![amastriano6192](/avatars/47690.jpg)
amastriano6192
28.01.2021 •
English
could y’all drop y’all’s insta ? so y’all can help me to get my working . I still don’t know . I’m on (mobile btw )
Solved
Show answers
More tips
- C Computers and Internet The Twitter Phenomenon: What it is and How to Use it...
- C Computers and Internet How to Choose a Laptop: Expert Guide and Tips...
- C Computers and Internet How to Choose a Monitor?...
- H Horoscopes, Magic, Divination Where Did Tarot Cards Come From?...
- S Style and Beauty How to Make Your Lips Fuller? Ideas and Tips for Beautiful Lips...
- C Computers and Internet How to Learn to Type Fast?...
- A Art and Culture Who Said The Less We Love a Woman, the More She Likes Us ?...
- F Family and Home How to Get Rid of Your Neighbors?...
- S Society and Politics How Could Nobody Know About the Dead Mountaineers?...
Answers on questions: English
- E English What is the main idea of Hope Despair and Memory by Elie Weisel...
- S Social Studies When a person unwittingly mimics another person s expressions and feels the other person s emotions they are engaged in automatic...
- M Mathematics PLEASE ITS ABT RATIOS ANSWER THE PICTURE PLZ...
- M Mathematics If f(x) = 4x - 11, what is the value of f(5)?...
Ответ:
eived the voice messages accurately gleaned the sarcasm (or lack thereof) 73 percent of the time, but those who received the statements via e-mail did so only 56 percent of the time, hardly better than chance. By comparison, the e-mailers had anticipated that 78 percent of participants would pick up on the sarcasm inherent in their sarcastic statements. That is, they badly overestimated their ability to communicate the tenor of their sarcastic statements via e-mail. What’s more, the recipients of the sarcastic e-mails were also decidedly overconfident. They guessed they would correctly interpret the tone of the e-mails they received about 90 percent of the time. They were considerably less overconfident about their ability to interpret voice messages.
In recent research, my colleagues and I discovered an upside to this otherwise gloomy picture of sarcasm. In one study, we assigned some participants to engage in either simulated sarcastic, sincere, or neutral dialogues by choosing from pre-written responses on a sheet of paper. Others were recipients of these different types of messages from others. Immediately after participants engaged in these “conversations,” we presented them with tasks testing their creativity. Not surprisingly, the participants exposed to sarcasm reported more interpersonal conflict than those in other groups. More interestingly, those who engaged in a sarcastic conversation fared better on creativity tasks. The processes involved in initiating and delivering a sarcastic comment improved the creativity and cognitive functioning of both the commenter and the recipient. This creativity effect only emerged when recipients picked up on the sarcasm behind the expresser’s message rather than taking mean comments at face value.
Why might sarcasm enhance creativity? Because the brain must think creatively to understand or convey a sarcastic comment, sarcasm may lead to clearer and more creative thinking. To either create or understand sarcasm, tone must overcome the contradiction between the literal and actual meanings of the sarcastic expressions. This is a process that activates, and is facilitated by, abstraction, which in turn promotes creative thinking. Consider the following example, which comes from a conversation one of my co-authors on the research (Adam Galinsky, of Columbia) had a few weeks before getting married. His fiancée woke him up as he was soundly asleep at night to tell him about some new ideas she has for their upcoming wedding next month –many of which were quite expensive. Adam responded with some ideas of his own: “Why don’t we get Paul McCartney to sing, Barack Obama to give a benediction and Amy Schumer to entertain people.” His comment required his fiancée to recognize that there is a distinction between the surface level
Explanation:
Ответ:
d is correct
Explanation: