Newsday have an article about the latest results using imaging data to judge whether people are telling the truth. The judgment is based on the observation that our brains work harder at making up a lie.

The Guardian has an interesting article about a new Swedish initiative -- the government is proposing to introduce more flexibility into the age at which children start school. Pointing out, quite rightly, that children develop at different rates, they propose that the starting age should range from 6 to 8 (it's currently 7), depending on the child's readiness. While I applaud the philosophy, there are of course some practical difficulties with this proposal; it will be interesting to see how it develops.

And while we're on the subject of education -- this time at the other end of the scale -- there's a fascinating essay in the New Yorker on the Harvard admissions policy and its history. According to this, the use of a solely merit-based admissions policy came under attack in the 1920s, when the number of Jewish students had risen to frightening (from the perspective of the Harvard administration and alumni) levels. The solution -- I love this -- was to redefine what "merit" meant. Suddenly "character" became all important (and we know what was meant by character).

But I didn't mention this essay because of that (stunning that it is). The reason I'm directing your attention to this essay is because of its discussion of treatment and selection effects. The Marines, it points out, rely mainly on the treatment effect: it's the training that makes a Marine, not the people they choose. The Ivy Leagues, it is argued, rely on the selection effect -- it's not the education people get there that's behind the high rates of success; it's because they choose people who are likely to be successful. The writer makes a compelling argument.