Google
 

May 30, 2012

female name

If J.K. Rowling or E.L. James used their full first names instead of initials, would you have read Harry Potter or Fifty Shades of Grey? Alright, I have not read Fifty Shades of Grey.

The reason is simple. I don't read romantic fictions, and I heard that is a book about a romantic story with many sexual contents. My information may be wrong, but my point is the name of the author, or more specifically, the first name of the author does not determine my interest in a reading.

I heard the rumor that these two authors decided to use their initials instead of full first names because their first names are names for females.

As a woman, I am angry about this rumor. You should be proud of your sex and proud of your name! Who says female authors can't produce best sellers?

As a person, I am sad about this rumor. I indeed live in a society dominated by men or male-oriented values. The Taiwanese media still use wordings belittling female artists or discussing whether they are "able" to give male babies. The American media still highlight "news" of female celebrities' dresses and hairdos, rather than focus on their accomplishments.

As I am angry and sad, a person -- who is supposed to stand firmly on her position as well as defend her name --insists that she is going to use her first and middle initials from now on, and get rid of her full first name. Seriously? This decision does not earn my respect. We are not writing fictions. We are writing scientific theses. If our manuscript is rejected by reviewers, it is not because of your first name! If our paper is not read or cited often, it is not because of your first name!

I acknowledge that most people (men and women) still question whether women are capable to bring more income to a child-raising family than men. However, in the field of scientific research, I do not think most scientists (men and women) question whether females are capable to conduct a better study than males, or whether females are better thinkers than men. When a piece of work is great, it is a great piece of work. Has anyone despise a paper authored by Anne Treisman, Brenda Milner, Nancy Kanwisher, Martha Farah, or Cathleen Moore because of their first names? The name simply is not an issue.

Don't blame on your own name. Hiding it does not make your work more acceptable or accessible. Unless you are writing a fiction.

March 4, 2012

to become a performer

I saw Ovid Tzeng's picture on Observer! Observer is a magazine published by the Association for Psychological Science.  As a member of the organization, I receive the magazine every month.  It's a casual read for catching up some interesting updated findings in cognitive, social, and educational psychology.  I usually skimmed it during my lunch break and left it on the coffee table in the waiting room.

The texts accompanying Tzeng's picture, in which he was holding his Golden Bell Award with a huge smile, described his contribution to cognitive psychology, neuropsychology, and education in Taiwan.  Tzeng's image stared back at me.  My memory went back to the day when I first met him.  Or I should say when I first saw him.  I did not officially meet and greet him three years after that first impression, which literally changed my life.
Of course the content of his talk made me choose my career.  But what also impressed me was not only his knowledge but his passion about pursuing the knowledge.  Tzeng was so passionate that I had to do what he was doing.

Many successful characters have great passion on the subject where they are so successful.  Having passion is essential but not enough to inspire new generations.  Tzeng was a great speaker.  He delivered his passion to a group of high school students and encouraged at least one of them to pursue science.  It's like Steve Jobs encouraged people to buy iPhones or Al Gore convinced people that human behaviors can change the climate.

Then I was closely coached by Toby Mordkoff.  Even though we are on first-name basis, my respect and gratitude to him is much more than to most of the professors who lectured me.  Playing the role of my academia father, he was not the father figure of my graduate years.  He was too insensitive (some people may used the word "eccentric") to be caring his students like his children.  But I love watching his interaction with his children. That was the first man I met in my life who demonstrated what a father should be like. I wish I had that kind of love and expression of love from my father.

Toby has an incredibly logic mind that processes information more rapidly than anyone else I've known.  I may never be as clever, creative, and critical as him.  I was once upset when I realized that I might not be smart enough to be his student.  Oh, being a doctoral student definitely makes you humble.  Then I gradually came to embrace such realization and accepted who I was and what I may become.
 
One of many thing that Toby taught me was presentation.  He was a genius with few social skills, but his presentation of his thoughts was always easy to follow.  "You are teaching," he said, "the goal is to help the audience learn rather than burden them with the material."  Oh well... that was not exactly what he said (as memory changes every time humans recollect it), but that was the essence I got.

Toby's presentations were enjoyable.  One universal tip was that fewer words are way much better than lengthy descriptions -- people are listening to you, not reading the slides!  But another tip gave me a much more significant impact: Anything appearing on the slide has a purpose; if you are not talking about it, don't put it there.
When I was in the drama club during my college years, one thing was taught and practiced a lot was: Anything appearing on the stage has a purpose; you have to make every single word and movement purposeful.
If I ever become a great lecturer or speaker, Toby will get the credit.

