<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?><rss version="2.0"
	xmlns:content="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/content/"
	xmlns:wfw="http://wellformedweb.org/CommentAPI/"
	xmlns:dc="http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/"
	xmlns:atom="http://www.w3.org/2005/Atom"
	xmlns:sy="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/syndication/"
	xmlns:slash="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/slash/"
	>

<channel>
	<title>Science - Trotzendorff</title>
	<atom:link href="https://trotzendorff.de/tag/science/feed/" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml" />
	<link>https://trotzendorff.de</link>
	<description>Running over sticks and stones</description>
	<lastBuildDate>Thu, 28 May 2026 10:58:58 +0000</lastBuildDate>
	<language>en-US</language>
	<sy:updatePeriod>
	hourly	</sy:updatePeriod>
	<sy:updateFrequency>
	1	</sy:updateFrequency>
	<generator>https://wordpress.org/?v=7.0</generator>

 
<site xmlns="com-wordpress:feed-additions:1">72357874</site>	<item>
		<title>We Are Entering the Age of Plausibility Overload</title>
		<link>https://trotzendorff.de/psychology/we-are-entering-the-age-of-plausibility-overload/</link>
					<comments>https://trotzendorff.de/psychology/we-are-entering-the-age-of-plausibility-overload/#respond</comments>
		
		<dc:creator><![CDATA[Trotzendorff]]></dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Thu, 28 May 2026 10:58:58 +0000</pubDate>
				<category><![CDATA[Psychology]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Science]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[AI]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Plausibility]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Technology]]></category>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">https://trotzendorff.de/?p=53979</guid>

					<description><![CDATA[We all knew AI would eventually generate fake citations. That was almost the boring part. The more interesting question is why so many of them passed through systems designed to evaluate knowledge in the first place. A recent study audited 111 million references across 2.5 million papers and preprints. Its estimate: nearly 147,000 hallucinated citations entered scientific literature in 2025 alone, many surviving peer review and later appearing in published journal articles. The numbers are striking. But that was not the part that stayed with me. The Weak Point What stayed with me was how little friction a plausible-looking citation can encounter once a system is already operating near capacity. Science has always depended partly on trust. Organizations do, too. Peer reviewers are overloaded, researchers publish under pressure, managers skim presentations between meetings. Very few people can independently verify the assumptions behind a market forecast, an AI roadmap or a strategy paper. So credibility often gets assessed indirectly: institutional reputation, internal alignment, familiar language, confidence. Large language models fit remarkably well into environments like these. &#8230;]]></description>
		
					<wfw:commentRss>https://trotzendorff.de/psychology/we-are-entering-the-age-of-plausibility-overload/feed/</wfw:commentRss>
			<slash:comments>0</slash:comments>
		
		
		<post-id xmlns="com-wordpress:feed-additions:1">53979</post-id>	</item>
		<item>
		<title>Do the Homework Before the Hype</title>
		<link>https://trotzendorff.de/running/do-the-homework-before-the-hype/</link>
					<comments>https://trotzendorff.de/running/do-the-homework-before-the-hype/#respond</comments>
		
		<dc:creator><![CDATA[Trotzendorff]]></dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Thu, 05 Feb 2026 09:50:03 +0000</pubDate>
				<category><![CDATA[Running]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Technology]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[AI]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Algorithms]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Data]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Gadgets]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Science]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Statistics]]></category>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">https://trotzendorff.de/?p=53803</guid>

					<description><![CDATA[There’s something mildly absurd about modern running tech. Every brand talks about AI now. Smart coaching, predictive training plans, readiness scores, recovery scores, stress scores, you name it. My watch apparently knows my future. It just doesn’t know what happened five minutes ago. Take heart rate. I run with a chest strap or the wrist sensor, doesn’t matter. Every now and then the data goes completely off the rails. Suddenly my pulse jumps to 190 while I’m jogging easy, stays there for three minutes, then drops back like nothing happened. No hill, no sprint, no drama. Just noise. Same with GPS. Clean route along the river, then one glitch and the track cuts straight through buildings like I teleported. The device shrugs and saves it as truth. I can live with imperfect sensors. Sweat, movement, bad satellite reception — physics is messy. What I don’t get is why all that so-called intelligence doesn’t clean up the mess afterwards. Because statistically speaking, this is the easy part. Outliers are not some exotic phenomenon. They’re textbook stuff. &#8230;]]></description>
		
