpation of company resources, Offering kickbacks, Corporate gamesmanship, Concealment of misconduct, & Cheating Customers. Higher scores indicate greater acceptance of these behaviors.
ellauri100.html on line 463: The scale you just completed was the Marlowe-Crowne Social Desirability Scale, developed by Douglas Crowne and David Marlowe (1960). This scale measures social desirability concern, which is people’s tendency to portray themselves favorably during social interaction. Each of the 33 true-false items that you just filled out describes a behavior that is either socially acceptable but unlikely, or socially unacceptable but likely. As a result, people who receive high scores on this measure may be more likely to respond to surveys in a self-promoting fashion.
ellauri100.html on line 465: We are interested in examining how liberals and conservatives score on this scale. Although previous research has investigated how these groups can be biased when evaluating political information, little is known about the relationship between political attitudes and social desirability concern.
ellauri100.html on line 467: The graph below shows your score on this scale. The scores range from 0% to 100% and represent the proportion of answers that indicated socially desirable responding. Thus, higher scores correspond with higher degrees of socially desirable responding. Your score is shown in green (1st bar). The score of the average liberal respondent is shown in light blue and the score of the average strong liberal is shown in dark blue. The average conservative score is shown in light red and the score of the average strong conservative is shown in dark red.
ellauri100.html on line 475: The first graph shows your score on two measures of belief in determinism:
ellauri100.html on line 481: The second graph shows your score on two subscales about belief in NON-determinism, or freedom:
ellauri100.html on line 487: In the graphs below, your score is shown in green (the first bar in each cluster). The scores of all people who have taken the scale on our site and who described themselves during registration as politically liberal are shown in the blue bars. The scores of people who described themselves as politically conservative are in red. Scores run from 1 (the lowest possible score, least belief in that construct) to 5 (the highest possible score).
ellauri100.html on line 495: In the graph below, your score is shown in green. The scores of all people who have taken the scale on our site and who say that they go to religious services never, or just a few times a year, are shown in blue. The scores of all people who have taken the scale on our site and who said (during registration) that they go to religious services a few times a month or more are shown in red. Scores run from 1 (the lowest possible score, least happy) to 7 (the highest possible score, most happy).
ellauri100.html on line 497: In addition, we asked you some questions on the second page about your mental health. That recent Gallup poll showed that conservatives and religious people report having better mental health when asked using a single question (“how would you rate your mental health?”). We want to see if their finding holds up using a more specific scale, so we asked you to report on a variety of symptoms related to depression and anxiety, which are the most common kinds of mental health symptoms that people report. In the graph below, your score is shown in green. High scores mean MORE mental health complaints. Scores run from 1 (the lowest possible score, no symptoms at all) to 5 (the highest possible score, people who responded “extremely” to all items). As before, the blue bar shows the score of the less religious people; the red bar shows the average score of the most religious people.
ellauri100.html on line 503: The idea behind the IAT is that concepts with very closely related (vs. unrelated) mental representations are more easily and quickly responded to as a single unit. For example, if “me” and “happy” are strongly associated in one’s mind, it should be relatively easy to respond quickly to this pairing by pressing the “E” or “I” key. If “me” and “happy” are NOT strongly associated, it should be more difficult to respond quickly to this pairing. By comparing reaction times on this test, the IAT gives a relative measure of how strongly associated the two categories (Me, Not Me) are to mental representations of “happy” and “sad”. Each participant receives a single score, and your score appears below.
ellauri100.html on line 505: Your score on the IAT was 1.059.
ellauri100.html on line 507: Positive scores indicate that “happiness” associations with the self-concept are stronger (i.e., faster) than “sadness” associations, and a negative score indicates the opposite.
ellauri100.html on line 509: Your score appears in the graph below in green. The score of the average Liberal visitor to this site is shown in blue and the average Conservative visitor’s score is shown in red.
ellauri100.html on line 513: The scale is a measure of your attitudes toward crime and punishment. Some of the items reflected a “progressive” and less punitive attitude toward criminals (for example agreeing with the statement that “punishment should be designed to rehabilitate offenders,” and being opposed to the death penalty). Other items reflected a more “traditional” attitude, including a willingness to use traditional forms of punishment, such as shaming or flogging. We grouped these two kinds of items together to give you a “progressive” and a “traditional” score in the first graph below. We call this the “comprehensive” justice scale because research on justice and punishment has usually taken either a liberal or conservative approach. We are trying to examine the broadest possible range of ideas and intuitions about what you think should happen to the offender, and the victim. Disagreements about crime and punishment have long been at the heart of the “culture war.” By linking your responses here to the information you gave us when you registered, or when you took other surveys, we hope to shed light on what kinds of people (not just liberals and conservatives) endorse what kinds of responses to crime, and why.