In recent years, the two best talks of all I attended are performed by Kenneth Heilman and Brenda Milner. Both of them are well-established scholars whose work is frequently cited in textbooks.  Ken (as I respectfully call him on his first name) is one of the greatest neurologists.  Milner (who I never talked to in person so I am going to call her by her last name) is one of the most influential experimental psychologists.  However, great researchers are not always great speakers. (I shall not give examples here).

Ken was about 80 years old at his talk. Milner was 94.  Both delivered tremendous amount of passion about their work with very few slides.  The audiences in the separate events were so engaged and felt how lucky we were to be part of the events.

Ken talked about spatial neglect and anosognosia.  He shared his life-time story of conducting research to seek answers.  I remember the story of his encountering patients who could only finish the half of food placed on the right side of the plate.  I remember his explanation of the Greek word "anosognosia" -- the disorder of not knowing.  Perhaps because I study spatial neglect and because people with spatial neglect often have anosognosia, I was already inclined to get engaged in his talk.
Actually it was hard not to get engaged when Ken was talking.  Ken used only one slide bearing information that I cannot remember at all.  He just talked without looking at any note.  He articulated every single difficult concept and elaborated with understandable examples and evidence.  It was an intellectually entertaining and stimulating talk show.  Immediately he reminded me of Toby, who never used powerpoints for lectures.
I want to become a speaker like Ken or Toby.

A month ago, I sat in the audience of Milner's talk.  Her topic was remotely linked to my research interests.  But being a psychologist or neurocognitive scientist, one must know of the case of H.M. (i.e., the now revealed Henry Molaison).  H.M. made Milner's career.  Milner's career has shaped what we know about memory -- the definition of memory, the categorization of memory, the systems of memory, the mechanism of memory, the function of memory, and the entire research field of memory.  The tales of H.M. have been told million of times in books and movies.  However, Milner clarified details that were overlooked by media.  For example, the famous star tracing task was actually a random task that Milner tried out for curiosity.  Also, H.M. surprised Milner at the first meeting: anticipating that H.M. would not learn new facts, she gave him four digits to remember. About half hours later, she asked him the digits, H.M. gave the correct answer and told her the strategy he used to memorize the digits; however, H.M. had no memory that he had met Milner 30 minutes ago. In fact, over almost five decades working in experiments with Milner, H.M. never remembered her.

Among so many things Milner talked about during that hour, one epiphany she shared stuck with me. At the death of H.M. in 2008, Milner felt that she lost a long-time friend. Her sadness was soon overcome by the realization that H.M. never remembered who Milner was. For H.M., Milner was no one. This man had stopped forming long-term declarative memory since he was 27. He had no new friends since 1953.

This is so hard to imagine. It is equally hard to imagine how patients with spatial neglect live their life. H.M. simply was not bothered by his amnesia or that neglect patients simply believe that their world was as normal as before their brain injuries.  Why should we, the so-called "normal healthy people" (or neurologically typical individuals), feel sorry for them?  They are happy.  They have no complaint.  They are not aware of their disorders even if they are told or if they are trying to be aware.  They are cognitively unable to comprehend why we want to feel sorry for them.
We thank them for teaching us memory and spatial cognition.  They may feel flattered and go on with their lives.

A science presentation is no more than a performance.  Any great performance (speech, research report, movie, play, musical, etc.) evokes further thoughts and discussions. 
I want to learn from these great performers and become one of them.
Finally after five years, I set a new personal goal. Wish me luck. 

January 22, 2012

除夕的時候

2002年的除夕我在做甚麼? 那一年是我上一次在台灣過年, 我想不起來我去了哪裡又做了甚麼, 大概跟今天差不多, 看電視殺時間, 等待晚上那一餐, 然後等待午夜的鞭炮聲.
從小就不愛過年, 今天也沒有因為十年沒過年而特別興奮, 倒是有些許焦躁, 誰知道下次跟家人過年要待何時.

過年的重點不是在哪裡過, 是跟誰過.

去年我在一個國際會議上跟同事長官過年, 大家應和應和的跟我說新年快樂, 我微笑以對老美虛假的笑容下, 心裡打定主意一年後一定要跟家人過年. 家人不願意遠行, 那我就回老家啦.


