Despite Drop in Gas Prices, College Students Still Feeling Pinch

By ANDREW CLARK

When gas prices climbed to $4.10 this summer, Old Dominion University student Azam Shafiee knew she had to make a few changes.

Students walk at the campus of Texas Southern University in Houston. Students across the country say they have been walking and taking public transportation to cut down on fuel costs.

(Pat Sullivan/AP Photo)

She drove less. Instead of commuting 25 minutes to work, she found a new job just 10 minutes away from the Norfolk, Va., campus.

"I walk around a lot more," she wrote in an e-mail.

College students are arguably the group most sensitive to swings in gasoline prices and the quickest to adjust. So how has the dorm set reacted as the price at the pump surged then declined somewhat to a $3.64 national average?

They're finding inventive ways to spend less time behind the wheel, and university administrators are finding creative ways to assist them.

Just like the rest of Americans, students are mulling whether to use public transportation. Nationwide, ridership has been on an upswing. This year, public transportation ridership soared to over 2.8 billion trips in the second quarter of 2008 – an increase of about 140 million rides compared with trips taken in 2007, according to the American Public Transportation Association (APTA). Of these riders, some 10.7 percent of public transit riders are students, according to a May 2007 study by the APTA.

But it's not always easy to make the switch.

"Many people tell me to take the subway to school or work in order to save money on gas," says Cara Lipper, a senior at the University of Massachusetts, Boston.

But the closest train station is a 15-minute drive from her house and a 20-minute commute on the train, she says, compared with a 20-minute drive into Boston.

Instead, she's looked into buying a hybrid car.

"Also, I carpool more than I used to," she wrote in an e-mail. "I will use public transportation to go to some places, even though I hate it. And I go for joyrides far less often."

High fuel prices actually cause Aram Pashaian to drive more. The student at the University of Nevada, who already spends an average $54 to fill his tank every six days, says he often drives around Las Vegas looking for the lowest gas prices. He notices the squeeze.

"At the end of the year it adds up," Mr. Pashaian wrote in an e-mail.

Campuses have also seen a shift in students' commuting behaviors. At Michigan State University, cars in the university's commuter parking lot have declined 25 percent to 1,661 vehicles in the past year, according to the campus police. And biking to campus has also picked up speed among students. During July and August, students registered 2,346 bikes – an increase from the 858 bikes registered during the same months in 2003, the police said.

Campuses are also taking steps to ease students' financial constraints by offering alternative transportation options.

The University of Houston has increased parking and invested in newer, larger buses. Rachel Rollins, a student there, says she has noticed that more students are opting to carpool in an area where alternative modes of transportation are admittedly limited.

She tries to walk and carpool with friends but says she doesn't worry much: "My car is very economical in its use of gas, so it isn't as big a problem.... It would take at least two buses for anyone to get remotely close to our campus."

Middlebury College, in Vermont, is one school that has joined with Zipcar, a car rental service, to serve students. Zipcar helps students cope with high gas prices by including the cost of gas, insurance, and parking in the rental fee. Currently, more than 70 schools provide the service, according to Zipcar.

Elissa Bullion, a student at Middlebury College, is considering signing up for Zipcar because of the advantages it offers. Although she often walks to get around campus and into town she says she likes "to leave Middlebury every once in a while."

But finding a car to borrow is a common obstacle she and other students encounter. So she sees Zipcar as a potential solution.

"Zipcar gives students access to a car, without having to deal with such stress. And because you only have to pay an hourly rate, and not for gas, it is also potentially cheaper," Bullion wrote in an e-mail.

Original here

Paying for gyms for obese children

SEOUL (Reuters) - South Korea plans to help obese children pay for health club membership and other activities that can help them lose weight, an official said on Wednesday.

Health ministry official Chun Myung-sook said the rate of childhood obesity had tripled over the past three years due to a changing diet higher in fatty foods and a more sedentary lifestyle.

Under the government plan, elementary school students whose body mass index indicates obesity will be able to receive up to 40,000 won ($33.58) a month to help them bring their weight down.

"Kids won't be able to waste the money on eating sweets. We will give them electronic vouchers that can only be used in designated places," Chun said.

Costs to the government and the economy related to childhood obesity were 2 trillion won in 2006, the ministry said, making the voucher program cost effective.

(Reporting by Kim Junghyun and Jon Herskovitz; Editing by Jonathan Hopfner)

Original here

How to Improve Your Self-Control

"It's all right letting yourself go, as long as you can get yourself back." ~Mick Jagger

New research suggests self-control can be improved using abstract reasoning.

Temptation comes in many forms, often so potent, so animal, that it seems impossible to resist. Eating too much, drinking too much, spending too much or letting the heart rule the head. We get instant messages from deep in the gut that resonate through the mind, trying to dictate our behaviour.

One of humanity's most useful skills, without which advanced civilisations would not exist, is being able to engage our higher cognitive functions, our self-control, to resist these temptations. Psychologists have found that self-control is strongly associated with what we label success: higher self-esteem, better interpersonal skills, better emotional responses and, perhaps surprisingly, few drawbacks at even very high levels of self-control (Tangney et al., 2004).

People, being only human, find the constant battle with basic urges is frequently too great and their self-control buckles. However, recent experimental research by Dr Kentaro Fujita at Ohio State University and colleagues has explored ways of improving self-control, where it comes from and why it sometimes deserts us.

Based on new research, along with studies conducted over the past few decades, Dr Fujita and colleagues have proposed that abstract thinking and psychological distance are particularly important in self-control.

1. Evidence that abstract thinking improves self-control

It never ceases to amaze just how different two people's views of exactly the same event can be: one person's freedom fighter is another's terrorist. But the way in which we view people or events isn't just constrained by unchangeable patterns of thought that are set in stone. Dr Fujita and colleagues explored the idea that simple manipulations of how we construe the world can have a direct effect on self-control. Their hunch was that thinking from a more abstract, high-level perspective increases self-control.

In their research, published in the Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, Fujita et al. (2006) used a number of experiments to test the idea that self-control is affected by how we construe or interpret events. The problem for the researchers was manipulating aspects of people's construal without them realising: this required some deception.

In one of Fujita et al.'s (2006) studies participants were told they were going to take part in two separate experiments - one on personality and another billed as a student survey. In fact this was just a cover story as the two pieces of research were designed to work together.

Experimenters used the 'student survey' as a cover to manipulate levels of construal. They needed participants to be thinking in either a high-level way (abstract - seeing the whole forest) or a low-level way (concrete - seeing individual trees). They did this by getting participants to think about their level of physical health, but in two different ways:

• High-level construal condition: participants were asked to fill in a diagram which encouraged them to think about why they maintain good physical health. Participants tended to put answer such as: "To do well in school." This got them thinking about ends rather than means - the ultimate purpose of physical health.
• Low-level construal condition: in contrast participants in this condition were asked to think about how they maintained their physical health. Naturally they responded with things like: "Go exercise". In other words they focused on means rather than ends, the actual process.

Just before this manipulation of construal level, in a study they were misinformed was separate, participants were told their personality was being tested physiologically through holding a handgrip. This handgrip was designed to be difficult to squeeze together but participants were told to hold on as long as possible. This provided a baseline measurement of their grip strength.

Just after the manipulation of construal level participants had dummy electrodes attached to their arm and were told that their personality could be measured while they squeezed the stiff handgrip again. This time, though, they were told that the longer they could squeeze the handgrip the more accurate the information would be. The question was: how well could participants forget the temporary discomfort of holding the handgrip once they had been told about the desired goal of getting information about their own personalities?

The results confirmed Fujita et al.'s (2006) suspicions. They showed that participants in the low-construal thinking condition (thinking about means rather than ends) held on to the handgrip for, on average, 4.9 seconds less than they had during the baseline measurement.

In contrast those in the high-construal condition held on for 11.1 seconds longer than their baseline measurement. Whether participants were thinking about means or ends had a really significant effect on how long they squeezed the handgrip. Those participants who had been encouraged to think in high-level, abstract terms demonstrated greater self-control in enduring the discomfort of the handgrip in order to receive more accurate personality profiles.

Along with this design Fujita et al. (2006) also carried out other studies using different measures of self-control and different ways of inducing either high-level or low-level construal. These produced similar findings. People in the high-level construal condition were consistently:

• More likely to avoid the temptation of instant gratification.
• Prepared to make a greater investment to learn more about their health status.
• Less likely to evaluate temptations like beer and television positively.

2. How personality and the situation affect self-control

Self-control is not just affected by how we are thinking at a specific moment, that would be too easy. We have each developed different amounts of self-control. Some people seem to find it easy to resist temptation while others can be relied on to always yield to self-gratification. To a certain extent we have to accept our starting point on the self-control sliding scale and do the best we can with it.

Although a few people have very high (or very low) levels of self-control, two-thirds of us lie somewhere near the middle: sometimes finding it easy to resist temptation, other times not. Naturally the exact situation has a huge effect on how much self-control we can exert. One property of different situations central to self-control that psychologists have examined is 'psychological distance'.

Research reveals that people find it much easier to make decisions that demonstrate self-control when they are thinking about events that are distant in time, for example how much exercise they will do next week or what they will eat tomorrow (Fujita, 2008). Similarly they make much more disciplined decisions on behalf of other people than they do for themselves. People implicitly follow the maxim: do what I say, not what I do.

It's not hard to see the convergence between the idea of 'psychological distance' and high-level construal. Both emphasise the idea that the more psychological or conceptual distance we can put between ourselves and the particular decision or event, the more we are able to think about it in an abstract way, and therefore the more self-control we can exert. It's all about developing a special type of objectivity.

3. How to improve your self-control

Fujita et al.'s (2006) studies, along with other similar findings reported by Fujita (2008), suggest that self-control can be increased by these related ways of thinking:

• Global processing. This means trying to focus on the wood rather than the trees: seeing the big picture and our specific actions as just one part of a major plan or purpose. For example, someone trying to eat healthily should focus on the ultimate goal and how each individual decision about what to eat contributes (or detracts) from that goal.
• Abstract reasoning. This means trying to avoid considering the specific details of the situation at hand in favour of thinking about how actions fit into an overall framework - being philosophical. Someone trying to add more self-control to their exercise regime might try to think less about the details of the exercise, and instead focus on an abstract vision of the ideal physical self, or how exercise provides a time to re-connect mind and body.
• High-level categorisation. This means thinking about high-level concepts rather than specific instances. Any long-term project, whether in business, academia or elsewhere can easily get bogged down by focusing too much on the minutiae of everyday processes and forgetting the ultimate goal. Categorising tasks or project stages conceptually may help an individual or group maintain their focus and achieve greater self-discipline.

These are just some examples of specific instances, but with a little creativity the same principles can be applied to many situations in which self-control is required. Ultimately these three ways of thinking are different ways of saying much the same thing: avoid thinking locally and specifically and practice thinking globally, objectively and abstractly, and increased self-control should follow.

Original here