Tufts University W 9: Fill & Download for Free

GRE score 290 - 300 university listTemple UniversityUniversity of AlabamaUniversity of Alabama, HuntsvilleUniversity of Arkansas, FayettevilleUniversity of ColoradoUniversity of Hawaii, ManoaUniversity of IdahoUniversity of KentuckyUniversity of South CarolinaUniversity of South FloridaUniversity of Texas, ArlingtonTexas Tech UniversitySouthern Methodist UniversityTufts University

Q. What American universities offer the best masters program in political science and international relations?A. The Best International Relations Master’s ProgramsBY KEDAR PAVGIJANUARY 3, 2012, 3:01 AMThese rankings are part of the Teaching, Research, and International Policy (TRIP) survey, conducted by Paul C. Avey, Michael C. Desch, James D. Long, Daniel Maliniak, Susan Peterson, and Michael J. Tierney. All additional information provided was added by Foreign Policy and is not part of the survey results.Georgetown UniversityProgram size: 500-600Program cost: $41,056/yearStar professors: Madeleine Albright, Daniel Byman, Victor Cha, Charles Hagel, Paul PillarGeorgetown offers a variety of master’s programs within the IR field, including an M.S. in foreign serviceand a program in security studies. The extremely selective School of Foreign Service offers a two-year program in which course work is supplemented by mentorship from IR professionals; notables in the past have included former Secretary of State Madeleine Albright and former USAID Director Andrew Natsios (a Georgetown alum).Website: http://sfs.georgetown.edu/2. Johns Hopkins UniversityProgram size: 600Program cost: $36,962/ yearStar professors: Zbigniew Brzezinski, David Lampton, Michael MandelbaumJohns Hopkins offers an M.A. from the Paul H. Nitze School of Advanced International Studies, an interdisciplinary program that allows students to concentrate on a particular area of the field, such as international development, or a particular geographic region, such as African Studies. The two-year program also emphasizes language skills, offering courses in 16 languages.Website: http://www.sais-jhu.edu3. Harvard UniversityProgram Size: 568Program Cost: $43,212/yearStar Professors: Joseph S. Nye, Richard Clarke, Stephen M. WaltThe highly selective master of public policy program at Harvard Kennedy School includes an option for a concentration in international and global affairs, geared specifically toward students seeking to join the ranks of international policy wonks. The all-star faculty list includes multiple former presidential advisors.Website: http://www.hks.harvard.edu4. Princeton UniversityProgram size: 165Program cost: $38,620Star professors: John Ikenberry, Robert Keohane, Anne-Marie SlaughterThe Woodrow Wilson School of Public and International Affairs offers not only offers a top-notch program, it also prides itself on generous fellowship funding to help students offset costs. Students also benefit from its many affiliated programs. For example, the World Politics journal is published by the Princeton Institute for International and Regional Studies.Website: http://wws.princeton.edu5. Tufts UniversityProgram size: 279Program cost: $37,344Star professors: Stephen Bosworth, Daniel W. Drezner, Leila Fawaz, Alex de WaalTufts’ Fletcher School of International Affairs offers a variety of programs spanning the school’s three major divisions: International Law and Organizations; Diplomacy, History, and Politics; and Economics and International Business. The programs range from 1-2 years and can be supplemented through joint partnerships with Harvard Law School, among others.Website: http://fletcher.tufts.edu/6. Columbia University in the City of New YorkProgram size: 900Program cost: $41,472Star professors: Jagdish Bhagwati, Jeffrey Sachs, Joseph StiglitzSchool of International and Public Affairs (SIPA) offers a master’s of international affairs that stresses real-world application, including proficiency in a foreign language, a robust internship program, and workshops that present real assignments for students working for different organizations. The international fellows program, open to all graduate-degree programs at Columbia, provides a unique opportunity for students to “examine the origins of the current international order” during a two-semester seminar that includes discussion groups and trips to the United Nations and Washington, D.C.Website: http://sipa.columbia.edu7. The George Washington University | Washington, D.C.Program size: 640-700Program cost: $26,530Star professors: Martha Finnemore, Karl F. Inderfurth, Marc LynchThe Elliott School of