這幾年回台北, 我都睡在我不熟悉的房間裡, 被熟悉的書櫃衣櫃圍繞著, 我大概知道抽屜裡有甚麼東西, 但也沒想要打開整理一番. 這回我清了兩個櫃子, 總共四層的物品裡, 將近八成變成了垃圾, 因為我想不起來那些東西的重要性.
如果哪一天非得把櫃子也丟了, 那廉價的夾板門必須要仔細的拆下來放進玻璃箱裡, 因為那上頭有一張小小的拼貼海報, 記錄著青攸君幫我慶祝十九歲的生日.
除夕, 就是要去蕪存菁的等待一個開始.

好歹也在台灣過了二十幾次的年, 今晚要有不一樣的開始: 午夜去行天宮看人擠人搶著跟神明拜年.

祝大家都找到自己的方向往前過個好龍年, 也過好這一年.

January 3, 2012

goals and objectives

Tomorrow I am meeting with my boss to discuss my goals and objectives in 2012.
I don't think I can ever get used to this corporate model of running academic business. Or perhaps I have not been in an academic business, and I have pretended that I were.

Reading Steve Jobs reminds me of a few people I met in the past decade. I currently am in Chapter 10 and have learned that he was such a dick in his 20s. I have met a few dicks in my 20s. He was definitely a combination of all of them.
But I do admire how he was convinced that he was special and living for a great purpose. I want to be convinced by that feeling about myself as well.

I am special and living for a great purpose.
Reality is constructed by one who perceive it. Even if it is distorted, it is the reality perceived.

My goal of 2012 is to have a purposeful year. To achieve this goal, I am going to demonstrate that I am special in an irreplaceable way.

Alright, this is a nice start of the first business day of the year.
See you tomorrow, the second business day of the year.




November 17, 2011

good-how-are-you

I prefer to say "hey" rather than "how are you?" every time when I meet a coworker in the hallway.

That means I can never become the CEO of my organization. The CEO always takes time to stop,  looking into my eyes, smiling at me (even his eyes smile), and asking "How are you?" with each word articulated (instead of howareyou). He presents this common greeting so sincerely that I feel guilty if I don't provide a true answer.
No one provides the true answer to howareyou. Because there is only one answer, which is goodhowareyou. Seriously, I say it like a word not four.

I would like to change the office atmosphere by greeting with "hey" or simply nodding upward at the person crossing my path. This would reduce dishonesty for a tremendously amount.
For one thing, most people do not care how I am. They just want to be polite, be friendly, and be considered as "professional".
For another reason, most people say good-how-are-you in the same way as I say it and do not mean they feel good at the moment.
Therefore, if this kind of pointless exchanges can be eliminated once and for all, there is less dishonesty flowing around in the work place.

My profession requires precision in every word I produce in writing or speaking. Greeting with how-are-you-good-how-are-you is totally imprecise and boring.
Many non-Americans argue that Americans are superficial. The truth is everyone is superficial, but Americans highlight this human trait by over-using this seemingly caring conversation. When they finally decide to care, they would say "Seriously, how are YOU?" If they have not put themselves in the situation of being explicitly superficial, there would be no need to clarify the actual intention of the question when they really care. 

Americans who are as busy as me would agree with me. They do not exchange that meaningless conversation. They smile and nod and pass me by. When I ask "How are you?" they start talking about their houses, children, pets, vacations, and boring meetings. They desire a chunk of time for being cared so that they can take a breath, think about themselves, complain about meaningless things making them busy, and end with "So how are you?"
And I say "Good."
So that we can proceed to reach the original purpose of the meeting.
I am professionalized. Sigh.


Or I don't know how I am. "Good" is an easy answer.
I am not used to being cared verbally.
I am not sure how to answer that question. I have no conscious access to that part of me. I have indicators though. When my work load is over to certain level, I have dreams in which I was in my high school classroom worrying about exams. When my personal life sucks, I feel drowsy all the time. When things go well at work, I work more. When things go poorly at work, I am silent.

I have four manuscripts waiting for me to revise. I am supposed to resubmit a grant. I am applying for two new IRB protocols. I am grading 13 final papers from students. I am spending time composing this blog entry. I am good.
Perhaps I will dream about the high school classroom tonight. But last night, I dreamed of the unborn baby of my cousin. I saw its face. I myself was a girl named "Louis" from the Middle East. Such random dreams make me wonder whether I am good.

Don't ask me. Just say hey.