Character Design Development

I studied the body language cues of Ted Lasso to find out why everyone loves him so much. Here are his 6 cues likeability cues that anyone can learn: 1. Dynamic hand gestures Ted often keeps his hands in his pockets, but when he brings them out, every movement has purpose. For example, if he wants to say three, he’ll show 3 fingers. So, when you speak, don’t be afraid to use your hands. Just ensure every gesture helps emphasize what you’re saying. 2. Animated facial expressions Ted never hides his emotions. He smiles, frowns, crinkles his eyes, and reacts with his whole face. That’s part of why we love watching him. His expressions make us feel what he feels. Too many people “play it cool” or go stoic in conversations. But we love expressive faces! So show what you feel because your face is your most powerful communication tool. 3. The “Up Face” This is one of my favorite cues. Most people listen with what I call a down face: relaxed muscles, heavy eyelids, a slightly down-turned mouth. It signals boredom or low energy, even when we don’t mean it. Ted, on the other hand, listens with an up face: raised eyebrows, eyes open, mouth lifted. He literally looks up when he listens, and it makes people feel like their ideas matter. Try this the next time you’re in a meeting or deep conversation. Raise your eyebrows slightly, keep your face open, and see how much more engaged people become. 4. The eyebrow raise Ted often uses a single eyebrow lift to say, “Really?”, “Tell me more.”, or “Hmm, that’s interesting.” It’s one of the most effortless ways to show curiosity. A tiny facial cue like that can invite someone to share more. 5. Vocalized listening Ted listens loudly. You’ll hear him say “Mmm,” “Ah,” or “Wow.” These little sounds might seem small, but they’re powerful. We love vocalizations because we can literally hear that someone is listening to us. So instead of silent nodding, try letting people hear your engagement. A simple “Got it,” “Wow,” or “I see” tells them, "I'm with you.” 6. Touch moments Ted loves connection through touch: high-fives, fist bumps, shoulder pats. These small, friendly gestures build instant rapport and show warmth. When appropriate, try adding light touches: a quick handshake, a pat on the back, a fist bump goodbye. Next time you walk into a room…harness your inner Ted Lasso.

That day, a student asked me: “Nelly, do I need citations if the argument comes from my own thinking?” She was not the only one. As she raised that question, other students had nodded, showing their same concerns. For as long as I can remember during my teaching career, it is one of the most common questions I often receive, and my answer is always the same: “Would your argument stand on its own without them? Moreover, how can you be sure your ideas align with established knowledge?” Here is how I explain the power of citations to my students: 1. Citations are bridges to expertise I often tell them that reading a journal or other academic source is like talking to an expert- a precious moment we need to appreciate. However, we meet them in their writing rather than asking them questions in person. Having a citation is an important process; we are not just voicing an opinion but joining a scholarly conversation. Think of citations as a way to consult experts indirectly. Their research becomes our foundation, lending our ideas credibility and anchoring them in evidence rather than speculation. 2. They turn claims into evidence Even if our argument sounds logical, it risks coming across as an unsupported opinion without citations. Citations function like witnesses in a trial, strengthening our case with authoritative backing. Supporting our argument with citations sets academic writing apart from everyday opinion: it is built on verifiable knowledge, not intuition. 