ellauri100.html on line 515: The graph below shows your scores (in green) on the items from the first page, compared to those of the average liberal (in blue) and the average conservative (in red) visitor to this website. The scale runs from 1 (lowest score) to 7 (highest score).
ellauri100.html on line 523: Low = formal; high = intuitive reasoning. Also, scores of zero are common. It simply means you chose all formal reasoning options.
ellauri100.html on line 529: Your score on the OCT is calculated by taking into account your familiarity with the real items (e.g., Bill Clinton) and subtracting how familiar you rated the false/fake items to be (e.g., Fred Gruneberg — my next door neighbor). Also, familiarity ratings of 1 to 4 are treated the same. So if you rated your familiarity with “Bill Clinton” as 1, 2, 3, or 4 then you scored a +1 for that item. And if you rated your familiarity with “Fred Gruneberg” as 1, 2, 3, or 4 then you scored a -1 for that item. If you were unfamiliar with any real or false items, your scores for those items are 0. A perfect score would be identifying all real items and not recognizing any of the false items.
ellauri100.html on line 531: The graph below shows your score on the OCT as it compares to others who have taken this survey on our website. Scores range from 0%-100% and higher values correspond to more correct responses to the OCT. Your score is shown in green, scores of the average liberal are in blue, and scores of the average conservative are in red.
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.
ellauri100.html on line 549: The graphs below show your scores (in green) compared to those of the average liberal (in blue), the average conservative (in red), and the average libertarian (in orange) visitor to this website. The first graph shows your score on the political knowledge scale in comparison to other liberals and conservatives and scores run from 0% (the lowest possible score) to 100% (the highest possible score*).
ellauri100.html on line 551: The graph below displays results for individuals who took the longer version of the survey before April 19, 2012. Everyone will have a score, but this graph is only valid for those who took the survey before April 19, 2012. Ignore the purple bar since it will incorporate averages from the short and long version of the survey.
ellauri100.html on line 557: The idea behind the IAT is that concepts with very closely related (vs. unrelated) mental representations are more easily and quickly responded to as a single unit. For example, if “European American” and “good” are strongly associated in one’s mind, it should be relatively easy to respond quickly to this pairing by pressing the “E” or “I” key. If “European American” and “good” are NOT strongly associated, it should be more difficult to respond quickly to this pairing. By comparing reaction times on this test, the IAT gives a relative measure of how strongly associated the two categories (European Americans, African Americans) are to mental representations of “good” and “bad”. Each participant receives a single score, and your score appears below.
ellauri100.html on line 559: Your score on the IAT was 0.07.
ellauri100.html on line 561: Positive scores indicate a greater implicit preference for European Americans relative to African Americans, and negative scores indicate an implicit preference for African Americans relative to European Americans.
ellauri100.html on line 563: Your score appears in the graph below in green. The score of the average Liberal visitor to this site is shown in blue and the average Conservative visitor’s score is shown in red.
ellauri100.html on line 565: It should be noted that my slightly positive score probably was influenced by the order in which choices were presented to me. Initially, pleasant concepts were associated with photos of European-Americans. I became used to that association, and so found that it affected my reaction time when I was faced with pairings of pleasant concepts and photos of African-Americans. The bottom line: My slight preference for European-Americans probably is an artifact of test design.
ellauri100.html on line 639: But there's the biblical three score and ten
ellauri101.html on line 475: Steppasin partyy, minä ja mun malis (ahh) nää bad hoes on mun saaliin mä scoreen sen pilluu niinku maalii nää hoes mua vaan vaanii mul on staminaa niinku Cavanii tää ämmä ei kestä mun banaanii mä teen tälle muijalle kawaalis tää muija fiilaa Jarers ja malis
ellauri101.html on line 481: Steppasin partyy, minä ja mun malis (ahh) nää bad hoes on mun saaliin mä scoreen sen pilluu niinku maalii nää hoes mua vaan vaanii mul on staminaa niinku Cavanii tää ämmä ei kestä mun banaanii mä teen tälle muijalle cawaalis tää muija fiilaa Jareers ja malis
ellauri101.html on line 487: Steppasin partyy, minä ja mun malis (ahh) nää bad hoes on mun saaliin mä scoreen sen pilluu niinku maalii nää hoes mua vaan vaanii mul on staminaa niinku Cavanii tää ämmä ei kestä mun banaanii mä teen tälle muijalle kawaalis tää muija fiilaa Jareers ja malis
ellauri143.html on line 271: Manly excellence, that scores not on another's wife,

ellauri147.html on line 263: For the series, review aggregator Rotten Tomatoes reported an approval rating of 63% based on 55 reviews, with an average rating of 5.81/10. The website´s critics consensus reads, "Though its depiction of France is trés cliché [sic], Emily in Paris is rom-com fantasy at its finest, spectacularly dressed and filled with charming performances." Metacritic gave the series a weighted average score of 60 out of 100 based on 17 reviews, indicating "mixed or average reviews".
