Napoleon and the French Revolution Essay Example for Free

Napoleon and the French Revolution Essay Some of historys greatest rulers such as Peter the Great, Catherine the Great, Frederick the Great, and Joseph II have been considered to be enlightened despot. One of these was also Napoleon Bonaparte. They ways by which Napoleon has been considered to be a despot are through his economic policies, religious and educational policies, and the Code Napoleon. The term enlightened despot has been used to describe many great rulers, but it might be misinterpreted. The word enlightened means to be influenced by the values and ideas of the Enlightenment. Also, the word despot is defined as to exercise dictatorial authority. Considering the definitions of these two words, the term enlightened despot would be defined as a person who believes to be influenced by the ideas of Enlightenment and exercises authority similar to that of a dictator. Napoleon had many accomplishments through his economic policies, such as establishing the Bank of France and reorganizing and centralizing tax collection. He also established the Continental System, which attempted to block England from continental trade. Napoleon also put into effect the Berlin Decree in 1816, which  prohibited trade with England. In 1807, the Milan Decree was passed which stated that any ship which traded or even been stopped by the British Navy was to be confiscated. French manufacturing was wholly unable to makeup for the loss of British goods. Soon afterwards, the French manufacturers and merchants began to resent the restrictions. Napoleon regarded his allies and conquered territories as a source for raw materials, conscripts, and a market for French goods. Eventually, Napoleons economic policies contributed to his fall. Religious and educational policies were also part of Napoleons accomplishments, which lead for him to be the greatest enlightened despot. One of the religious policies was the Concordat of 1801, which gave the Catholic Church special status. The Concordat also gave power to the government to nominate bishops who then had the power to appoint the priests. One of Napoleons educational policies was the establishment of the  Lycà ©es, which were state run elite secondary schools. The curriculum was to glorify Napoleon and teach obedience. He also founded the École Polytechnique, which was an engineering school. The final way by, which Napoleon became a despot, is through his Code Napoleon. It codified and reconciled the customary law of northern France with Roman law of the South. The Code Napoleon also provided equality of all before the law, religious freedom, and freedom of work, which reaffirmed the Le Chapelier law banning workers associations. A benefit of the Code Napoleon was that workers were not allowed to strike and were required to carry passports that could be checked by government officials or employers. Napoleon could be considered a sexist because the Code stated that a womans income would pass to her husbands family and not to hers. Another thing was that women workers wages did not belong to them; instead it belonged to their husband. Napoleon said, In France, women are considered too highly. They should not be regarded as equal to men. In reality they are nothing more than machines for producing children. This is an example of Napoleons discrimination towards women, which also relates to him being an enlightened despot. Rulers such as Peter the Great, Catherine the Great, Frederick the Great, and Joseph II have all been considered to be enlightened despots, but Napoleon Bonaparte is known to be the greatest enlightened despot until today. In a pattern similar to other despots, the people of France loved Napoleon at first, but enough they began to hate him. The ways through which he became the greatest enlightened despot are economic policies, religious and education policies, and the Code Napoleon. Only time will be able to show us if there a greater enlightened despot than Napoleon Bonaparte.