3. Citations show we are part of a dialogue Referencing is not just about borrowing ideas but engaging with them. Citing shows that we have read, questioned, and built upon existing work. As the saying goes, “Writers do not write in vacuums; we stand on the shoulders of giants.” No original idea emerges without influence. When a source sparks your thinking, that intellectual debt must be acknowledged. It is not only respectful—it is essential. It's their intellectual property that we are "borrowing". After all, we cannot just “borrow” someone’s work without permission or credit. That is plagiarism. As the day faded before our eyes and before I dismissed the class, I reminded them again: Citations do not undermine our originality—they strengthen it. They validate our reasoning, position our voice within a larger discourse, and elevate our work by showing that our ideas are rooted in rigorous, informed, scholarly thinking. That day may be one of those days when I have repeated the mantra, more than I usually do: Citations confirm, clarify, and strengthen. As they get ready to move on to another class, I take a moment to gently remind them: "You're not writing alone—you’re in dialogue with knowledge." NMA Written in Tāmaki Makarau, 15/5/2024 Shared on LinkedIn on 16/5/2025

Do newborn babies really smile? Newborn babies (0–28 days old) can display smiling faces that often look surprisingly expressive and even "complex" in videos — wide grins, cheek raises, sometimes with eye crinkling — but these are not signs of fully developed, conscious complex emotions like joy, amusement, contentment, or love in the adult sense. Developmental psychology and recent studies distinguish two main types of early smiles: 1. Reflexive / Endogenous Smiles (Common in Newborns) These are the smiles most newborns show in the first weeks: Often occur during sleep (especially active/REM sleep), when passing gas, after feeding, during transitions to drowsiness, or randomly due to immature nervous system activity. They are automatic facial muscle movements — similar to other newborn reflexes (like grasping or startling) — as the brain and facial nerves "test" coordination and build neural pathways. Typically brief, closed-mouth or subtle, and lack strong social context or prolonged eye contact. They appear from birth (and even in utero via ultrasound from ~23 weeks gestation), including in blind newborns, showing they're innate rather than learned. Not tied to understanding or feeling rich emotions; more physiological than psychological. Many classic sources (pediatric guidelines, textbooks) still describe newborn awake smiles as mostly reflexive, not emotional. 2. Early "Social" or Awake Smiles (Emerging Very Early in Some Cases) More recent research (from the late 2010s onward, including micro-analytic studies of facial movements) has challenged the strict "just a reflex" view: Newborns sometimes smile while awake, especially during gentle interaction (skin-to-skin, soft voices, eye contact, or touch). These can look more like adult Duchenne smiles (involving cheek raise + eye crinkling), occur twice as often in interactive awake states vs. sleep, and may include preparatory brow/cheek movements as if focusing on a caregiver's face. Some studies suggest these early awake smiles can have social meaning from the start — babies smile more after positive interactions, imitate adult smiles within hours/days of birth, and show open-mouth configurations more during wakeful communicative moments. This implies newborns may have rudimentary capacity for positive affective states and basic social responsiveness far earlier than once thought — though still very limited compared to later months. Even so, these are not equivalent to the full social smiles that appear reliably around 6–12 weeks (often cited as 2 months): True social smiles are longer-lasting, involve eye contact + brightening of the whole face, occur consistently in response to familiar faces/voices/play, and signal intentional communication ("I see you and feel good about it!"). This marks the real start of social-emotional bonding, early "conversation," and clearer positive emotion signaling. Genuine laughter/giggling usually starts ~4–6 months. Video: TikTok

Please don't fake citations. Remember that peer reviewers have Google scholar too 😅 In my early-career days, referencing felt like the most tedious part of the job. Here I give you my 6 essential tips to get it right: 1️⃣ Use a reference manager Stop copying and pasting manually. Tools like Zotero, EndNote, and Mendeley can save time and reduce errors. 2️⃣ Keep your references updated Cite the most recent and relevant studies especially in fast-evolving fields like oncology. 3️⃣ Don’t over-reference Don't use more than 3 solid references for a single statement. Over-referencing weakens the impact and adds clutter. 4️⃣ Cite original research Avoid citing reviews unless you’re summarizing a broad concept. Always trace back to the primary source of a finding. 5️⃣ Be consistent with style Follow the journal or institutional style guide (APA, Vancouver, etc.) meticulously. This reflects your attention to detail. 6️⃣ Know what NOT to cite Avoid predatory journals, obscure websites, or Wikipedia. Your citations reflect the credibility of your work. What other tips do you wish someone had told you earlier? Share them below in the comments 👇 #AcademicWriting #ResearchTips #PhDlife #Research #ResearchersToolbox #academia #ScientificWriting

Lip Corner Puller vs. Sharp Lip Puller And how to tell them apart We refer to almost every lifted lip corner expression as a "smile." However, there are multiple facial muscles that elevate our lip corners. To name a couple, we have: 🔹 zygomaticus major (the big player) - described in anatomy textbooks as moving the lip corners up and outwards 🔹 levator anguli oris (still cool, but doesn't get the recognition it deserves) - described in anatomy textbooks as moving the lip corners upward The Facial Action Coding System (FACS), refers to the actions of these muscles as: 🔹 lip corner puller - marked by the contraction of zygomaticus major & 🔹 sharp lip puller (formerly known as cheek puffer) - marked by the contraction of levator anguli oris Artists and FACS coders, not surprisingly, confuse these two movements. They can be such a pain to tell apart that sharp lip puller often gets left out of rigs and shape libraries. While it can be frustrating to deal with the nuances of these corner raising conundrums, spending a little extra time on the lesser-used sharp lip puller can really *elevate* the emotional depth of expressions in your characters. I explore the benefits of incorporating actions like sharp lip puller in my studio FACS trainings... ...but if you're looking for free stuff, I have heaps of references & content on facial expressions in animation & technology at: melindaozel.com #facialexpressions #FACS #animation

Sometimes I look at the AI tools available to today’s PhD students and feel a bit envious. They have technologies that can simplify every step of the research journey, from taking notes to drafting entire chapters. But then I remember the focus and deep cognitive work we had to put in, working without the constant digital distractions. There’s something to be said for those intense, AI-free environments. Don’t mind my mixed feelings, I’ve been deeply immersed in this field for years, so I can’t help but feel a bit nostalgic about the old ways. But in all honesty, given the rapid development of generative AI, it would be a mistake not to take full advantage of these tools. They can save you hours, reduce your stress, and help you produce better work. Here are some of the best ones I recommend. 1. Build a Networked Note-Taking System Don’t scatter your ideas across random files. Use tools that let you build a connected knowledge network: 1.1. Obsidian: Markdown-based, backlinking, visual graph for idea mapping. 2.1. Notion: Flexible databases, linked pages, and powerful organization features. 2. Manage Your References Like a Pro Don’t repeat my mistake of leaving references to the last minute. Organize from the start: 2.1. Zotero: Free, open-source, automatic citation management. 2.2. Paperpile: Google Docs integration, fast search, and PDF management. 2.3. Mendeley: PDF annotation, collaboration features, reference management. 3. Master the Art of Literature Search Don’t waste hours hunting for papers. Use these tools to dig deeper and find what really matters: 3.1. Scite: Understand how papers are cited, track their impact. 3.2. Connected Papers: Visualize research networks, discover related studies. 3.3. ResearchRabbit: Track influential works, find co-cited papers. 3.4. Litmaps: Stay updated on emerging research trends and citation networks. 4. Active Reading for Deep Understanding Don’t just skim, read with purpose. Use these tools to synthesize ideas and make deeper connections: 4.1. NotebookLM: Synthesizes notes, highlights key concepts. 4.2. Elicit: Quickly extracts insights from research papers. 4.3. Consensus: Provides evidence-based summaries, ideal for systematic reviews. 4.4. ChatGPT / Claude: Summarize, clarify, and connect ideas across papers. 5. Write with Clarity and Precision When it’s time to write, don’t let a blank page slow you down. Use these tools to draft, polish, and refine your work: 5.1. ChatGPT / Claude: Drafts, refining, and brainstorming. 5.2. Jenni: Overcome writer’s block, maintain flow, and boost creativity. 5.3. PaperPal: Grammar checks, technical writing improvements, and style enhancements. 5.4. Google Docs / Word: Reliable platforms for drafting, formatting, and collaboration. #medkharbach #educatorstechnology

𝗙𝗿𝗼𝗺 𝗖𝗵𝗮𝗼𝘀 𝘁𝗼 𝗖𝗹𝗮𝗿𝗶𝘁𝘆: 𝗠𝗮𝘀𝘁𝗲𝗿𝗶𝗻𝗴 𝘁𝗵𝗲 𝗟𝗶𝘁𝗲𝗿𝗮𝘁𝘂𝗿𝗲 𝗥𝗲𝘃𝗶𝗲𝘄 𝗳𝗼𝗿 𝗬𝗼𝘂𝗿 𝗥𝗲𝘀𝗲𝗮𝗿𝗰𝗵 𝗣𝗿𝗼𝗽𝗼𝘀𝗮𝗹 A strong literature review is the backbone of any research proposal. It helps you identify existing studies, spot research gaps, and justify your work. But how do you conduct an effective one? Let’s break it down! 👇 𝗦𝘁𝗲𝗽 𝟭: 𝗗𝗲𝗳𝗶𝗻𝗲 𝗬𝗼𝘂𝗿 𝗦𝗰𝗼𝗽𝗲 Before diving into papers, clarify: ✅ Your research topic – What exactly are you exploring? ✅ Key research questions – What are you trying to solve? ✅ Keywords & search terms – Use variations & synonyms to refine your search. 𝗦𝘁𝗲𝗽 𝟮: 𝗙𝗶𝗻𝗱 𝗥𝗲𝗹𝗲𝘃𝗮𝗻𝘁 𝗟𝗶𝘁𝗲𝗿𝗮𝘁𝘂𝗿𝗲 Use trusted sources like: 🔹 Google Scholar 🔹 IEEE Xplore (for tech & engineering) 🔹 Elsevier’s ScienceDirect 🔹 PubMed (for life sciences & biotech) 🔹 Springer, Wiley, JSTOR & more 💡 Pro Tip: Use Boolean operators (AND, OR, NOT) to refine search results and filter by publication date for recent studies. 𝗦𝘁𝗲𝗽 𝟯: 𝗦𝗰𝗿𝗲𝗲𝗻 & 𝗦𝗲𝗹𝗲𝗰𝘁 𝗖𝗮𝗿𝗲𝗳𝘂𝗹𝗹𝘆 Not every paper is useful! Prioritize: ✔️ Relevance to your research ✔️ Credibility (peer-reviewed journals) ✔️ Recent studies (preferably within 5-7 years) ✔️ Highly cited works for strong theoretical backing 𝗦𝘁𝗲𝗽 𝟰: 𝗔𝗻𝗮𝗹𝘆𝘇𝗲 & 𝗢𝗿𝗴𝗮𝗻𝗶𝘇𝗲 𝗙𝗶𝗻𝗱𝗶𝗻𝗴𝘀 Instead of reading passively, actively categorize key insights: 📌 Trends & themes in the research 📌 Gaps & limitations in existing studies 📌 Methodologies used in prior work 🔎 Use a literature matrix (or reference managers like Zotero/Mendeley) to structure findings efficiently.  𝗦𝘁𝗲𝗽 𝟱: 𝗦𝘆𝗻𝘁𝗵𝗲𝘀𝗶𝘇𝗲 & 𝗪𝗿𝗶𝘁𝗲 Instead of summarizing each paper separately, connect the dots: 📖 Compare and contrast findings 📖 Show the evolution of knowledge in your field 📖 Highlight research gaps & why your study is needed 🔥 𝗙𝗶𝗻𝗮𝗹 𝗧𝗶𝗽𝘀 𝗳𝗼𝗿 𝗮 𝗪𝗶𝗻𝗻𝗶𝗻𝗴 𝗟𝗶𝘁𝗲𝗿𝗮𝘁𝘂𝗿𝗲 𝗥𝗲𝘃𝗶𝗲𝘄 ✅ Be critical, not just descriptive ✅ Link your discussion to theoretical frameworks ✅ Keep your references organized & formatted properly (APA, IEEE, Harvard, etc.) ✅ Stay updated—literature reviews evolve as new research emerges. A well-structured literature review strengthens your research proposal and sets the foundation for impactful research 💡 #ResearchProposal #LiteratureReview #AcademicWriting #PhDLife #ResearchTips

𝐀 𝐬𝐦𝐢𝐥𝐞 𝐝𝐨𝐞𝐬𝐧’𝐭 𝐧𝐞𝐜𝐞𝐬𝐬𝐚𝐫𝐢𝐥𝐲 𝐦𝐞𝐚𝐧 𝐬𝐨𝐦𝐞𝐨𝐧𝐞 𝐟𝐞𝐞𝐥𝐬 𝐠𝐨𝐨𝐝. 𝐓𝐡𝐞 𝐛𝐫𝐚𝐢𝐧 𝐭𝐞𝐥𝐥𝐬 𝐚 𝐝𝐢𝐟𝐟𝐞𝐫𝐞𝐧𝐭 𝐬𝐭𝐨𝐫𝐲. We just submitted new findings that challenge a long-standing assumption in affective neuroscience: that facial expressions and internal mood states share the same neural substrates. To study this in the real world, we built an automated computer vision pipeline to detect spontaneous facial expressions across 1,000+ hours of inpatient video. We paired this with continuous intracranial brain recordings from epilepsy patients over multiple days, identifying 1,396 spontaneous smiles and 3,746 neutral expressions alongside periodic mood assessments. 𝐓𝐡𝐞 𝐠𝐨𝐚𝐥 𝐰𝐚𝐬 𝐬𝐢𝐦𝐩𝐥𝐞: decode smiles and mood from the same neural signals and see how they relate. We expected substantial overlap. That’s not what we found. 𝐒𝐦𝐢𝐥𝐞𝐬 𝐰𝐞𝐫𝐞 𝐜𝐨𝐧𝐬𝐢𝐬𝐭𝐞𝐧𝐭 𝐚𝐧𝐝 𝐩𝐫𝐞𝐝𝐢𝐜𝐭𝐚𝐛𝐥𝐞. Aperiodic activity in the lateral temporal cortex decoded smiles with 80% accuracy using leave-one-participant-out cross-validation. 𝐌𝐨𝐨𝐝 𝐰𝐚𝐬 𝐚 𝐝𝐢𝐟𝐟𝐞𝐫𝐞𝐧𝐭 𝐬𝐭𝐨𝐫𝐲. Only 5 of 12 participants showed decodable mood signals, primarily reflected in low-gamma power within limbic regions. Most strikingly, 𝐭𝐡𝐞 𝐧𝐞𝐮𝐫𝐚𝐥 𝐟𝐞𝐚𝐭𝐮𝐫𝐞𝐬 𝐭𝐡𝐚𝐭 𝐝𝐞𝐜𝐨𝐝𝐞𝐝 𝐬𝐦𝐢𝐥𝐞𝐬 𝐟𝐚𝐢𝐥𝐞𝐝 𝐭𝐨 𝐩𝐫𝐞𝐝𝐢𝐜𝐭 𝐦𝐨𝐨𝐝, 𝐚𝐧𝐝 𝐭𝐡𝐞 𝐟𝐞𝐚𝐭𝐮𝐫𝐞𝐬 𝐭𝐡𝐚𝐭 𝐝𝐞𝐜𝐨𝐝𝐞𝐝 𝐦𝐨𝐨𝐝 𝐟𝐚𝐢𝐥𝐞𝐝 𝐭𝐨 𝐩𝐫𝐞𝐝𝐢𝐜𝐭 𝐬𝐦𝐢𝐥𝐞𝐬. 𝐓𝐡𝐞 𝐭𝐚𝐤𝐞 𝐡𝐨𝐦𝐞: facial expressions should be used cautiously as proxies for sustained mood states. Smiles and mood appear to operate on different timescales (seconds vs hours) and rely on distinct neural mechanisms. Interestingly, in those where mood 𝑤𝑎𝑠 decodable, smile frequency correlated with self-reported mood. These individuals showed specific limbic signatures, suggesting distinct neural phenotypes in how sustained affect is encoded. This aligns with a broader theme in precision psychiatry: 𝐛𝐢𝐨𝐦𝐚𝐫𝐤𝐞𝐫𝐬 𝐚𝐫𝐞 𝐧𝐨𝐭 𝐨𝐧𝐞-𝐬𝐢𝐳𝐞-𝐟𝐢𝐭𝐬-𝐚𝐥𝐥. What works in one person may fail in another, and understanding these differences is essential for developing effective, personalized interventions. Limitations: small sample size, a simplified mood scale, and epilepsy patients whose brains may differ from healthy populations. Still, the neural dissociation between expressions and mood provides an important foundation for future work in affective neuroscience and mental health technology. Proud of the Stanford team for building the multimodal pipeline that made continuous neural, facial, and symptom monitoring in naturalistic settings possible. Where do you see facial expression being over-used as a proxy for internal state? What other questions do you have about this work? Next up: replication at a larger scale and cortical stimulation to modulate both facial expressions and mood.

Your face during a video interview is 50% of your answer. And I'll tell you why. Yesterday, a candidate messaged me in panic. "I know everything about clinical research, but I freeze on camera. My face went blank." Sound familiar? Here's what nobody tells you about video interviews: The hiring manager made their first decision before you opened your mouth. Within 7 seconds, they've decided if you're: • Confident or nervous • Engaged or checked out • Someone they'd enjoy working with or endure Your facial expressions are speaking louder than your STAR stories. THE PSYCHOLOGY NOBODY TALKS ABOUT: When you smile genuinely during tough questions? The interviewer's stress hormones drop. They literally feel calmer around you. When your face shows you're listening (not just waiting to talk)? They feel heard. Valued. Connected. When you maintain warm eye contact through the camera? Trust chemicals fire in their brain. You're not just answering questions. You're creating a chemical reaction that says: "I belong on your team." THE TECHNIQUES THAT ACTUALLY WORK: The 3-Second Reset: Between questions, take a breath and micro-smile. Resets your face. Calms your nerves. Shows confidence even when you're scrambling. The Active Listening Face: Slight head tilts. Occasional nods. Raised eyebrows for emphasis. Shows engagement without interrupting. Makes them feel like the smartest person in the room. The Strategic Smile: Not constant (that's creepy). But during introductions, transitions, and when discussing achievements. Creates warmth without seeming fake. The Eye Contact Hack: Look at the camera, not the screen. Put a small arrow pointing to your camera. Feels weird to you. Feels perfect to them. WHAT THIS LOOKS LIKE IN PRACTICE: Question: "Tell me about a challenging protocol deviation." Bad: Stone face while recounting the disaster. Good: Slight smile + "This was a valuable learning experience..." Your face says: "I can handle pressure with grace." Not: "I'm still traumatized by this event." THE UNCOMFORTABLE TRUTH: I've seen brilliant CRCs with 10 years experience lose to candidates with 2 years. Why? Because the 2-year candidate smiled when discussing challenges. Maintained eye contact when admitting mistakes. Showed enthusiasm through their expressions, not just words. The 10-year veteran? Technically perfect. Emotionally flat. Guess who got the offer? THE PRACTICE THAT CHANGES EVERYTHING: Record yourself answering common questions. Watch without sound. Would you hire that person based on face alone? Do they look engaged or enduring? Confident or constipated? Fix your face first. Your answers will follow. Because here's the reality: They're not just hiring your brain. They're hiring your energy. Your presence. Your ability to make tough days bearable. And 50% of that message? It's written on your face. What's your biggest video interview challenge? #ClinicalResearch #InterviewTips #VideoInterviews #BodyLanguage

Here's how to avoid these pitfalls: 1. Missing Important Studies If you only search in one or two places or don’t use the right keywords, you might miss key studies that are important for your topic. Try searching in multiple databases, check reference lists of papers, and think of different ways to phrase your keywords. 2. Using Outdated or Irrelevant Sources Relying on old research or studies that don’t directly connect to your topic can steer you off course. Make sure to focus on recent studies (unless you're covering historical context) and double-check that they actually relate to what you’re trying to learn or prove. 3. Treating All Research as Equal Not every study is high-quality, even if it looks good at first glance. Take time to check if the methods used are sound, if the sample size makes sense, or if the study might have biases. 4. Presenting Information Without Structure If you don’t organize your findings, your review can feel messy and hard to follow. Group similar ideas or studies together under themes or headings. This helps readers (and you!) see the bigger picture and understand the flow of ideas. 5. Just Summarizing What’s Already There A good literature review doesn’t just repeat what others have done—it highlights what’s missing. After summarizing the research, take a step back and ask: “What hasn’t been explored yet? What questions are still unanswered?” That’s where your study comes in. Do you have anything to add, wise researchers? 🤔 #TheWiseResearcher #qualitative #quantitative #actionresearch #capstone #thesis #research #researchtips