ellauri147.html on line 430: Verdict: Borderline Jew. Jew score: 7 out of ten.
ellauri147.html on line 860: faces to find out the current standard of good looks on the Internet. On the Hot or Not web site, people rate others' attractiveness on a scale of 1 to 10. An average score based on hundreds or even thousands of individual ratings takes only a few days to emerge. To make this hot or not palette of morphed images, photos from the site were sorted by rank and used SquirlzMorph to create multi-morph composites from them. Unlike projects like Face of Tomorrow, where the subjects are posed for the purpose, the portraits are blurry because the source images are of low resolution with differences in variables such as posture, hair styles and glasses, so that in this instance images could use only 36 control points for the morphs. A similar study was done with Miss Universe contestants, as shown in the averageness article, as well as one for age, as shown in the youthfulness article.
ellauri151.html on line 451: Let us assume that we invited an unknown person to a game of cards. If this person answered us, “I don’t play,” we would either interpret this to mean that he did not understand the game, or that he had an aversion to it which arose from economic, ethical, or other reasons. Let us imagine, however, that an honorable man, who was known to possess every possible skill in the game, and who was well versed in its rules and its forbidden tricks, but who could like a game and participate in it only when it was an innocent pastime, were invited into a company of clever swindlers, who were known as good players and to whom he was equal on both scores, to join them in a game. If he said, “I do not play,” we would have to join him in looking the people with whom he was talking straight in the face, and would be able to supplement his words as follows: “I don’t play, that is, with people such as you, who break the rules of the game, and rob it of its pleasure. If you offer to play a game, our mutual agreement, then, is that we recognize the capriciousness of chance as our master; and you call the science of your nimble fingers chance, and I must accept it as such, it I will, or run the risk of insulting you or choose the shame of imitating you.” … The opinion of Socrates can be summarized in these blunt words, when he said to the Sophists, the leaned men of his time, “I know nothing.” Help! TLDR!
ellauri156.html on line 447: The musical score was by Alfred Newman (the funny looking kid on the cover of Mad magazine), who, for the bucolic scene with the shepherd boy, used a solo oboe in the Lydian mode, drawing on long established conventions linking the solo oboe with pastoral scenes and the shepherd's pipe. To underscore David's guilt-ridden turmoil in the Mount Gilboa scene, Newman resorted to a vibraphone, which Miklós Rózsa used in scoring Peck's popular 1945 Spellbound, in which he played a no less disturbed patient suffering from amnesia, viz. prophet Nathan Zuckerman.
ellauri160.html on line 196: Harriet Monroe, editor of Poetry, published a letter in April 1919 from a professor of Latin, W. G. Hale, who found "about three-score errors" in the text; he said Pound was "incredibly ignorant of Latin", that "much of what he makes his author say is unintelligible", and that "If Mr. Pound were a professor of Latin, there would be nothing left for him but suicide" (adding "I do not counsel this"). Pound replied to Monroe: "Cat-piss and porcupines!! The thing is no more a translation than my 'Altaforte' is a translation, or than Fitzgerald's Omar is a translation."
ellauri163.html on line 723: Day wrote concerning atheist PZ Myers´ blog audience: “It´s by no means a scientific test, but it is interesting to note the coincidence that 59 of the virulent atheists over at Dr. PZ Myers place report an average score on the Asperger´s Quotient test of 27.8. And this does not include the two individuals who actually have Asperger´s but did not report any test results.
ellauri163.html on line 724: As PZ himself said: "I took the test and scored a 24, an “average math contest winner.” You need a 32 to suggest Asperger’s, and a 15 is the average. So there. I don’t have Asperger’s, I’m just cruel and insensitive."
ellauri163.html on line 740: In fact, scores of 32 or above are one of strong indicators of having as ASD.
ellauri163.html on line 744: PZ Myers is a New Atheist and New Atheism is a contemporary form of antitheism. Therefore, it is very probable his blog appeals to people who hold to a antitheism perspective. Social science research indicates that antitheists score the highest among atheists when it comes to personality traits such as narcissism, dogmatism, and anger. Furthermore, they scored lowest when it comes to agreeableness and positive relations with others.