International Affairs offers a variety of MA degrees, including a masters of international policy and practice degree for professionals looking to increase their marketable skills. The school also partners with the London School of Economics and Political Science (#9) to provide a master of international studies degree to students of both institutions.Website: http://elliott.gwu.edu8. American University, Washington, D.C.Program size: 800+Program cost: $25,764Star professors: Amitav Acharya, Phillip Brenner, James GoldgeierAmerical University School of International Service provides a dedicated international peace and conflict resolution program, which began after students requested more conflict-resolution classes in the 1980s. It’s a fitting move from a school that declared its mission was to prepare students to “wage peace” globally upon its founding in 1957.Website: http://www.american.edu/sis9. London School of Economics and Political ScienceProgram size: 461Program cost: $27, 256Star professors: Jeffrey Chwieroth, Katerina Delacoura, Christopher HughesOne of the oldest international-relations departments in the world (as well as one of the largest), the London School of Economics and Political Science’s IR department provides a number of master’s programs, most based in London. The school also runs a joint program for a master of international studies degree with George Washington University in Washington, D.C.Website: http://www2.lse.ac.uk10. The University of ChicagoProgram size: 60Program cost: $44,568Star professors: John Mearsheimer, Robert PapeThe oldest IR graduate program in the United States, the Committee on International Relations focuses on the more intellectual side of international affairs. Programs are capped by a rigorous M.A. thesis, and courses are focused on producing “intellectual leaders” in the field.Website: http://cir.uchicago.edu/

1st, definition of handedness, 2nd, psychological trait differences associated with handedness, 3rd and finally, technical problems associated with studies of handedness.Definition of handednessChirality from the Greek 'cheir' or hand is synonym for handedness. 'Chiral' is the property of any object that cannot be superimposed on its mirror image, such as our hands.Are psychological trait differences associated with handedness?This is a rather profound question. Are our abstract thoughts really abstract or more rooted in our physical selves?Language abounds in examples that show our body contributes to our abstract thoughts.Examples such as 'right-hand person', 'given the cold shoulder', 'out in left field', 'two left feet'.Language also suggests that we ascribe positive virtue to our dominant side.Since more of us are right-handed, our language reflects this bias.For example, 'left' is associated with inadequacy in French ('gauche'), bad in Latin and Italian ('sinistra'), derived from the word 'lyft' or broken in English (1).In Russian, 'levja' (maybe misspelled in original; left-handed) implies deceptive or untrustworthy (2).In the Chichewa language in Malawi, 'left' implies inferior, weaker while the right hand is often called the male hand (3, 4).In Mandarin Chinese, 'zou', the character for left implies weird, unorthodox, wrong, incorrect, different, contrary or opposite while the Mandarin character for right suggests to eat with the right hand (5).How we experience and use our body contributes to our mental metaphors. This idea is called Embodied or Grounded Cognition. Our physical experience of the world influences how we think about it and how we remember it (6).Daniel Casasanto, currently at the University of Chicago, studied whether handedness influences abstract mental constructs such as 'goodness and badness, victory and loss, deceit and honesty' (7).In his 2009 study (7), Casasanto compared responses of left- and right-handed volunteers to Fribbles (alien creatures created by Michael J. Tarr, Brown University, www.tarrlab.org), arranged as binary choices.In each choice, was the one on the left or on the right a better representative of a given quality, say intelligence, happiness, honesty or attractiveness?Of 286 participants, 65% of left-handers 'attributed positive characteristics more often to Fribbles on the left of the page, whereas a small majority of right-handers (54%) attributed positive characteristics more often to Fribbles on the right of the page'.According to Casasanto, 'lefties [tend to] think left is good, righties [tend to] think right is good' (8).Casasanto's fMRI studies suggested body-specific associations underpin our abstract concepts.Casasanto