Identity and Belonging Essay Example for Free

Identity and Belonging Essay Feedback is considered by many education experts to be one of the most important elements of assessment for student learning as well as being a crucial influence on student learning (Brown, Harris Harnett, 2012). Feedback, when applied effectively, can result in an increase in learner satisfaction and persistence as well as contributing to students taking on and applying more productive learning strategies. Feedback is a powerful strategy for teachers of all subjects and grade levels to use and has been endorsed worldwide. Feedback can be defined as the information provided by an agent, for example; a teacher or parent, regarding aspects of ones performance or understanding (Brown, Harris Harnett, 2012). However, when feedback is provided to students inappropriately it can lead to negative effects. This is why, as teachers, we need to have a full understanding of what constitutes effective quality feedback as well as developing an understanding of how to apply feedback in an appropriate manner for our students as differentiated learners (Clark, 2012). Feedback is consistent with the Assessment for learning strategy which focuses assessment on in-course improvement-orientated interactions between instructors and learners rather than end-of-course testing and examinations (Brown, Harris Harnett, 2012). Assessment for learning acknowledges that individual students learn in idiosyncratic ways and is designed to give information to teachers on how to modify and differentiate teaching and learning activities as well as giving teachers an idea of how best to provide effective feedback to their students (Brown, Harris Harnett, 2012). There are a few guidelines in which teachers can follow to help improve the quality of their feedback to their students to increase learner satisfaction and persistence as well as catering for differentiated learning, these guidelines include timing, amount, mode, audience (James-Ward, Fisher, Frey Lapp, 2013) and also allowing students to provide one another with feedback (Brown, Harris Harnett, 2012). The timing in which teachers provide their students with feedback is important as feedback needs to come while students are still mindful of the topic, assignment or performance in question (James-Ward, Fisher, Frey Lapp, 2013). Feedback needs to be provided while students are still thinking of their learning goal as a learning goal, meaning; something they are still striving for and not something they have already done (Brown, Harris Harnett, 2012). It is extremely important to provide students with effective feedback whilst they are still working on reaching their learning target, as mentioned earlier this will influence student learning. It is extremely important for teachers to know the audience in which they are providing feedback to in order for the feedback to be most effective for student learning (James-Ward, Fisher, Frey Lapp, 2013). This is based on the fact that no student is the same and feedback needs to accommodate for differentiated learners (Clark, 2012). Once a teacher understands his or her students individual learning they can then apply feedback in a way that is best addressed to the student about the specifics of the individuals work in terms the student can understand. Mode is also extremely important in providing effective feedback as it also supports differentiated learning. Mode stands for the different ways in which feedback can be delivered as it can be given in many modalities (James-Ward, Fisher, Frey Lapp, 2013). Some sorts of assessment lend themselves better to written feedback, some to oral feedback and others are better in demonstrations, and teachers can decide with their knowledge of how best to provide each individual student with feedback based on how they learn and understand best, whether it is written, spoken or demonstrated, in order for the feedback to be most effective in reaching each students learning needs (Clark, 2012). Also recently there has been an increasing agreement that students are a legitimate source of feedback as peer and self-assessment practices encourage students to identify learning objectives and helps them to understand the criteria used to judge their work aiming to reach the goal of increasing self-regulation (Brown, Harris Harnett, 2012). As timeliness can play a real issue in the effectiveness and quality of feedback from teachers, using students as a source of feedback can legitimately reduce this problem (Brown, Harris Harnett, 2012). As there are many different ways in which a teacher can go about providing feedback on set learning tasks to their students whether it is orally, written or demonstrated, the ways in which to construct effective feedback varies depending on the student (James-Ward, Fisher, Frey Lapp, 2013). Ultimately it is the teachers understanding of feedback and the knowing of how each individual student learns best that influences the type and quality of feedback they provide (Brown, Harris Harnett, 2012). Effective feedback will help increase student evaluation of their own learning progress and will help reach the Assessment for learning goal of developing self-regulating learners (Brown, Harris Harnett, 2012).

Hepatitis B infection: An overview

Hepatitis B infection: An overview HEPATITIS B What is hepatitis B? Hepatitis B is a liver infection caused by the hepatitis B virus. Chronic hepatitis B is a long-term infection of the liver that can sometimes develop after a bout of acute or short term, hepatitis B. How does a person get hepatitis B? The virus that causes hepatitis B is spread through contact with infected blood or other body fluids of people who have hepatitis B. For example, you can get hepatitis B by having unprotected sex with an infected person. People who use intravenous drugs can get hepatitis B when they share needles with someone who has the virus. Health care workers, such as nurses, lab technicians and doctors, can get these infections if they are accidentally stuck with a needle that was used on an infected patient. Pregnant women who are infected with hepatitis B can also pass the virus on to their babies. Hepatitis B cannot be transmitted through casual contact. For example, you cannot get hepatitis B by hugging or shaking hands with someone who is infected. How long does it take chronic hepatitis to develop after acute hepatitis B? The time between the acute illness and signs of chronic hepatitis B varies. It may take a short time, or it may be years after the acute infection before chronic hepatitis B develops. How is hepatitis B diagnosed? Blood tests are used to diagnose hepatitis B. Blood tests can tell your doctor whether your liver is working properly, and they can also be used to follow your condition during treatment. Your doctor may want to look at your liver with an ultrasound exam or x-rays. A liver biopsy may also be needed. With a liver biopsy, a small piece of the liver is removed through a needle and looked at under a microscope. A liver biopsy can help your doctor diagnose your illness and see the condition of your liver directly. What are the symptoms of hepatitis B? The symptoms of hepatitis B are: nausea, vomiting, loss of appetite, abdominal pain, jaundice (the skin turns yellow), weakness, fatigue, or brown urine (may look like tea), Symptoms of hepatitis B can range from mild to severe. If you have a mild case of hepatitis, you may not even realize that you have it. It may not cause symptoms or may only cause symptoms similar to the stomach flu. What are the complications of chronic hepatitis B? People with chronic hepatitis B may not have any symptoms at all. In some people, chronic hepatitis can lead to cirrhosis of the liver. Cirrhosis occurs when the liver cells die and are replaced by scar tissue and fat. The damaged areas of the liver stop working and cant cleanse the body of wastes. The early stages of cirrhosis may not have symptoms, but the following symptoms may arise as cirrhosis gets worse and more of the liver is damaged: weight loss, fatigue, jaundice, nausea, vomiting, or loss of appetite, Cirrhosis can lead to liver failure and even liver cancer. If you have hepatitis B, you are also susceptible to hepatitis D (also called Delta agent). Hepatitis D can only develop in people who already have hepatitis B. It can make your symptoms of hepatitis B or liver disease worse. It is spread through contact with infected blood or other body fluids of people who have hepatitis D. How is chronic hepatitis B treated? If you have chronic hepatitis B, your family physician will probably refer you to a gastroenterologist or other subspecialist that treats people with chronic liver problems. There are a number of medical treatments available that are often successful. These include Interferon alfa-2b and other antiviral medicines. Treatment may take a year or more, depending on the severity of the infection and the response to treatment. Can hepatitis B be prevented? The best way to prevent hepatitis B is to have protected sex (use a condom) and to avoid sharing needles. A vaccine is available to prevent hepatitis B. It is now routinely given in the first year of life to all newborn infants. It is safe and requires 3 shots over a 6-month period. This vaccine should be given to people who are at high risk for this illness, such as health care workers, all children, drug users, people who get tattoos or body piercing, and those with multiple sex partners. (Hepatitis B, 2007a) (Hepatitis B, 2007b) (Viral hepatitis B, 2007) References Hepatitis B. (2007). Retrieved December 30, 2007, from eMedicine Health website: http://www.emedicinehealth.com/hepatitis_b/article_em.htm Hepatitis B. (2007). Retrieved December 30, 2007, from World Health Organization website: http://www.who.int/mediacentre/factsheets/fs204/en/ Viral hepatitis B. (2007). Retrieved December 30, 2007, from CDC website: http://www.cdc.gov/ncidod/diseases/hepatitis/b/

Radio Frequency Identification (RFID) Essay -- microchip radio waves i

Radio Frequency Identification (RFID) Radio frequency identification, or RFID, is a generic term for technologies that use radio waves to automatically identify people or objects. There are several methods of identification, but the most common is to store a serial number that identifies a person or object, and perhaps other information, on a microchip that is attached to an antenna (the chip and the antenna together are called an RFID transponder or an RFID tag). The antenna enables the chip to transmit the identification information to a reader. The reader converts the radio waves reflected back from the RFID tag into digital information that can then be passed on to computers that can make use of it. RFID is a better technology than bar codes in many ways. The two are different technologies and have different applications, which sometimes overlap. The big difference between the two is bar codes are line-of-sight technology. That is, a scanner has to "see" the bar code to read it, which means people usually have to orient the bar code towards a scanner for it to be read. Radio frequency identification, by contrast, doesn't require line of sight. RFID tags can be read as long as they are within range of a reader. Bar codes have other shortcomings as well. If a label is ripped, soiled or falls off, there is no way to scan the item. And standard bar codes identify only the manufacturer and product, not the unique item. The bar code on one milk carton is the same as ever...

The Sight Of Science :: essays research papers

The Sight of Science It is a truth universally acknowledged that he whose mind is ahead of his time and above that of his peers may not be understood by his fellow people and be subject to critisizm and persecution. Galilei Galileo, Francis Bacon, and Rene Descartes were among the first to break away from the conventional views of their times to find a place for science in a society and propose the way it should be practiced. All three authors agree on some points but differe markedly on others. Bacon insists on the importa nce of experimentation and relative uselessness of senses and experience, while Decartes thinks them imporatnt for understanding of nature. Galileo stresses the need for separation of science and religion, while Descartes deems the correctness of the method of scientific thought to be most important. Yet all three writers agree that natural science should be freed of the grip of theology and human ethics, what sets them apart from previous generations of scientists and thinkers. In his Discoveries, Bacon goes at great length to discuss the influence the prescientfic mode of thinking has had on generations of scientists, and tries to Descartes asserts that the mathematical method of examining the relationship between objects and expressing them in concise formulas, applied to the entire realm of knowledge, permits him to exercise his own reason to the best of his ability. Since nothing in philosophy is certain, it is evident that he must discover his own philosophical principles. Galileo's views on science and religion, as seen from his Letter to the Grand Dutchess Christina are very radical for his times. He suggests that physical sciences must be separated from theological studies because the goals of the two disicplines are totally different: theology is concerned with salvation of the soul, while the sciences are concerned with understanding of nature. He believes that the clergy apply faith where ther is none involved -- one cannot undersand nature just by quoting the Scripture because the nature, a fruit of God's infinite wisdom., defies the simple explanation men's feeble minds attempt to find in the Bible. To truly understand nature, one has apply the little of the reason that God has given to him and look "between the li nes" for the true meaning of the Bible. There are a number interpretations one can find because the Bible is often general and simplistic; Galileo suggests that the best way to find the true meaning is to disprove the false conclusions by finding contradicions in nature, as determined by accurate experiments rather than fervent meditation. It is a job of scientists to examine nature and it is

King Thrushbeard and Lessons Behind Fairytales Essay examples -- essay

To Be a Domestic Woman†¦   Ã‚  Ã‚  Ã‚  Ã‚  Ã¢â‚¬Å"Grimm’s Fairytales,† although never intended to be in text form, are some of the most influential methods in teaching young children morals and to be productive citizens of society. While children enjoy the mere esthetics of fairytales and interpret them at their face value, s are aware of the didacticism hidden beneath the appealing plots and characters of the stories. Unlike s, children would not be able to extract any metaphorical meaning out of fairytales even if fairytales were intended to have distinct messages. For this very reason, fairytales have been studied along with a branch of child psychology to determine whether or not a message that is ual is actually retained in the subconscious of the child. Grimm’s fairytale, â€Å"King Thrushbeard† enforces the importance of modesty in s, teaches them to be less concerned with their own needs, and instead, to be concerned with the needs of others. It keeps us aware of the costs of this teaching. The first evidence of this underlying, didactic theme in â€Å"King Thrushbeard† comes in the second paragraph. The princess’ father, the Old King, reveals being aware of his daughter’s tendency to ridicule and be unappreciative of those to whom he offers her. He is angered by her behavior. What the King doesn’t seem to realize is that his daughter has probably not reached puberty. We can assume that she’s around ten to twelve years old and that her understanding of males is different of that of a sixteen or seventeen year old . As pre- , a she does not yet understand or even know of qualities in men that are pleasing. At this stage she would not have the ability to look for qualities in a man that are ually satisfying for a woman who is ready to marry. The only traits the princess takes note of and relates to are the immediate physical characteristics of the men, which are common things for pre-teens to focus on. There was never an initial attracti on or subsequent attractions to follow with any of the men because of the fact that she was not aware of her own ual nature. At the middle school level it is common for s of this age to still have an ill understanding of men because of their inexperience as ual beings. They often have difficulties in dealing with males because of this lack of understanding. Because the princess has yet to even reach the transition period o... ...love for the princess despite her lack of domestic skills. This teaches s to make individuals out of themselves, and that there is no standard of being â€Å"domestic.† That means that there also wouldn’t be a standard for men in choosing their wives. This fairytale moves s ahead a step in overcoming men’s expectations in a wife. In conclusion, it is interesting to note that this fairytale, â€Å"King Thrushbeard,† does not teach s to conform to a standard way of life. What it does teach is that s should not be discouraged by the disapproval of men who prefer to view a standard way of life. It teaches s to be confident and assertive in making decisions, and to be appreciative of those who are appreciative of them. However, I do not feel as though each and every feature of the fairytale could be yzed to produce a solid, coherent idea. There are many occasions in which features of the story are assumed to be a specific teaching, when, on the other hand, after being yzed do not hold together in producing a second or third didactic theme. This is my reasoning for not including many features of the fairytale. I found some to be misleading and often time irrelevant to the issue being discussed.

