141 Matching Annotations
  1. Last 7 days
  2. Sep 2019
  3. Aug 2019
  4. Jan 2019
    1. Causes of cervical cancer

      What are other causes of cervical cancer besides HPV?

    2. As many as 80% of men and women who have had sex have HPV

      Can you get cervical cancer without having sex?

    3. If precancerous cells are found, they often can be removed.

      What is the treatment for pre cervical cancer - how are the cells removed?

    4. While most women with HPV will not get cervical cancer,

      What percentage of women get cervical cancer?

    5. This is why regular Pap tests are so important, particularly if you are sexually active.

      Can you have cervical cancer with a normal pap smear?

    6. Minimally invasive procedures including robotic and laparoscopic hysterectomy Radical hysterectomy

      Can you get cervical cancer after a hysterectomy?

    7. However, in a small percentage of people the virus will remain and cause cell changes that may develop into cancer.

      Can you still get cervical cancer after a HPV vaccine?

    8. What percentage of cases are caused by HPV?

    1. While breast cancer is thought of as a disease impacting women, each year about 2,000 men in the United States are diagnosed with the disease.

      How many women get breast cancer ?

    1. Symptoms of vulvar cancer vary from woman to woman. They may include: Red, pink or white bump (or bumps) with a rough or scaly surface on the vulva Burning, pain or itching in the genital area Pain when you urinate Bleeding and discharge when you are not having a menstrual period Sore on the vulva that does not heal for a month Change in a mole in the genital area Lump close to the opening to the vagina

      Which symptoms are early symptoms of vulvar cancer?

      Can vulvar cancer make you tired?

    1. Why come to MD Anderson for your fallopian tube cancer care?

      What is the survival rate for this cancer type? This might be a good section to elaborate on the survival rate and why patients should choose and trust MD Anderson for their treatment.

    2. The Fallopian tubes, ovaries, uterus and cervix, as well as nearby lymph nodes, usually are removed. Sometimes the surgery can be minimally invasive laparoscopic surgery.

      Can removing the fallopian tubes PRIOR to developing the cancer reduce the risk?

    1. If you are using an operating system that uses the systemd service manager (which nowadays includes most GNU/Linux distributions), then the best solution might be to use systemd to start your Emacs daemon on boot. You can do this by creating a file $HOME/.config/systemd/user/emacs.service with the following contents:

      $HOME/.config/systemd/user/emacs.service

    2. ‘-a COMMAND’ ‘--alternate-editor=COMMAND’ Specify a command to run if ‘emacsclient’ fails to contact Emacs. This is useful when running ‘emacsclient’ in a script. As a special exception, if COMMAND is the empty string, then ‘emacsclient’ starts Emacs in daemon mode (as ‘emacs --daemon’) and then tries connecting again. ‘-c’ ‘--create-frame’ Create a new graphical “client frame”, instead of using an existing Emacs frame. See below for the special behavior of ‘C-x C-c’ in a client frame. If Emacs cannot create a new graphical frame (e.g., if it cannot connect to the X server), it tries to create a text terminal client frame, as though you had supplied the ‘-t’ option instead. ‘-t’ ‘--tty’ ‘-nw’ Create a new client frame on the current text terminal, instead of using an existing Emacs frame. This behaves just like the ‘-c’ option, described above, except that it creates a text terminal frame (*note Non-Window Terminals::).

      ‘-a COMMAND’ ‘--alternate-editor=COMMAND’

      Specify a command to run if ‘emacsclient’ fails to contact Emacs. This is useful when running ‘emacsclient’ in a script.

      As a special exception, if COMMAND is the empty string, then ‘emacsclient’ starts Emacs in daemon mode (as ‘emacs --daemon’) and then tries connecting again.

      ‘-c’ ‘--create-frame’

      Create a new graphical “client frame”, instead of using an existing Emacs frame.

      See below for the special behavior of ‘C-x C-c’ in a client frame.

      If Emacs cannot create a new graphical frame (e.g., if it cannot connect to the X server), it tries to create a text terminal client frame, as though you had supplied the ‘-t’ option instead.

      ‘-t’ ‘--tty’ ‘-nw’

      Create a new client frame on the current text terminal, instead of using an existing Emacs frame.

      This behaves just like the ‘-c’ option, described above, except that it creates a text terminal frame (*note Non-Window Terminals::).

    3. I do this by starting an emacs daemon when I login. Where you put this command depends on your desktop manager. I use i3, which is configured to run a script on login that includes the following: emacs --daemon & With that, emacs is always running in the background, and I open a new client with emacsclient -c -n, bound to a convenient keybinding in the window manager. If you're working in a terminal, you only need a simple alias like alias emc='emacsclient', possibly with -n, -c or -t arguments, depending on how you use it. Do check out the options for emacsclient in the manual: ((emacs) emacsclient Options, accessible from Emacs by C-h r m emacsclient options <enter>). You can use the -a flag to automatically start an emacs daemon if it isn't running already, and -c or -t to open a new frame or terminal client, rather than reusing an existing one (in the same session):
  5. Nov 2018
    1. Single study?

      Is the article primarily about a single scientific study?

      Choices:

      <div>[ "1.07.01:Yes", "1.07.02:No" ]</div>

    2. Upcoming Workshop: Web Standardization for Graph Data

      Clickbaitiness

      Is the headline clickbaity?