					<wfw:commentRss>https://trotzendorff.de/running/do-the-homework-before-the-hype/feed/</wfw:commentRss>
			<slash:comments>0</slash:comments>
		
		
		<post-id xmlns="com-wordpress:feed-additions:1">53803</post-id>	</item>
		<item>
		<title>Two Truths and no Lie: Why Business Mantras Are a Beautiful Illusion</title>
		<link>https://trotzendorff.de/psychology/two-truths-and-no-lie-why-business-mantras-are-a-beautiful-illusion/</link>
					<comments>https://trotzendorff.de/psychology/two-truths-and-no-lie-why-business-mantras-are-a-beautiful-illusion/#respond</comments>
		
		<dc:creator><![CDATA[Trotzendorff]]></dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Sun, 11 May 2025 12:38:20 +0000</pubDate>
				<category><![CDATA[Psychology]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Workplace]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Business]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Science]]></category>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">https://trotzendorff.de/?p=53617</guid>

					<description><![CDATA[You’re in a meeting. A big, bold, slightly terrifying opportunity lands on the table. You’re not fully prepared. Your team’s maxed out. Your to-do list? A crime scene. And your gut? Screaming maybe. One voice inside says: «Say yes before you’re ready.» Another whispers: «The difference between successful people and very successful people is that very successful people say no to almost everything.» Welcome to the paradox of business advice. For every punchy quote, for example on LinkedIn, there’s an equally viral one saying the opposite: «Move fast and break things.» vs «Slow is smooth, smooth is fast.» «Be authentic.» vs «Fake it till you make it.» «Never take no for an answer.» vs «Know when to walk away.» «Done is better than perfect.» vs «Whatever you do, do it well.» None of them are wrong. But none of them are always right. Nonetheless, we love these quotes because they sound like shortcuts. They give us the comforting illusion that complex decisions can be solved with a single line of text. But that’s misleading. Context &#8230;]]></description>
		
					<wfw:commentRss>https://trotzendorff.de/psychology/two-truths-and-no-lie-why-business-mantras-are-a-beautiful-illusion/feed/</wfw:commentRss>
			<slash:comments>0</slash:comments>
		
		
		<post-id xmlns="com-wordpress:feed-additions:1">53617</post-id>	</item>
		<item>
		<title>The «Real Men» Dilemma: Why Leaders Struggle to Say «I Don’t Know»</title>
		<link>https://trotzendorff.de/psychology/the-real-men-dilemma-why-leaders-struggle-to-say-i-dont-know/</link>
					<comments>https://trotzendorff.de/psychology/the-real-men-dilemma-why-leaders-struggle-to-say-i-dont-know/#respond</comments>
		
		<dc:creator><![CDATA[Trotzendorff]]></dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Thu, 24 Apr 2025 16:44:35 +0000</pubDate>
				<category><![CDATA[Psychology]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Workplace]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Leadership]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Masculinity]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Science]]></category>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">https://trotzendorff.de/?p=53614</guid>

					<description><![CDATA[Leadership has long been entwined with traditional masculine norms. The ideal leader is often seen as decisive, strong, in control, and emotionally stoic – traits stereotypically coded as male. In fact, classic research found people implicitly associate leadership with being male («think manager, think male»). Many organizations still operate like a «masculinity contest» culture. Some core unwritten rules of this old-school masculine code include: Never show weakness. Admitting doubt or mistakes is off-limits – a «real man» always projects swaggering confidence. Always be in control. Losing or appearing uncertain isn’t an option; one must win and be right at all costs. Avoid «feminine» traits. Traits like empathy, openness, or vulnerability are seen as unmanly; one must embody only traditionally masculine qualities. Never ask for help. Seeking support is seen as a sign of incompetence – a competent male leader should be self-reliant. Underlying these norms is the idea that masculinity is something to prove and protect. Researchers note that manhood is often viewed as a precarious social status – one that must be earned repeatedly &#8230;]]></description>
		