ellauri163.html on line 748: People with higher scores on the Autism Spectrum Quotient (items included "I am fascinated by numbers," and "I find social situations difficult") had weaker belief in a personal God than those with lower IQ score ("I am fascinated by skirts", and "I find zippers difficult"). Second, reduced ability to mentalize mediated this correlation. (Mentalizing was measured with the Empathy Quotient, which assesses self-reported ability to recognize and react to others' emotions, and with a task that requires identifying what's being expressed in pictures of eyes. Systematizing -- interest in and aptitude for mechanical and abstract systems -- was correlated with autism but was not a mediator.) Third, men were much less likely than women to say they strongly believed in a personal God (even controlling for autism), and this correlation was also mediated by reduced mentalizing. They were also clearly more interested in skirts and puzzled by zippers.
ellauri163.html on line 750: Another study found that the higher the autism score, the less likely the person was to believe in God, with the link partially explained by theory of mind. In other words, the better someone felt at understanding other minds, the more fervent their belief in God, who reads everybody´s mind. (Sometimes I wonder what kind of mind God must have, when s/he has to simultaneously concentrate on several gigamonkeys worth of personal requests. I bet s/he is fascinated by numbers. S/He never says "all our service representatives are busy at this moment, please hold without hanging up the phone.")
ellauri171.html on line 1062: Tamar was assertive of her rights and subversive of convention. She was also deeply loyal to Judah’s family. These qualities also show up in Ruth, who appears later in the lineage of Perez and preserves Boaz’s part of that line. The blessing at Ruth’s wedding underscores the similarity in its hope that Boaz’s house “be like the house of Perez, whom Tamar bore to Judah” (Ruth 4:12). Tamar’s (and Ruth’s) traits of assertiveness in action, willingness to be unconventional, and deep loyalty to family are the very qualities that distinguish their descendant, King David.
ellauri181.html on line 134: One of the main limitations of this theory lies in the methodology of the research. The SVS is quite difficult to answer, because respondenz have to first read the set of 30 value items and give one value the highest as well as the lowest ranking (0 or −1, depending on whether an item is opposed to their values). Hence, completing one questionnaire takes approximately 12 minutes resulting in a significant amount of only half-filled in forms. Furthermore, many respondenz have a tendency to give the majority of the values a high score, resulting in a skewed responses to the upper end. However, this issue can be mitigated by providing respondenz with an additional filter to evaluate the items they marked with high scores. When administering the Schwartz Value Survey in a coaching setting, respondenz are coached to distinguish between a "must-have" value and a "meaningful" value. A "must-have" value is a value you have acted on or thought about in the previous 24 hours (this value item would receive a score of 6 or 7 on the Schwartz scale). A "meaningful" value is something you have acted on or thought about recently, but not in the previous 24 hours (this value item would receive a score of 5 or less).
ellauri181.html on line 136: Another methodological limitations are the resulting ordinal, ipsatised (?) scores that limit the type of useful analyses researchers can perform.
ellauri181.html on line 374: In psychology, ipsative measures (/ˈɪpsətɪv/; from Latin: ipse, 'of the self') are those where respondents compare two or more desirable options and pick the one they prefer most. Sometimes called a forced-choice scale, this measure contrasts Likert-type scales in which respondents score—often from 1 to 5—how much they agree with a given statement (see also norm-referenced test).
ellauri181.html on line 376: While mean scores from Likert-type scales can be compared across individuals, scores from an ipsative measure cannot. To explain, if an individual was equally extroverted and conscientious and was assessed on a Likert-type scale, each trait would be evaluated singularly, i.e. respondents would see the item "I enjoy parties" and agree or disagree with it to whatever degree reflected their preferences.[citation needed]
ellauri192.html on line 273: There are great, canonic names on the Nobel list, choices on which common sense and passionate alertness concur. I have mentioned Yeats. We find Anatole France, Kipling, Shaw, Thomas Mann, Andre Gide, T. S. Eliot, Pasternak, Faulkner, Hemingway, Seferis, Montale, Beckett and Solzhenitsyn (the last, I would guess, a titan among men even more, perhaps, than among writers; what I mean by this is he was tall but not much of a novelist). But place the two lists next to each other, and the cardinal truth springs to view: during these past 83 years, the award of the Nobel Prize in Literature has scored more misses than hits. With eminent exceptions, it is the uncrowned who are sovereign.
ellauri198.html on line 364: Suppression of the glee that pursed and scored Jota mainio pajunköysi vedätteli:
ellauri222.html on line 159: And it got even better. Jack Ludwig reviewed the novel. He informed readers of Holiday that “the book is a major breakthrough.” By no means should it be read as autobiography—“as if an artist with Bellow’s enormous gifts were simply playing at second-guessing reality, settling scores.” No, in this book, Ludwig wrote, “Bellow is after something greater.” The greater something turns out to be “man’s contradiction, his absurdity, his alienation,” and so on. It was pretty chutzpadik, as even Bellow had to admit. But by then he was laughing all the way to the bank.
ellauri241.html on line 1330: In a commercial break, Altheus tries to score on Arethusa.