Counterfactual Thinking Essay

The experience of regret arguably relies on a multifaceted, counterfactual analysis of two previously possible outcomes. An important question to consider is at what age these counterfactual emotions develop, and what enables these responses to occur. Previous research proposes that regret emerges at around 4 years old, marginally earlier than more recent studies conducted by Guttentag and Ferrell, who suggest that the experience of regret occurs relatively late in child development. The results of these studies argue that understanding, rather than simply experiencing counterfactual emotions relies heavily on a child’s ability to simultaneously conceive alternate realities, and that a recognition of differing outcomes is a necessary, rather than sufficient component of the development of regret. These findings accumulate and extend previous research, and demonstrate that the development of counterfactual thinking in children is positively correlated with a complex cognitive p rocessing of two alternate realities. The experience of regret and relief are counterfactual emotions based on a comparison of reality with a better, alternative situation. Counterfactual emotions are considered to perform important emotional regulatory functions, and require additional complex cognitive processing than more basic emotions such as anger, fear or happiness. They require us to consider ‘dual possibilities’ (Byrne, 2002) in which both outcomes were possible at some point in the past. The ability to experience emotions such as regret is  believed to play an important role in decision-making following the emergence into adulthood. Significant differences however, exist between when children are thought to first experience regret. It is arguable that children’s understanding of regret develops relatively late due to the complex nature of not only comprehending counterfactual thinking (Guttentag and Ferrell, 2004), which requires an identification and comparison of two equally possible, alternate actions. If children are unable to generate these comparisons, they are unable to experience the emotion of regret. Little research has been done on the cognitive processes behind the emergence of regret in young children, and thus many questions still exist as to why the experience of counterfactual thinking develops relatively late in childhood. Many inconsistencies exist in the theoretical understandings of regret, and subsequently further research is required in order to overcome these age-related discrepancies. Counterfactual thinking refers to an ability to think â€Å"about what could have been had an alternative decision been made or had the outcome been different† (Roese, 1991). It is within the intriguing paradigm that the ongoing research into the experience of regret takes place. Recent findings have shed further light into the development of regret during the early years of childhood. Beck et al (2006) proposed the theoretical perspective that counterfactual emotions develop relatively late because it requires more complex cognitive processing to conceive two possible outcomes, as opposed to recognizing basic emotions of happiness and sadness. This perspective is widely agreed upon, however theories differ in the age at which the emotion of regret actually emerges. Daniel Weisberg (2001) located the emergence of regret at about 4 years, however Guttentag and Ferrell (2004) speculated that it was not until children are 6 or 7 years old that they are able to simultaneously comp rehend counterfactual and actual situations. Further research however, has revealed that within the emergence of counterfactual thinking, is a distinction between experiencing and reasoning about regret. The latter involves a reflection on the reasoning behind the emotion, i.e. _why_ does the child feel bad that he/she picked box ‘A’ containing nothing, when he/she could have picked box ‘B’, containing the chocolate. Experiencing regret however, involves a comparison  of reality with a better, alternative outcome. Given that it is a difficult task to simultaneously comprehend two equally plausible realities, it must be even more difficult to understanding the reasoning behind _why_ this feels bad. Interestingly, although Guttentag and Ferrell (2004) located the experience of regret early in childhood, they argued that it wasn’t until later in life – around 7 years old – that a child was able to demonstrate _why_ an alternative reality might affect the emotional reaction to the actual outcome. Guttentag and Ferrell (2004) suggested that children less than 5 or 6 years old cannot generate a comparison between a real and counterfactual re ality. According to this perspective, the comparison between two previously possible outcomes is critical. In 2009, Beck and Crilly adapted this theory, and hypothesized that â€Å"an inability to compare the two worlds limits children’s thinking about regret.