					<wfw:commentRss>https://trotzendorff.de/psychology/the-real-men-dilemma-why-leaders-struggle-to-say-i-dont-know/feed/</wfw:commentRss>
			<slash:comments>0</slash:comments>
		
		
		<post-id xmlns="com-wordpress:feed-additions:1">53614</post-id>	</item>
		<item>
		<title>Inequality is a Choice—And We Keep Making the Wrong One</title>
		<link>https://trotzendorff.de/psychology/inequality-is-a-choice-and-we-keep-making-the-wrong-one/</link>
					<comments>https://trotzendorff.de/psychology/inequality-is-a-choice-and-we-keep-making-the-wrong-one/#respond</comments>
		
		<dc:creator><![CDATA[Trotzendorff]]></dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Mon, 03 Feb 2025 17:18:57 +0000</pubDate>
				<category><![CDATA[Psychology]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Science]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Equality]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Politics]]></category>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">https://trotzendorff.de/?p=53611</guid>

					<description><![CDATA[In three weeks, Germany will vote. When I decide where to place my vote, one thing matters most: Which party represents a vision of society that acknowledges a fundamental truth—who we become is largely shaped by circumstances beyond our control. Our intelligence, resilience, and talents may feel personal, but they are, to a significant extent, the result of factors we never chose: our genetics, the quality of our education, the financial security of our parents, the country we were born in. Even our ability to work hard and persevere is shaped by early childhood experiences and social conditioning. Yet, political debates still treat success as if it were primarily a matter of individual merit. Those who thrive are seen as deserving, while those who struggle are often met with suspicion. Policies reinforce this bias: When it comes to the successful, we talk about investments and incentives. When it comes to those facing hardship—whether they are migrants, low-income workers, or people who grew up in difficult circumstances—we talk about restrictions, obligations, and sanctions. ✋ This isn’t &#8230;]]></description>
		
					<wfw:commentRss>https://trotzendorff.de/psychology/inequality-is-a-choice-and-we-keep-making-the-wrong-one/feed/</wfw:commentRss>
			<slash:comments>0</slash:comments>
		
		
		<post-id xmlns="com-wordpress:feed-additions:1">53611</post-id>	</item>
		<item>
		<title>«A simple act can save your life»</title>
		<link>https://trotzendorff.de/running/a-simple-act-can-save-your-life/</link>
					<comments>https://trotzendorff.de/running/a-simple-act-can-save-your-life/#respond</comments>
		
		<dc:creator><![CDATA[Trotzendorff]]></dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Tue, 13 Aug 2024 06:15:53 +0000</pubDate>
				<category><![CDATA[Running]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Health]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Science]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Skincancer]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Spot the Dot]]></category>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">https://trotzendorff.de/?p=53393</guid>

					<description><![CDATA[Skin cancer is an underrated but life-threatening danger that can hit anyone—no matter your age, gender, or skin color. As someone at risk, I’m especially committed to raising awareness about this disease. That’s why I’ve been supporting the «Spot the Dot» initiative for a while now. It shines a light on skin cancer through events, collaborations, or exhibitions. I recently talked with Marije, the founder of Spot the Dot, about her personal experience with skin cancer, the challenges she faced starting the initiative, cultural differences in how skin cancer is perceived, and the creative ways she’s bringing attention to the issue. Our conversation highlights just how crucial it is to take skin cancer seriously and how we can all play a part in prevention. Trotzendorff: Spot the Dot was founded, because a physiotherapist friend noticed a tiny spot that led to your own melanoma diagnosis. How did that experience shape your perspective on healthcare professionals beyond dermatologists in the fight against skin cancer? Marije: It is true, I was having a coffee with a friend; &#8230;]]></description>
		