interprets 'People tend to understand verbs as referring to actions they would perform with their particular bodies— not to a Platonic ideal of the action or to the action as it is performed by the majority of language users. In this sense, people with different bodies understand the same verbs to mean something different' (9).Calling this the Body-Specificity Hypothesis, Casasanto suggests that we develop certain abstract concepts corresponding to dominant physical traits, i.e. lefties imbue the left side with positive emotional, intellectual and moral attributes while righties do the same with the right side.Could other researchers show similar differences between left- and right-handers in other tests?Response to words: Linguistic StimuliTwo studies from researchers at the University of Tubingen, Germany.1st, how do left- and right-handers classify positive and negative words (10)?Native German speakers asked to press a key to positive words with the right hand and to negative with the left in the 1st half of the experiment, and the other way around in the 2nd half of the experiment.20 each left- and right-handers tested.Right-handers responded faster to positive words with their right hand compared to their left hand, and faster to negative words with their left hand compared to their right handLeft-handers responded faster to positive words with their left hand to positive stimuli, and with their right hand to negative words.Data support Embodied or Grounded Cognition.Side corresponding to the dominant hand represents positive things while the side corresponding to the non-dominant hand represents negative things.This bias happens even with linguistic stimuli.2nd, does such bias also extend to foot usage (11)?37 native German speakers tested; all right-footed.Participants were shown positive and negative words. They were asked to respond by pressing a key with their left or right foot.As their title says, 'strong right-footers responded faster with their right foot to positive words, and with their left foot to negative words'.Remembering and Mapping Positive and Negative EventsAnother group at Tuft's University (12) 1st showed participants a map of fictitious positive and negative events, then asked them to recall these locations on the map.Right-handers tended to remember positive events too far to the right (25/36; 69%) and negative events too far to the left (20/36; 56%)Left-handers tended to remember positive events too far to the left (20/36; 56%) and negative events too far to the right (19/36; 53%).Caveats to these studiesSmall numbers of participants. Can they be safely extrapolated to entire populations? Open question.Shoddy statistics: many use standard error of the mean to minimize variability within groups and thereby enhance differences between groups.Most of them used Hand Preference tests such as the Edinburgh Handedness Inventory (EHI), as opposed to Hand Performance tests. The former self-identifies left- and right-handed people while the latter identifies them based on comparison of performance of certain [uni-]manual tasks using either hand.Technical problems associated with studies of handednessStudy of handedness is a little mired in confusion, especially between two linked attributes, Hand Preference and Hand Performance.Hand Preference: Assessed How?Questionnaires such as the EHI (13) assess an individual's subjective preference for 20 different manual tasks such as writing, drawing, throwing, scissors, comb, toothbrush, knife and spoon for eating, hammer, screw-driver, tennis racket, knife with fork, cricket bat, golf club, broom, rake, striking match, opening box, dealing cards, and threading needle.A lateralization quotient (LQ) uses the formula LQ = [(R-L)/(R+L)]*100, where R indicates activities where right hand is preferentially used, and L the left hand. LQ ranges from -100 to +100.Negative values indicate greater left-hand preferences.Positive values greater right-hand preferences.Hand Performance: Assessed How?Usually assessed through motor task such as the peg board task (14, 15, 16).The peg board task assesses the time it takes a person to move a row of 10 pegs from one side of a board to another.Compares reaction times for left and right hands.Other tests include placing dots in a circle (Dot Test) or squares on a sheet of paper as quickly as possible (17, 18).Pick up 20 matches from a table as quickly as possible (17).Hand Preference and Hand Performance test results are significantly different (19, 20).Hand Preference: The DataHas a J-shaped distribution, i.e. it's bi-modal.Many strongly right-handed.Fewer