† (Beck, & Crilly 2009). Beck, Robinson, Carroll and Apperly (2006) proposed a similar perspective, arguing that it wasn’t until children were 5 or 6 years old that counterfactual and actual events were two equally plausible events. Studies conducted following this proposal revealed corresponding results. Children between the ages of 3 and 6 were asked an open and a closed question regarding the pathway chosen by a toy mouse. Children aged 3 found it difficult to correctly answer the question â€Å"what if he had gone the other way, where would he be?† as opposed to the simpler â€Å"could he have gone anywhere else?† Comparatively, children aged 6 and older performed significantly better, with 85% answering the open question correctly. Beck et al reasoned that regret could not be felt if the child had no understanding of the possibility of a counterfactual reality replacing the actual reality. In 2009, Beck and Crilly replicated these studies, but alternatively used an open question and a regret question to measure children’s ability to comprehend regret. The results indicated that, contrary to Beck et al, it is in fact not sufficient to simply distinguish two counterfactual possibilities in order for children to recognize regret. The study gave more weight to Guttentag and Ferrell’s 2004 claim that the comparison of two alternate realities is critical in the development of regret. Beck and Crilly (2009) went on to suggest that perhaps understanding two counterfactual realities was a necessary rather than sufficient developmental goal in the cognitive processing of regret. In 2003, German  and Nichols proposed that the experience of counterfactual thinking could occur as early as 4 years of age. In their study, a group of 3 year olds were given stories that involved two possible outcomes. When given the negative alternative, the children were asked whether the character in the story would feel happy or sad. German and Nichols reported that children answered more than two thirds of the simple counterfactual questions correctly . This data was used to theorize that children as young as 3 could comprehend basic counterfactual realities, and thus indicated the early emergence of regret. Although much discrepancy exists as the to the exact age at which regret begins to emerge, the view that counterfactual thinking develops much earlier than previously thought has become widely accepted amongst both cognitive and developmental psychologists. However, evidence exists that contradicts this perspective. Beck et al argue that the studies used by German and Nichols contain a number of false positives. Further research has suggested that the supposed counterfactual thinking demonstrated in the 3 year olds tested, could simply be use of the child’s general knowledge, and that the questions used were too simple to reliably indicate an experience of regret. Questions used in the experiment by German and Nichols arguably lead to answers that could be answered using the child’s general knowledge, such as recognizing that squashed flowers make people unhappy, and ‘unsquashed’ flowers make people happy (Beck, Robison, Carroll, & Apperly 2006). Where German and Nichols may have revealed an emergence of counterfactual thinking; may simply have been the child’s expression of past experience. The most widely agreed upon theory of regret in childhood appears to be ability to not only distinguish two previously possible realities, but to also compare them in order to come to an emotional understanding. Theorists including Guttentag and Ferrell (2004), and Beck and Crilly (2009) argue that a distinction must be made between simply experiencing a counterfactual emotion, and understanding _why_ someone may feel unhappy when comparing the actual reality with a counterfactual world. This theory is based on the premise that counterfactual thinking is a complex cognitive process, requiring a multifaceted understanding of two dual possibilities. Research on counterfactual thinking in childhood also suggests children may  experience regret as early as 4 years old, however this view has generated much criticism and requires further research in order to rule out experimental limitations, such as small research groups and over generalized questions. Future research may focus on overcoming these limitations in order to generate reliable data. Compiling the findings from these and future studies will enable researchers to form a much clearer of picture of exactly when children not only experience, but also understand the emotion of regret, and what cognitive processes underpin this development. In conclusion, research examining children’s regret has focused on the criticality of the moment children begin to comprehend two dual realities, and feel remorse after choosing one outcome over another. Current studies lend weight to the complex nature of the role of cognition in emotional experiences, and this data, taken in conj unction with earlier studies, suggests a number of age-related stepping stones are implicated in the development of counterfactual thinking. REFERENCE LIST Beck, R. S., & Crilly, M. (2009) Is understanding regret dependent on developments in counterfactual thinking? _British Journal of Developmental Psychology_. 27, 505-510. Beck, R. S., Riggs, J. K., & Burns, P. (2001) Multiple developments in counterfactual thinking. _Understanding Counterfactuals, Understanding Causation_. 2-21. Beck, S. R., Riggs, J. K., & Gorniak, L. S. (2009) The effect of casual length on counterfactual conditioning reasoning. _British Journal of Developmental Psychology_. Doi: 10.1348/026151009X450836. Beck, S. R., Robinson, E. J., Carroll, D. J., & Apperly, I. A. (2006) Children’s thinking about counterfactuals and future hypotheticals as possibilities. _Child Development._ 77, 413-426. Burns, P., Riggs, J. K., & Beck, R. S. (2012) Executive control and the experience of regret. _Journal of Experimental Child Psychology_. 111(3), 501-515. Doi: 10.1016/j.jecp.2011.10.003. Brocki, K. C., & Bohlin, G. (2004) Executive functions in children aged 6-13: A dimensional and developmental study. _Developmental Neuropsychology_. 26, 571-593. Diamond, A. (2006) The early development of executive functions. _Lifespan Cognition: Mechanisms of Change_, Oxford University Press, Oxford, UK. 70-95. Ferrel, J. M., Guttentag, R. E., Gredlein, J. M. (2009) Children’s understanding of counterfactual emotions: Age differences, individual differences, and the effects of counterfactual-information salience. _British Journal of Developmental Psychology_. 27, 569-585. Guttentag, R. E., Ferrell, J. (2004) Reality compared with its alternatives: Age differences in judgments of regret and relief. _Developmental Psychology_. 40, 764-775. Mitchell, P., Riggs, K. J. (2000) Children’s reasoning and the mind. _Psychology Press_. 121-147. O’Connor, E. (2011) The emergence of regret in childhood. _Pediatrics for Parents_. 27, 11-12. O’Connor, E., McCormack, T., & Feeney, A. (2012). The development of regret. _Journal of Experimental Child Psychology,_ 111, 120-127. Doi: 10.1016/j.jecp.2011.07.002. Roese, N. J. (1997) Counterfactaul thinking. _Psychological Bulletin_. 121, 133-148. Rafetseder, E., & Perner, J. (2011) When the alternative would have been better: Counterfactual reasoning and the emergence of regret. _Cognition and Emotion_, 26, 800-819. Rafetseder, E., Schwitalla, M., & Perner, J. (2012) Counterfactual reasoning: From childhood to adulthood. Journal of Experimental Child Psychology. 114(3), 389-404. Doi: 10.1016/j.jecp.2012.10.010. Weisberg, D. P. (2011) Children’s thinking about regret and relief. _University of Birmingham (thesis)_. 56-83. Weisberg, D. P., & Beck, S. R. (2010) Children’s thinking about their own and other’s regret and relief. _Journal of Experimental Child Psychology_. 106, 184-191. Weisberg, D. P., & Beck, S. R. (2011) The development of children’s regret and relief. _Cognition and Emotion._ 26, 820-835. Van Duijvenvoorder, K. C. A., Hulzenga, M. H., & Jansen, R. J. (2013) What is and what could have been: Experiencing regret and relief across childhood. _Cognition and Emotion_, 28, 926-935. Zeelenberg, M., Van Dkik, W. W., Manstead, A. S. R., & van der Pligt, J. (1998) The experience of regret and disappointment. _Cognition and Emotion_, 12, 221-230.