					<wfw:commentRss>https://trotzendorff.de/running/a-simple-act-can-save-your-life/feed/</wfw:commentRss>
			<slash:comments>0</slash:comments>
		
		
		<post-id xmlns="com-wordpress:feed-additions:1">53393</post-id>	</item>
		<item>
		<title>Into the quiet corners of everyday life</title>
		<link>https://trotzendorff.de/psychology/into-the-quiet-corners-of-everyday-life/</link>
					<comments>https://trotzendorff.de/psychology/into-the-quiet-corners-of-everyday-life/#respond</comments>
		
		<dc:creator><![CDATA[Trotzendorff]]></dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Wed, 17 Apr 2024 17:50:30 +0000</pubDate>
				<category><![CDATA[Psychology]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Workplace]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Carreer]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Science]]></category>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">https://trotzendorff.de/?p=53605</guid>

					<description><![CDATA[For twenty years, my identity was intertwined with my profession as a journalist—a career that, by its very nature, thrusts you into the spotlight. I embraced this public role wholeheartedly, not just as an individual or a journalist, but as what we called a personal brand. This approach felt not only natural but necessary. Yet, over time, a growing realization dawned on me: perhaps I wasn’t as professional in my journalistic role as I had believed. Journalism, at its core, demands objectivity and detachment. Hanns Joachim Friedrichs, a stalwart of German news broadcasting, famously said that a good journalist «does not ally themselves with a cause, not even a good one.» This principle was one I inadvertently challenged throughout my career. My deep interest in people, their stories, and their causes led me to form connections that, in hindsight, have clouded my journalistic integrity. I wasn’t just covering stories—I was sometimes becoming a part of them. Ironically, this perceived flaw in my journalistic pursuits has unveiled itself as a significant strength in my new path &#8230;]]></description>
		
					<wfw:commentRss>https://trotzendorff.de/psychology/into-the-quiet-corners-of-everyday-life/feed/</wfw:commentRss>
			<slash:comments>0</slash:comments>
		
		
		<post-id xmlns="com-wordpress:feed-additions:1">53605</post-id>	</item>
		<item>
		<title>Why You Get the «Sunday Scaries» and What You Can Do About It</title>
		<link>https://trotzendorff.de/psychology/why-you-get-the-sunday-scaries-and-what-you-can-do-about-it/</link>
					<comments>https://trotzendorff.de/psychology/why-you-get-the-sunday-scaries-and-what-you-can-do-about-it/#respond</comments>
		
		<dc:creator><![CDATA[Trotzendorff]]></dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Sun, 09 Jul 2023 15:17:16 +0000</pubDate>
				<category><![CDATA[Psychology]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Workplace]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Science]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Stress]]></category>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">https://trotzendorff.de/?p=53596</guid>

					<description><![CDATA[Are you already thinking about tomorrow’s Monday today? With worry, perhaps? Even with fear? If so, you’re not alone. But why do we dread Monday so much? And what can we do about it? Firstly, let’s look at some numbers. A British study by the Office for Health Improvement and Disparities found that 67 percent of all Britons are already afraid of Monday on Sundays. In February, Fortune magazine reported that one in two managers are affected by this fear, although not every week. And according to ABC’s «Good Morning America», the fear of Mondays was at an all-time high in 2021, with 78 percent of millennials and Gen-Xers affected. The phenomenon, known as the «Sunday scaries» or sometimes «Sunday blues», was first mentioned in the Urban Dictionary in 2009. And it’s far from trivial, as a look at its symptoms reveals: a racing heart rate, irritability, restlessness, looming negative thoughts, upset stomach, headache, or sweating. However, it’s important to note that this is not a clinical diagnosis of an anxiety disorder. Interestingly, the Sunday &#8230;]]></description>
		
					<wfw:commentRss>https://trotzendorff.de/psychology/why-you-get-the-sunday-scaries-and-what-you-can-do-about-it/feed/</wfw:commentRss>
			<slash:comments>0</slash:comments>
		