strongly left-handed.Still fewer ambidextrous.Considered a dichotomous attribute by many researchers (21).Hand Performance: The DataDistribution depends on the assessment method used.For example, peg board task more unimodal, with shift towards the right.OTOH, the Dot Test shows a more bi-modal distribution (22).Thus, Hand Preference and Hand Performance measure different attributes and derive different conclusions.Bottomline, handedness could be mis-identified depending on the test. In practical terms, this means that left- and right-handed definition is not clear-cut, and their psychological basis may be more flexible than studies suggest.Science is only as good as the methods used to study it and when the methods are imprecise so are the resulting data. Ergo, interpret these data as suggestive and not typical of left- and right-handers in general, at least until confirmed by many more studies using many more people, and every time comparing equal or similar numbers of left- and right-handed people.BibliographyMcManus, Chris. Right hand, left hand: The origins of asymmetry in brains, bodies, atoms and cultures. Harvard University Press, 2004.Coren, Stanley. The left-hander syndrome: The causes and consequences of left-handedness. Simon and Schuster, 2012.Stapleton, Walter H. "The Terms for" Right Hand" and" Left Hand" in the Bantu Languages." Journal of the Royal African Society 4.16 (1905): 431-433.Werner, Alice. "Note on the terms used for" right hand" and" left hand" in the Bantu languages." Journal of the Royal African Society 4.13 (1904): 112-116.Kushner, Howard I. "Why are there (almost) no left-handers in China?." Endeavour 37.2 (2013): 71-81.Barsalou, Lawrence W. "Grounded cognition." Annu. Rev. Psychol. 59 (2008): 617-645. Page on ucsd.eduCasasanto, Daniel. "Embodiment of abstract concepts: good and bad in right-and left-handers." Journal of Experimental Psychology: General 138.3 (2009): 351. Page on mpdl.mpg.deAnanthaswamy, Anil. "Bodily minds: how we think outside the brain." New Scientist 205.2753 (2010): 8-9.Casasanto, Daniel. "Different bodies, different minds the body specificity of language and thought." Current Directions in Psychological Science 20.6 (2011): 378-383. Page on mpdl.mpg.de)de la Vega, Irmgard, et al. "Emotional valence and physical space: Limits of interaction." Journal of experimental psychology: human perception and performance 38.2 (2012): 375. Page on bibliographie.uni-tuebingen.dede la Vega, Irmgard, et al. "Starting off on the right foot: strong right-footers respond faster with the right foot to positive words and with the left foot to negative words." Frontiers in psychology 6 (2015). Starting off on the right foot: strong right-footers respond faster with the right foot to positive words and with the left foot to negative wordsBrunyé, Tad T., et al. "Body-specific representations of spatial location." Cognition 123.2 (2012): 229-239. Page on tufts.eduEdinburgh Handedness Inventory) (Oldfield, Richard C. "The assessment and analysis of handedness: the Edinburgh inventory." Neuropsychologia 9.1 (1971): 97-113. Page on psy.ku.dkAnnett, Marian. Left, right, hand and brain: The right shift theory. Psychology Press, 1985.Annett, Marian. Handedness and brain asymmetry: The right shift theory. Psychology Press, 2013.Scerri, Thomas S., et al. "PCSK6 is associated with handedness in individuals with dyslexia." Human molecular genetics (2010): ddq475. PCSK6 is associated with handedness in individuals with dyslexiaMcManus, I. C. "Right‐and left‐hand skill: Failure of the right shift model." British Journal of Psychology 76.1 (1985): 1-16. Page on ucl.ac.ukTapley, S. M., and M. P. Bryden. "A group test for the assessment of performance between the hands." Neuropsychologia 23.2 (1985): 215-221.Peters, Michael, and Bruce M. Durding. "Handedness measured by finger tapping: a continuous variable." Canadian Journal of Psychology/Revue canadienne de psychologie 32.4 (1978): 257.Nicholls, Michael ER, et al. "The relationship between hand preference, hand performance, and general cognitive ability." Journal of the International Neuropsychological Society 16.04 (2010): 585-592. Page on squarespace.comCorballis, Michael C., Gjurgjica Badzakova‐Trajkov, and Isabelle S. Häberling. "Right hand, left brain: genetic and evolutionary bases of cerebral asymmetries for language and manual action." Wiley Interdisciplinary Reviews: Cognitive Science 3.1 (2012): 1-17. Page on researchgate.netTapley, S. M., and M. P. Bryden. "A group test for the assessment of performance between the hands." Neuropsychologia 23.2 (1985): 215-221.