      Choices:

      <div>[ "1.04.01:Very much clickbaity", "1.04.02:Somewhat clickbaity", "1.04.03:A little bit clickbaity", "1.04.04:Not at all clickbaity" ]</div>

    3. Upcoming Workshop: Web Standardization for Graph Data

      Title Representativeness

      Does the title of the article accurately reflect the content of the article?

      Choices:

      <div>[ "1.02.01:Completely Unrepresentative", "1.02.02:Somewhat Unrepresentative", "1.02.03:Somewhat Representative", "1.02.04:Completely Representative" ]</div>

    4. Overall Credibility

      Rate your impression of the credibility of this article

      Choices:

      <div>[ "1.01.01:Very low credibility", "1.01.02:Somewhat low credibility", "1.01.03:Medium credibility", "1.01.04:Somewhat high credibility", "1.01.05:High credibility" ]</div>

  6. Sep 2018
    1. Overall Credibility

      Rate your impression of the credibility of this article

      Choices:

      <div>[ "1.01.01:Very low credibility", "1.01.02:Somewhat low credibility", "1.01.03:Medium credibility", "1.01.04:Somewhat high credibility", "1.01.05:High credibility" ]</div>

    1. Exaggerated/minimized claims

      Does the author use exaggerations/minimizations or generally seems to represent situations and events in a proportional manner?

      Choices:

      <div>[ "1.17.01:Yes, there are a mix of exaggerations and minimizations", "1.17.02:Yes, there are exaggerations", "1.17.03:Yes, there are minimizations", "1.17.04:No, the text seems generally proportional (avoids exaggeration and minimization)" ]</div>

    2. Emotional valence

      Is the language extremely negative, extremely positive, or somewhere in the middle?

      Choices:

      <div>[ "1.16.01:Extremely negative", "1.16.02:Somewhat negative", "1.16.03:Neither negative nor positive", "1.16.04:Somewhat positive", "1.16.05:Extremely positive" ]</div>

    3. Acknowledgement of uncertainty

      Does the author acknowledge uncertainty, or the possibility things might be otherwise?

      Choices:

      <div>[ "1.15.01:Yes", "1.15.02:Sort of", "1.15.03:No" ]</div>

    4. Confidence in claims made by sources

      To what extent does the author's confidence in claims made by sources seem justified?

      Choices:

      <div>[ "1.14.01:Completely justified", "1.14.02:Mostly justified", "1.14.03:Somewhat justified", "1.14.04:Slightly justified", "1.14.05:Not at all justified" ]</div>

    5. Other types of sources

      Are any experts, organizations, or studies separate from the central study quoted in the article?

      Choices:

      <div>[ "1.13.01:Yes", "1.13.02:No" ]</div>

    6. Types of sources

      Does the article cite sources?

      Choices:

      <div>[ "1.08a.01:Yes", "1.08a.02:No" ]</div>

    7. Single study?

      Is the article primarily about a single scientific study?

      Choices:

      <div>[ "1.07.01:Yes", "1.07.02:No" ]</div>

    8. The Amish, who don’t get vaccinated, rarely get autism, cancer, or heart disease – coincidence?

      Clickbaitiness

      What clickbait techniques does this headline employ?

      Choices:

      <div>[ "1.05.01:Listicle (\"6 Tips on ...\")", "1.05.02:Cliffhanger to a story (\"You Won't Believe What Happens Next\")", "1.05.03:Provoking emotions, such as shock or surprise (\"...Shocking Result\", \"...Leave You in Tears\")", "1.05.04:Hidden secret or trick (\"Fitness Companies Hate Him...\", \"Experts are Dying to Know Their Secret\")", "1.05.05:Challenges to the ego (\"Only People with IQ Above 160 Can Solve This\")", "1.05.06:Defying convention (\"Think Orange Juice is Good for you? Think Again!\", \"Here are 5 Foods You Never Thought Would Kill You\")", "1.05.07:Inducing fear (\"Is Your Boyfriend Cheating on You?\")", "1.05.08:Other" ]</div>

    9. The Amish, who don’t get vaccinated, rarely get autism, cancer, or heart disease – coincidence?

      Clickbaitiness

      Is the headline clickbaity?

      Choices:

      <div>[ "1.04.01:Very much clickbaity", "1.04.02:Somewhat clickbaity", "1.04.03:A little bit clickbaity", "1.04.04:Not at all clickbaity" ]</div>

    10. The Amish, who don’t get vaccinated, rarely get autism, cancer, or heart disease – coincidence?

      Title Representativeness

      How is the title unrepresentative? (select all that apply)

      Choices:

      <div>[ "1.03.01:Title is on a different topic than the body", "1.03.02:Title emphasizes different information than the body", "1.03.03:Title carries little information about the body", "1.03.04:Title takes a different stance than the body", "1.03.05:Title overstates claims or conclusions in the body", "1.03.06:Title understates claims or conclusions in the body", "1.03.07:Other" ]</div>

    11. The Amish, who don’t get vaccinated, rarely get autism, cancer, or heart disease – coincidence?

      Title Representativeness

      Does the title of the article accurately reflect the content of the article?