ellauri257.html on line 77: Franz Waxman’s bombastic score bursts across the lush Technicolor screen as a reminder of how much Gogol’s novel has been cheapened, Cossacks on horseback engage the Poles in battle giving the film its life pulse and the action-packed film ultimately serves as a paean to Ukrainian nationalism as it rewrites history to leave out how the violently anti-Semitic Cossacks attacked the Jewish population of Poland with a barbaric ruthlessness to dispense with their ethnic cleansing. Yul chews the scenery, but is watchable. Tony demonstrates he can’t act by giving an unbearably gooey performance.
ellauri257.html on line 419: Upon the 2009 American release (of the book, after the film of course, this is America), Michael Dirda wrote in The Washington Post that Pornografia "seems as sick, as pathologically creepy a novel as one is ever likely to read. In some ways, it resembles a rather more polymorphously perverse version of Les Liaisons Dangereuses or one of those disturbing fictions by European intellectuals that blend the philosophical with the erotic: Think of Georges Bataille's The Story of the Eye or Pierre Klossowski's Roberte Ce Soir. ... Through its sado-masochistic material and its almost Henry Jamesian analyses of human motives, Pornografia underscores Gombrowicz's lifelong philosophical obsession: the quest for authenticity." Dirda continued: "Certainly, most readers will find Pornografia perturbing, or worse: repulsive, confusing, ugly. As Milosz once said of Gombrowicz: 'He had no reverence whatsoever for literature. He derided it as a snobbish ritual, and if he practiced it, he attempted to get rid of all its accepted rules.'"
ellauri263.html on line 772: My partner and I made compersion an active practice, a skill that we both worked on together. It didn't really come naturally to either of us, but we supported each other as we tried to do it. Initially, it was basically a lot of mental gymnastics trying to reason out why we should be happy when the other person scored a hot date. Once you fully get why it doesn't make sense to feel jealous—i.e., your relationship is totally secure, and the presence of another person in your partner's life is not a threat to your relationship whatsoever—then you can start to disarm that alarm more easily whenever it goes off in your head.
ellauri264.html on line 153: Audience reception to Velma has been overwhelmingly negative. It became one of the lowest-rated television shows on IMDb, receiving similar low scores from audiences on Rotten Tomatoes and Google.
ellauri266.html on line 268: Are people insane? Like honestly. Are the people who reviewed this movie certifiably insane? This movie got 100%?????????? How. Like really, howwwww??? The most boring, slowest, most depressing movies ever. The only movie worse than this was Marley & Me. If this movie was based on a true story, then ok. But this was just a made up sad story? Like why? It does not deserve a 100% score AT ALL! That's just absurd and outrageous. And it now calls every score into question. Simply insane.
ellauri284.html on line 621: Ethics experts say engaging partners who have ongoing legal issues underscores the growing concern that the president’s business projects around the world could create conflicts of interest or other challenges for his administration.
ellauri302.html on line 409: Reb Ali, more calmly, spitting out. Blessed be His Name. I feel easier on that score. (To Yekel.) What made you talk such nonsense? (To Reizel, without looking at her.) Did she go away? Isn't she back yet? (To Yekel.) Has anybody gone to look for her?
ellauri321.html on line 188: He looks around, and sees many a prosperous person, who but a few years before was as poor as himself. This encourages him much, he begins to form some little scheme, the first, alas, he ever formed in his life. If he is wise he thus spends in a tent on the street two or three score years, in which time he acquires knowledge, the use of tools, the modes of working the lands, felling trees, &c. This prepares the foundation of a good name, the most useful acquisition he can make. He is encouraged, he has gained friends;
ellauri332.html on line 481: A lumpy mélange of naturalism and melodrama, German and Spanish and Russian players bumping into one another, a score like a pile of bricks.
ellauri340.html on line 116: Vähän jäi Laschilta lyhyexi virsi kaunis. Three score and ten on apinalle mitattu elinvuotten määrä. Meiltä se meni rikki vuosi sitten, ja sen kyllä huomaa. Se seisoo psalmissa 90, jossa mm. todetaan:
ellauri347.html on line 190: