The headline is broadly defensible, but the qualifications matter. Effect sizes vary by population, the strongest claims rest on shorter trials, and credible voices push back on how it's typically framed.
Anorexics, are very good at identifying the face. They find it much faster than do non-anorexics, which is really interesting, right? They somehow are able to hone in on details and find those details and fixate on those details.
Every Sunday: the week’s new conflicts and verdict changes — and nothing else.
Native comments, Twitter mentions, and Reddit threads about this claim — surfaced together so the conversation isn't fragmented across platforms.
Bookmarking — the dossier-vs-overview split is the right call. Most of the time I want overview; sometimes I want receipts.
Would love a "what would change this verdict" RSS feed. Sign me up if it exists.
The first is something called weak central coherence. Weak central coherence is essentially an inability to see the forest through the trees. It's a hyper acuity and focus on details within a given environment.
The first is something called weak central coherence. Weak central coherence is essentially an inability to see the forest through the trees. It's a hyperaccuity and focus on details within a given environment. You miss the big picture.