      Choices:

      <div>[ "1.02.01:Completely Unrepresentative", "1.02.02:Somewhat Unrepresentative", "1.02.03:Somewhat Representative", "1.02.04:Completely Representative" ]</div>

    12. Overall Credibility

      Rate your impression of the credibility of this article

      Choices:

      <div>[ "1.01.01:Very low credibility", "1.01.02:Somewhat low credibility", "1.01.03:Medium credibility", "1.01.04:Somewhat high credibility", "1.01.05:High credibility" ]</div>

    1. Exaggerated/minimized claims

      Does the author use exaggerations/minimizations or generally seems to represent situations and events in a proportional manner?

      Choices:

      <div>[ "1.17.01:Yes, there are a mix of exaggerations and minimizations", "1.17.02:Yes, there are exaggerations", "1.17.03:Yes, there are minimizations", "1.17.04:No, the text seems generally proportional (avoids exaggeration and minimization)" ]</div>

    2. Emotional valence

      Is the language extremely negative, extremely positive, or somewhere in the middle?

      Choices:

      <div>[ "1.16.01:Extremely negative", "1.16.02:Somewhat negative", "1.16.03:Neither negative nor positive", "1.16.04:Somewhat positive", "1.16.05:Extremely positive" ]</div>

    3. Acknowledgement of uncertainty

      Does the author acknowledge uncertainty, or the possibility things might be otherwise?

      Choices:

      <div>[ "1.15.01:Yes", "1.15.02:Sort of", "1.15.03:No" ]</div>

    4. Acknowledgement of uncertainty

      Does the author acknowledge uncertainty, or the possibility things might be otherwise?

      Choices:

      <div>[ "1.15.01:Yes", "1.15.02:Sort of", "1.15.03:No" ]</div>

    5. Confidence in claims made by sources

      To what extent does the author's confidence in claims made by sources seem justified?

      Choices:

      <div>[ "1.14.01:Completely justified", "1.14.02:Mostly justified", "1.14.03:Somewhat justified", "1.14.04:Slightly justified", "1.14.05:Not at all justified" ]</div>

    6. Other types of sources

      Are any experts, organizations, or studies separate from the central study quoted in the article?

      Choices:

      <div>[ "1.13.01:Yes", "1.13.02:No" ]</div>

    7. Types of sources

      Which of the following are cited?

      Choices:

      <div>[ "1.08.01:Experts", "1.08.02:Studies", "1.08.03:Organizations", "1.08.04:Other" ]</div>

    8. Types of sources

      Does the article cite sources?

      Choices:

      <div>[ "1.08a.01:Yes", "1.08a.02:No" ]</div>

    9. Single study?

      Is the article primarily about a single scientific study?

      Choices:

      <div>[ "1.07.01:Yes", "1.07.02:No" ]</div>

    10. NOT EAT THIS FISH, IT IS VERY DANGEROU

      Clickbaitiness

      What clickbait techniques does this headline employ?

      Choices:

      <div>[ "1.05.01:Listicle (\"6 Tips on ...\")", "1.05.02:Cliffhanger to a story (\"You Won't Believe What Happens Next\")", "1.05.03:Provoking emotions, such as shock or surprise (\"...Shocking Result\", \"...Leave You in Tears\")", "1.05.04:Hidden secret or trick (\"Fitness Companies Hate Him...\", \"Experts are Dying to Know Their Secret\")", "1.05.05:Challenges to the ego (\"Only People with IQ Above 160 Can Solve This\")", "1.05.06:Defying convention (\"Think Orange Juice is Good for you? Think Again!\", \"Here are 5 Foods You Never Thought Would Kill You\")", "1.05.07:Inducing fear (\"Is Your Boyfriend Cheating on You?\")", "1.05.08:Other" ]</div>

    11. NOT EAT THIS FISH, IT IS VERY DANGEROU

      Clickbaitiness

      Is the headline clickbaity?

      Choices:

      <div>[ "1.04.01:Very much clickbaity", "1.04.02:Somewhat clickbaity", "1.04.03:A little bit clickbaity", "1.04.04:Not at all clickbaity" ]</div>

    12. NOT EAT THIS FISH, IT IS VERY DANGEROU

      Title Representativeness

      How is the title unrepresentative? (select all that apply)

      Choices:

      <div>[ "1.03.01:Title is on a different topic than the body", "1.03.02:Title emphasizes different information than the body", "1.03.03:Title carries little information about the body", "1.03.04:Title takes a different stance than the body", "1.03.05:Title overstates claims or conclusions in the body", "1.03.06:Title understates claims or conclusions in the body", "1.03.07:Other" ]</div>

    13. NOT EAT THIS FISH, IT IS VERY DANGEROU

      Title Representativeness

      Does the title of the article accurately reflect the content of the article?

      Choices:

      <div>[ "1.02.01:Completely Unrepresentative", "1.02.02:Somewhat Unrepresentative", "1.02.03:Somewhat Representative", "1.02.04:Completely Representative" ]</div>

    14. Overall Credibility

      Rate your impression of the credibility of this article

      Choices:

      <div>[ "1.01.01:Very low credibility", "1.01.02:Somewhat low credibility", "1.01.03:Medium credibility", "1.01.04:Somewhat high credibility", "1.01.05:High credibility" ]</div>

    1. Exaggerated/minimized claims

      Does the author use exaggerations/minimizations or generally seems to represent situations and events in a proportional manner?

      Choices:

      <div>[ "1.17.01:Yes, there are a mix of exaggerations and minimizations", "1.17.02:Yes, there are exaggerations", "1.17.03:Yes, there are minimizations", "1.17.04:No, the text seems generally proportional (avoids exaggeration and minimization)" ]</div>

    2. Emotional valence

      Is the language extremely negative, extremely positive, or somewhere in the middle?

      Choices:

      <div>[ "1.16.01:Extremely negative", "1.16.02:Somewhat negative", "1.16.03:Neither negative nor positive", "1.16.04:Somewhat positive", "1.16.05:Extremely positive" ]</div>

    3. Acknowledgement of uncertainty

      Does the author acknowledge uncertainty, or the possibility things might be otherwise?

      Choices:

      <div>[ "1.15.01:Yes", "1.15.02:Sort of", "1.15.03:No" ]</div>

    4. Acknowledgement of uncertainty

      Does the author acknowledge uncertainty, or the possibility things might be otherwise?

      Choices:

      <div>[ "1.15.01:Yes", "1.15.02:Sort of", "1.15.03:No" ]</div>

    5. Confidence in claims made by sources

      To what extent does the author's confidence in claims made by sources seem justified?

      Choices:

      <div>[ "1.14.01:Completely justified", "1.14.02:Mostly justified", "1.14.03:Somewhat justified", "1.14.04:Slightly justified", "1.14.05:Not at all justified" ]</div>

    6. Other types of sources

      Are any experts, organizations, or studies separate from the central study quoted in the article?

      Choices:

      <div>[ "1.13.01:Yes", "1.13.02:No" ]</div>

    7. Types of sources

      Which of the following are cited?

      Choices:

      <div>[ "1.08.01:Experts", "1.08.02:Studies", "1.08.03:Organizations", "1.08.04:Other" ]</div>

    8. Types of sources

      Does the article cite sources?

      Choices:

      <div>[ "1.08a.01:Yes", "1.08a.02:No" ]</div>

    9. Single study?

      Is the article primarily about a single scientific study?

      Choices:

      <div>[ "1.07.01:Yes", "1.07.02:No" ]</div>

    10. An Iceberg the Size of Delaware Just Broke Away From Antarctica

      Clickbaitiness

      What clickbait techniques does this headline employ?

      Choices:

      <div>[ "1.05.01:Listicle (\"6 Tips on ...\")", "1.05.02:Cliffhanger to a story (\"You Won't Believe What Happens Next\")", "1.05.03:Provoking emotions, such as shock or surprise (\"...Shocking Result\", \"...Leave You in Tears\")", "1.05.04:Hidden secret or trick (\"Fitness Companies Hate Him...\", \"Experts are Dying to Know Their Secret\")", "1.05.05:Challenges to the ego (\"Only People with IQ Above 160 Can Solve This\")", "1.05.06:Defying convention (\"Think Orange Juice is Good for you? Think Again!\", \"Here are 5 Foods You Never Thought Would Kill You\")", "1.05.07:Inducing fear (\"Is Your Boyfriend Cheating on You?\")", "1.05.08:Other" ]</div>

    11. An Iceberg the Size of Delaware Just Broke Away From Antarctica

      Clickbaitiness

      Is the headline clickbaity?

      Choices:

      <div>[ "1.04.01:Very much clickbaity", "1.04.02:Somewhat clickbaity", "1.04.03:A little bit clickbaity", "1.04.04:Not at all clickbaity" ]</div>

    12. An Iceberg the Size of Delaware Just Broke Away From Antarctica

      Title Representativeness

      How is the title unrepresentative? (select all that apply)

      Choices:

      <div>[ "1.03.01:Title is on a different topic than the body", "1.03.02:Title emphasizes different information than the body", "1.03.03:Title carries little information about the body", "1.03.04:Title takes a different stance than the body", "1.03.05:Title overstates claims or conclusions in the body", "1.03.06:Title understates claims or conclusions in the body", "1.03.07:Other" ]</div>

    13. An Iceberg the Size of Delaware Just Broke Away From Antarctica

      Title Representativeness

      Does the title of the article accurately reflect the content of the article?

      Choices:

      <div>[ "1.02.01:Completely Unrepresentative", "1.02.02:Somewhat Unrepresentative", "1.02.03:Somewhat Representative", "1.02.04:Completely Representative" ]</div>

    14. Overall Credibility

      Rate your impression of the credibility of this article

      Choices:

      <div>[ "1.01.01:Very low credibility", "1.01.02:Somewhat low credibility", "1.01.03:Medium credibility", "1.01.04:Somewhat high credibility", "1.01.05:High credibility" ]</div>

    15. Overall Credibility

      Rate your impression of the credibility of this article

      Choices:

      <div>[ "1.01.01:Very low credibility", "1.01.02:Somewhat low credibility", "1.01.03:Medium credibility", "1.01.04:Somewhat high credibility", "1.01.05:High credibility" ]</div>

    1. Overall Credibility

      Rate your impression of the credibility of this article

      Choices:

      <div>[ "1.01.01:Very low credibility", "1.01.02:Somewhat low credibility", "1.01.03:Medium credibility", "1.01.04:Somewhat high credibility", "1.01.05:High credibility" ]</div>

    2. Overall Credibility

      Rate your impression of the credibility of this article

      Choices:

      <div>[ "1.01.01:Very low credibility", "1.01.02:Somewhat low credibility", "1.01.03:Medium credibility", "1.01.04:Somewhat high credibility", "1.01.05:High credibility" ]</div>

    1. Exaggerated/minimized claims

      Does the author use exaggerations/minimizations or generally seems to represent situations and events in a proportional manner?

      Choices:

      <div>[ "1.17.01:Yes, there are a mix of exaggerations and minimizations", "1.17.02:Yes, there are exaggerations", "1.17.03:Yes, there are minimizations", "1.17.04:No, the text seems generally proportional (avoids exaggeration and minimization)" ]</div>

    2. Emotional valence

      Is the language extremely negative, extremely positive, or somewhere in the middle?

      Choices:

      <div>[ "1.16.01:Extremely negative", "1.16.02:Somewhat negative", "1.16.03:Neither negative nor positive", "1.16.04:Somewhat positive", "1.16.05:Extremely positive" ]</div>

    3. Acknowledgement of uncertainty

      Does the author acknowledge uncertainty, or the possibility things might be otherwise?

      Choices:

      <div>[ "1.15.01:Yes", "1.15.02:Sort of", "1.15.03:No" ]</div>

    4. Confidence in claims made by sources

      To what extent does the author's confidence in claims made by sources seem justified?

      Choices:

      <div>[ "1.14.01:Completely justified", "1.14.02:Mostly justified", "1.14.03:Somewhat justified", "1.14.04:Slightly justified", "1.14.05:Not at all justified" ]</div>

    5. Other types of sources

      Are any experts, organizations, or studies separate from the central study quoted in the article?

      Choices:

      <div>[ "1.13.01:Yes", "1.13.02:No" ]</div>

    6. Types of sources

      Does the article cite sources?

      Choices:

      <div>[ "1.08a.01:Yes", "1.08a.02:No" ]</div>

    7. Single study?

      Is the article primarily about a single scientific study?

      Choices:

      <div>[ "1.07.01:Yes", "1.07.02:No" ]</div>

    8. Coconut oil isn't healthy. It's never been healthy.

      Clickbaitiness

      What clickbait techniques does this headline employ?

      Choices:

      <div>[ "1.05.01:Listicle (\"6 Tips on ...\")", "1.05.02:Cliffhanger to a story (\"You Won't Believe What Happens Next\")", "1.05.03:Provoking emotions, such as shock or surprise (\"...Shocking Result\", \"...Leave You in Tears\")", "1.05.04:Hidden secret or trick (\"Fitness Companies Hate Him...\", \"Experts are Dying to Know Their Secret\")", "1.05.05:Challenges to the ego (\"Only People with IQ Above 160 Can Solve This\")", "1.05.06:Defying convention (\"Think Orange Juice is Good for you? Think Again!\", \"Here are 5 Foods You Never Thought Would Kill You\")", "1.05.07:Inducing fear (\"Is Your Boyfriend Cheating on You?\")", "1.05.08:Other" ]</div>

    9. Coconut oil isn't healthy. It's never been healthy.

      Clickbaitiness

      Is the headline clickbaity?

      Choices:

      <div>[ "1.04.01:Very much clickbaity", "1.04.02:Somewhat clickbaity", "1.04.03:A little bit clickbaity", "1.04.04:Not at all clickbaity" ]</div>

    10. Coconut oil isn't healthy. It's never been healthy.

      Clickbaitiness

      Is the headline clickbaity?

      Choices:

      <div>[ "1.04.01:Very much clickbaity", "1.04.02:Somewhat clickbaity", "1.04.03:A little bit clickbaity", "1.04.04:Not at all clickbaity" ]</div>

    11. Coconut oil isn't healthy. It's never been healthy.

      Title Representativeness

      Does the title of the article accurately reflect the content of the article?

      Choices:

      <div>[ "1.02.01:Completely Unrepresentative", "1.02.02:Somewhat Unrepresentative", "1.02.03:Somewhat Representative", "1.02.04:Completely Representative" ]</div>

    12. Overall Credibility

      Rate your impression of the credibility of this article

      Choices:

      <div>[ "1.01.01:Very low credibility", "1.01.02:Somewhat low credibility", "1.01.03:Medium credibility", "1.01.04:Somewhat high credibility", "1.01.05:High credibility" ]</div>

    1. Overall Credibility

      Rate your impression of the credibility of this article

      Choices:

      <div>[ "1.01.01:Very low credibility", "1.01.02:Somewhat low credibility", "1.01.03:Medium credibility", "1.01.04:Somewhat high credibility", "1.01.05:High credibility" ]</div>

    1. Overall Credibility

      Rate your impression of the credibility of this article

      Choices:

      <div>[ "1.01.01:Very low credibility", "1.01.02:Somewhat low credibility", "1.01.03:Medium credibility", "1.01.04:Somewhat high credibility", "1.01.05:High credibility" ]</div>

    1. Types of sources

      Which of the following are cited?

      Choices:

      <div>[ "1.08.01:Experts", "1.08.02:Studies", "1.08.03:Organizations" ]</div>

    2. Types of sources

      Does the article cite sources?

      Choices:

      <div>[ "1.08a.01:Yes", "1.08a.02:No" ]</div>

    3. Single study?

      Is the article primarily about a single scientific study?