		
		<post-id xmlns="com-wordpress:feed-additions:1">53596</post-id>	</item>
		<item>
		<title>Why Emotional Intelligence Doesn’t Exist — Or Does It?</title>
		<link>https://trotzendorff.de/psychology/why-emotional-intelligence-doesnt-exist-or-does-it/</link>
					<comments>https://trotzendorff.de/psychology/why-emotional-intelligence-doesnt-exist-or-does-it/#respond</comments>
		
		<dc:creator><![CDATA[Trotzendorff]]></dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Mon, 08 May 2023 18:17:35 +0000</pubDate>
				<category><![CDATA[Psychology]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Science]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Emotions]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Intelligence]]></category>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">https://trotzendorff.de/?p=53588</guid>

					<description><![CDATA[In a 2015 survey, 72 percent of employees ranked «respectful treatment of all employees at all levels» as the top factor in job satisfaction. That’s no big surprise, but what exactly does it mean for organizations and managers? One simple answer could be: hire more employees with a high Emotional Intelligence Quotient (EQ), enabling them to understand and manage their own and others’ emotions. However, measuring EQ is not as straightforward as it may seem, and the concept of Emotional Intelligence itself has been subject to scientific scrutiny and criticism. Daniel Goleman’s book, «Emotional Intelligence,» skyrocketed to fame in the 90s, claiming a direct correlation between Emotional Intelligence (EI) and professional success and stating that EI was more crucial to success than IQ – despite a lack of empirical evidence to support this relationship. And as alluring as the concept may be, the science behind it has been under scrutiny for years. The sheer amount of skills and competencies that Goleman groups together under Emotional Intelligence raises eyebrows: Emotional self-awareness — being aware of one’s &#8230;]]></description>
		
					<wfw:commentRss>https://trotzendorff.de/psychology/why-emotional-intelligence-doesnt-exist-or-does-it/feed/</wfw:commentRss>
			<slash:comments>0</slash:comments>
		
		
		<post-id xmlns="com-wordpress:feed-additions:1">53588</post-id>	</item>
		<item>
		<title>The Mystery of Statistica: What the Owl Can Tell Us About an Enigmatic Paradox</title>
		<link>https://trotzendorff.de/psychology/the-mystery-of-statistica-what-the-owl-can-tell-us-about-an-enigmatic-paradox/</link>
					<comments>https://trotzendorff.de/psychology/the-mystery-of-statistica-what-the-owl-can-tell-us-about-an-enigmatic-paradox/#respond</comments>
		
		<dc:creator><![CDATA[Trotzendorff]]></dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Wed, 03 May 2023 17:48:21 +0000</pubDate>
				<category><![CDATA[Psychology]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Science]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Statistics]]></category>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">https://trotzendorff.de/?p=53580</guid>

					<description><![CDATA[Once upon a time in the enchanting land of Statistica, there were two groups of animals: the Crows and the Foxes. The animals in this land were known for their exceptional skills in playing two very popular games: Featherball and Furball. The Crows and Foxes loved to compete against each other, and every year, they would gather to participate in the Grand Statistica Tournament. One year, the wise old Owl, who was in charge of keeping the records of the games, announced something unusual. When he looked at the results of each game individually, the Crows seemed to be better at playing both Featherball and Furball. But when he combined the results of both games, it appeared that the Foxes were actually better players overall. The animals were all very confused by this strange occurrence, so they decided to ask the wise old Owl to explain what was going on. Owl, known for his storytelling skills, decided to teach them about the mysterious phenomenon known as the Simpson’s Paradox. «Dear friends,» began the wise old &#8230;]]></description>
		
					<wfw:commentRss>https://trotzendorff.de/psychology/the-mystery-of-statistica-what-the-owl-can-tell-us-about-an-enigmatic-paradox/feed/</wfw:commentRss>
			<slash:comments>0</slash:comments>
		
		
		<post-id xmlns="com-wordpress:feed-additions:1">53580</post-id>	</item>
	</channel>
</rss>