      Choices:

      <div>[ "1.07.01:Yes", "1.07.02:No" ]</div>

    4. Trump Lashes Out After Reports of ‘Quiet Resistance’ by Staff

      Clickbaitiness

      Is the headline clickbaity

      Choices:

      <div>[ "1.04.01:Very much clickbaity", "1.04.02:Somewhat clickbaity", "1.04.03:A little bit clickbaity", "1.04.04:Not at all clickbaity" ]</div>

    5. Trump Lashes Out After Reports of ‘Quiet Resistance’ by Staff

      Title Representativeness

      Does the title of the article accurately reflect the content of the article?

      Choices:

      <div>[ "1.02.01:Completely Unrepresentative", "1.02.02:Somewhat Unrepresentative", "1.02.03:Somewhat Representative", "1.02.04:Completely Representative" ]</div>

    6. Overall Credibility

      Rate your impression of the credibility of this article

      Choices:

      <div>[ "1.01.01:Very low credibility", "1.01.02:Somewhat low credibility", "1.01.03:Medium credibility", "1.01.04:Somewhat high credibility", "1.01.05:High credibility" ]</div>

    1. Types of sources

      Which of the following are cited?

      Choices:

      <div>[ "1.08.01:Experts", "1.08.02:Studies", "1.08.03:Organizations" ]</div>

    2. Types of sources

      Does the article cite sources?

      Choices:

      <div>[ "1.08a.01:Yes", "1.08a.02:No" ]</div>

    3. Single study?

      Is the article primarily about a single scientific study?

      Choices:

      <div>[ "1.07.01:Yes", "1.07.02:No" ]</div>

    4. Trump Lashes Out After Reports of ‘Quiet Resistance’ by Staff

      Clickbaitiness

      Is the headline clickbaity

      Choices:

      <div>[ "1.04.01:Very much clickbaity", "1.04.02:Somewhat clickbaity", "1.04.03:A little bit clickbaity", "1.04.04:Not at all clickbaity" ]</div>

    5. Trump Lashes Out After Reports of ‘Quiet Resistance’ by Staff

      Title Representativeness

      Does the title of the article accurately reflect the content of the article?

      Choices:

      <div>[ "1.02.01:Completely Unrepresentative", "1.02.02:Somewhat Unrepresentative", "1.02.03:Somewhat Representative", "1.02.04:Completely Representative" ]</div>

    6. Overall Credibility

      Rate your impression of the credibility of this article

      Choices:

      <div>[ "1.01.01:Very low credibility", "1.01.02:Somewhat low credibility", "1.01.03:Medium credibility", "1.01.04:Somewhat high credibility", "1.01.05:High credibility" ]</div>

  7. Aug 2018
    1. Overall Credibility

      Rate your impression of the credibility of this article

      Choices:

      <div>[ "1.01.01:Very low credibility", "1.01.02:Somewhat low credibility", "1.01.03:Medium credibility", "1.01.04:Somewhat high credibility", "1.01.05:High credibility" ]</div>

    2. Overall Credibility

      Rate your impression of the credibility of this article

      Choices:

      <div>[ "1.01.01:Very low credibility", "1.01.02:Somewhat low credibility", "1.01.03:Medium credibility", "1.01.04:Somewhat high credibility", "1.01.05:High credibility" ]</div>

    3. Overall Credibility

      Rate your impression of the credibility of this article

      Choices:

      <div>[ "1.01.01:Very low credibility", "1.01.02:Somewhat low credibility", "1.01.03:Medium credibility", "1.01.04:Somewhat high credibility", "1.01.05:High credibility" ]</div>

    4. Overall Credibility

      Rate your impression of the credibility of this article

      Choices:

      <div>[ "1.01.01:Very low credibility", "1.01.02:Somewhat low credibility", "1.01.03:Medium credibility", "1.01.04:Somewhat high credibility", "1.01.05:High credibility" ]</div>

    1. Evidence for primary claim

      What evidence is given for the primary claim?

      Choices:

      <div>[ "1.23.01:Correlation", "1.23.02:Cause precedes effect", "1.23.03:The correlation appears across multiple independent contexts", "1.23.04:A plausible mechanism is proposed", "1.23.05:An experimental study was conducted (natural experiments OK)", "1.23.06:Experts are cited", "1.23.07:Other kind of evidence", "1.23.08:No evidence given" ]</div>

    2. Evidence for primary claim

      What evidence is given for the primary claim?

      Choices:

      <div>[ "1.23.01:Correlation", "1.23.02:Cause precedes effect", "1.23.03:The correlation appears across multiple independent contexts", "1.23.04:A plausible mechanism is proposed", "1.23.05:An experimental study was conducted (natural experiments OK)", "1.23.06:Experts are cited", "1.23.07:Other kind of evidence", "1.23.08:No evidence given" ]</div>

    3. Causal claims

      Is a general or singular causal claim made?

      Choices:

      <div>[ "1.22.01:General causal claim", "1.22.02:Singular causal claim", "1.22.03:No causal claim" ]</div>

    4. Exaggerated claims

      Does the author exaggerate claims?

      Choices:

      <div>[ "1.21.01:Yes", "1.21.02:Sort of", "1.21.03:No" ]</div>

    5. Emotionally charged tone

      Does the author use outrage, snark, celebration, horror, etc?

      Choices:

      <div>[ "1.20.01:Yes", "1.20.02:Sort of", "1.20.03:No" ]</div>

    6. Naturalistic fallacy

      Does the author suggest something is good because it is natural, or bad because it is not natural?

      Choices:

      <div>[ "1.19.01:Yes", "1.19.02:Sort of", "1.19.03:No" ]</div>

    7. Scare tactics

      Does the author exaggerate the dangers of a situation (the appeal to fear fallacy)?

      Choices:

      <div>[ "1.18.01:Yes", "1.18.02:Sort of", "1.18.03:No" ]</div>

    8. Slippery slope

      Does the author say that one small change will lead to a major change?

      Choices:

      <div>[ "1.17.01:Yes", "1.17.02:Sort of", "1.17.03:No" ]</div>

    9. False dilemma

      Does the author present a complicated choice as if it were binary?

      Choices:

      <div>[ "1.16.01:Yes", "1.16.02:Sort of", "1.16.03:No" ]</div>

    10. Straw man argument

      Does the author present a counterargument as a weaker, more foolish version of the real counterargument?

      Choices:

      <div>[ "1.15.01:Yes", "1.15.02:Sort of", "1.15.03:No" ]</div>

    11. Confidence in claims made by sources

      To what extent does the author's confidence in claims made by sources seem justified?

      Choices:

      <div>[ "1.13.01:Completely justified", "1.13.02:Mostly justified", "1.13.03:Somewhat justified", "1.13.04:Slightly justified", "1.13.05:Not at all justified" ]</div>

    12. Other types of sources

      Are any experts, organizations, or studies separate from the central study quoted in the article?

      Choices:

      <div>[ "1.12.01:Yes", "1.12.02:No" ]</div>

    13. Types of sources

      Which of the following are cited?

      Choices:

      <div>[ "1.08.02:Experts", "1.08.03:Studies", "1.08.04:Organizations" ]</div>

    14. Types of sources

      Does the article cite sources?

      Choices:

      <div>[ "1.08a.01:Yes", "1.08a.02:No" ]</div>

    15. Single study?

      Is the article primarily about a single scientific study?

      Choices:

      <div>[ "1.07.01:Yes", "1.07.02:No" ]</div>

    16. Trump Praises Manafort, Saying ‘Unlike Michael Cohen’ He ‘Refused to Break’

      Clickbaitiness

      What clickbait techniques does this headline employ?

      Choices:

      <div>[ "1.05.01:Listicle (\"6 Tips on ...\")", "1.05.02:Cliffhanger to a story (\"You Won't Believe What Happens Next\")", "1.05.03:Provoking emotions, such as shock or surprise (\"...Shocking Result\", \"...Leave You in Tears\")", "1.05.04:Hidden secret or trick (\"Fitness Companies Hate Him...\", \"Experts are Dying to Know Their Secret\")", "1.05.05:Challenges to the ego (\"Only People with IQ Above 160 Can Solve This\")", "1.05.06:Defying convention (\"Think Orange Juice is Good for you? Think Again!\", \"Here are 5 Foods You Never Thought Would Kill You\")", "1.05.07:Inducing fear (\"Is Your Boyfriend Cheating on You?\")", "1.05.08:Other" ]</div>

    17. Trump Praises Manafort, Saying ‘Unlike Michael Cohen’ He ‘Refused to Break’

      Clickbaitiness

      Is the headline clickbaity

      Choices:

      <div>[ "1.04.01:Very much clickbaity", "1.04.02:Somewhat clickbaity", "1.04.03:A little bit clickbaity", "1.04.04:Not at all clickbaity" ]</div>

    18. Trump Praises Manafort, Saying ‘Unlike Michael Cohen’ He ‘Refused to Break’

      Title Representativeness

      Does the title of the article accurately reflect the content of the article?

      Choices:

      <div>[ "1.02.01:Completely Unrepresentative", "1.02.02:Somewhat Unrepresentative", "1.02.03:Somewhat Representative", "1.02.04:Completely Representative" ]</div>

    19. Overall Credibility

      Rate your impression of the credibility of this article

      Choices:

      <div>[ "1.01.01:Very low credibility", "1.01.02:Somewhat low credibility", "1.01.03:Medium credibility", "1.01.04:Somewhat high credibility", "1.01.05:High credibility" ]</div>

    1. Lorem ipsum

      Title Representativeness

      Does the title of the article accurately reflect the content of the article?

      Choices:

      <div>[ "1.02.01:Completely Unrepresentative", "1.02.02:Somewhat Unrepresentative", "1.02.03:Somewhat Representative", "1.02.04:Completely Representative" ]</div>

    2. Overall Credibility

      Rate your impression of the credibility of this article

      Choices:

      <div>[ "1.01.01:Very low credibility", "1.01.02:Somewhat low credibility", "1.01.03:Medium credibility", "1.01.04:Somewhat high credibility", "1.01.05:High credibility" ]</div>

    1. Overall Credibility

      Rate your impression of the credibility of this article

      Choices:

      <div>[ "1.01.01:Very low credibility", "1.01.02:Somewhat low credibility", "1.01.03:Medium credibility", "1.01.04:Somewhat high credibility", "1.01.05:High credibility" ]</div>

    2. How School Walkouts Test Student Rights And School Responsibilities

      Title Representativeness

      How is the title unrepresentative? (select all that apply)

      Choices:

      <div>[ "1.03.01:Title is on a different topic than the body", "1.03.02:Title emphasizes different information than the body", "1.03.03:Title carries little information about the body", "1.03.04:Title takes a different stance than the body", "1.03.05:Title overstates claims or conclusions in the body", "1.03.06:Title understates claims or conclusions in the body", "1.03.07:Other" ]</div>

      Answer:

      <div>1.03.01, 1.03.05, 1.03.07</div>

    3. How School Walkouts Test Student Rights And School Responsibilities

      Title Representativeness

      Does the title of the article accurately reflect the content of the article?

      Choices:

      <div>[ "1.02.01:Completely Unrepresentative", "1.02.02:Somewhat Unrepresentative", "1.02.03:Somewhat Representative", "1.02.04:Completely Representative" ]</div>

      Answer:

      <div>1.02.02</div>

    4. Overall Credibility

      Rate your impression of the credibility of this article

      Choices:

      <div>[ "1.01.01:Very low credibility", "1.01.02:Somewhat low credibility", "1.01.03:Medium credibility", "1.01.04:Somewhat high credibility", "1.01.05:High credibility" ]</div>

      Answer:

      <div>1.01.02</div>

  8. Jan 2018
    1. Certainly

      Although the phrase "dust ground" does not appear in the installment, Dickens mentions the "dust mounds" in this chapter when Wegg visits Boffin's Bower. The mention of dust recurs at the end of the installment when Mr. Venus explains that Mr. Boffin brings him items he finds in the dust: "'The old gentleman was well known all round here. There used to be stories about his having hidden all kinds of property in those dust mounds."

    2. Do

      Although Dickens marks both Twemlow and the Veneerings as appearing in this installment, they appear only in the original chapter 7, which was moved to the following installment as chapter ten

  9. Sep 2017
    1. Certainly

      Although the phrase "dust ground" does not appear in the installment, Dickens mentions the "dust mounds" in this chapter when Wegg visits Boffin's Bower. The mention of dust recurs at the end of the installment when Mr. Venus explains that Mr. Boffin brings him items he finds in the dust: "'The old gentleman was well known all round here. There used to be stories about his having hidden all kinds of property in those dust mounds."

    2. Do

      Although Dickens marks both Twemlow and the Veneerings as appearing in this installment, they appear only in the original chapter 7, which was moved to the following installment as chapter ten

  10. Apr 2017
    1. Do microbes live at every depth sampled in Figures 11.17A and 11.18? Do you see any trends in the data with regards to depth and type of metabolism?

      In 11.18 the microbes are present at all depths. The sulfate reducers are restricted to the first four meters. The methane producers and methanogens are restricted to the middle three to 30 meters. There is no correlation between the depth and number of microbes present.

    1. Using the data in Figure 10.20B, what is the pH of the cytoplasm? What is the pH of the mitochondrial matrix in this experiment? What is the fold change in H+ ions between the cytoplasm and the matrix? Which subcellular location has the higher concentration of H+ ions?

      The pH of the cytoplasm was about 7 based on the data from Fig 10.2B. The pH of the mitochondrial matrix in this experiment was a bit higher than 8. The fold change in H+ ion channels between the cytoplasm and the mitochondrial matrix was about 10x higher in concentration in the cytoplasm. Cytoplasm had a higher concentration if H+ ions.

  11. Mar 2017
  12. Jan 2017
    1. Whose stories are taught and told? Whose suffering is recognized? Whose dead are mourned?

      HIStory. What is being erased?

  13. Sep 2016
  14. Dec 2015
    1. RAJ: Good morning, Paul. I am glad to hear from you this morning. I know yesterday was a rugged day for you, as it also was for Susan.1 PAUL: I do not understand why it was necessary. However, I do not want to dwell on that level or in those feelings.

      Answer: to question of what Raj is up to when he tells Paul that Maitreya (Christ) will make himself known on March 14 (yesterday in the timeframe of this chapter).

      The footnote explains that Raj was making a point with Paul to not look outside himself for answers. They were expecting a life-changing announcement by a being revealing himself as the return of Christ. That's huge and Raj was playing them - telling them outright this was going to happen as proposed by Benjamin Creme.

      This could feel like total and deliberate deceit on the part of Raj. The teacher must really know what he is doing...

      The lesson - don't seek for answers outside of your Self.

  15. Jan 2014
    1. Responsibility, myself versus others. It may appear that responses to the question of responsibility are bifurcated between "Myself" and all other parties combined. However, respondents who identified themselves as being responsible were more likely than not to identify additional parties that share that responsibility. Thus, curatorial responsibility is seen as a collaborative effort. (The "Nobody" category is a slight misnomer here as it also includes non-responses to this question.)

      This answers my previous question about this survey item:

      https://hypothes.is/a/QrDAnmV8Tm-EkDuHuknS2A

    1. the proposition that diverse motivations animate human beings, and, more importantly, that there exist ranges of human experience in which the presence of monetary rewards is inversely related to the presence of other, social-psychological rewards.

      The first analytic move.

    2. understanding that when a project of any size is broken up into little pieces, each of which can be performed by an individual in a short amount of time, the motivation to get any given individual to contribute need only be very small.

      The second analytic move.