Say you’re in the running for your dream job, but it’s on the other side of the country. The higher-ups call you for a final interview, and give you a choice: You can video conference in, or fly out to meet with them face-to-face.

You might be tempted to choose the easier option that doesn’t involve travel or additional expenses. But it may be wise to make the trip: A new study suggests that in-person interviews tend to leave better impressions on both the hiring company and the candidate.

“We live in a world where we increasingly rely on technology, but this study reminds us that personal interactions should never be underestimated,” study co-author Nikki Blacksmith, a doctoral candidate at the George Washington University’s Department of Organizational Sciences and Communication, said in a press release. Blacksmith and her colleagues wanted to see how tools like telephone and video interviewing might affect overall decision making, so they analyzed the findings of 12 studies published between 2000 and 2007.

Their results, published Monday in the journal Personnel Assessment and Decisions, found that overall, technology-mediated interviews resulted in lower ratings—for both parties involved—than face-to-face interviews. Video interviews received the most negative rankings, followed by telephone and computer interviews.

Initially, the researchers assumed that these differences would have lessened over the years, as people became more accustomed to technology in the workplace. But they were surprised to find the opposite: The ratings were actually more negative in the later research. (They do point out, however, that even the most recent study took place seven years ago.)

“Considering the rate at which technology has changed, it is clear that we lack understanding of the modern interview,” the authors wrote.

Senior author Tara Behrend, PhD, director of the Workplaces and Virtual Environments Lab at George Washington University, says the study was not able to determine what, exactly, was wrong with technology-mediated interviews—but does offer a guess.

“On the phone I can’t shrug my shoulders, roll my eyes, wink, or nod my head to show that I understand,” she told RealSimple.com. “That means that the interviewer can easily misinterpret something I say.”

On top of that, she says, taking turns is harder in a video or phone setting. “The chance of accidentally interrupting the interviewer would be much higher,” says Behrend. “If you’re afraid of interrupting, then you might have a long awkward pause instead. Neither option is going to give the perception that you are a strong communicator.”

It’s also difficult to engage in what Behrend calls “impression management”—doing things to make the interviewer like you—when you’re not face-to-face with them. You might not be able to make friendly small talk or show that you’re attentive by smiling and sitting up straight if you’re on the phone or staring into a webcam, she says…

I’ve been meditating, off and on, for the past 14 years. The technique I learned in meditation class many years ago is old-school and austere: Find a place to sit, close your eyes, feel your feet on the floor, and focus on the in-and-out breath at the tip of your nose. No music, no mantras, just the moment-by-moment struggle of bringing your attention back to breathing every time your mind wanders away (which is just about every time you breathe). The point, and the challenge, is to train your mind to let go of distraction, to detach from thoughts, to simply “be here now.” 

Mindfulness meditation is a welcome (some say necessary) respite from the hustle and stress of modern life, and from the incessant pings, buzzes, and chimes of personal technology.

So I was intrigued when I received an invitation from the folks at Oculus, the virtual reality shop at Facebook, to test out the latest application for this booming technology: guided meditation. I wondered: If being mindful requires disengaging from the diversions of modern life, can we truly meditate while mind-melding with state-of-the-art computer processing power? Is it possible to “be here now” if that “here” is a digitally-synthesized someplace else?

At Oculus’ pop-up showroom in New York City, I was first given a quick tour of the capabilities of their high-end Rift system.  I was menaced by a life-size Tyrannosaurus Rex (cowering in virtual terror as the beast stomped past/through me) and dropped onto the ledge of an 80-story Times Square skyscraper (dropping reflexively to hands and knees and crawling backwards to safety). 

RELATED: A Meditation to Start Your Day

After the stress test warm up, I strapped on the Samsung Gear VR, for a downshift into Oculus’ meditation offerings.

The Guided Meditation VR app, developed by Cubicle Ninjas, gives you a choice of environment, voiceover, and chill-out music. I picked a fall foliage setting called "Autumnshade" to start, and the "Relaxation" audio track. 

The 360-degree view was splendid: Crisp brown leaves floated from trees between shafts of golden sunlight. In the narration, an English woman likened our thoughts to hummingbirds, and indeed, my mind was flitting from voice to scene (with multiple perspectives available at the push of a button) and back again, with nary a thought of my breath.

I switched to a tropical seaside setting ("Costa del Sol"), with waves sloshing on the shore, then toggled again to an icy mountain ("Snow Peak"): Blood red sky reflected in an iridescent blue lake. Somewhere behind me I heard a crunching sound, like the calving of icebergs (or the footfall of a hungry snow leopard). Each time I picked a new setting, the device asked me to press my finger to a sensor to measure my heart rate, part of the app's biofeedback feature. I started out around 76 beats per minute, and hovered in that range throughout the experience…

Come November, your fiction preferences might have a real-life impact on your choices at the polls. People who have read Harry Potter novels tend to have a lower opinion of Donald Trump, according to a new study—and the more books they’ve read in the series, the less favorably they view the Republican presidential nominee.

These findings held true regardless of a person’s political party, gender, age, level of education, or religious beliefs, says study author Diana Mutz, professor of political science and communication at the University of Pennsylvania’s Annenberg School for Communication.

The massive popularity of the series, by British author J.K. Rowling, made such research possible; more than 450 million copies of the books have been sold worldwide, and Mutz found that both Republicans and Democrats were equally likely to have read them.

To gauge people’s opinions of the controversial businessman-turned-politician, Mutz surveyed a nationally representative sample of 1,142 Americans. (In addition to Trump and Harry Potter, she also asked them about hot-button election issues such as waterboarding, the death penalty, and the treatment of Muslims and gay people.)

She found that each book people had read in the fantasy series lowered their evaluations of Trump by about two to three points on a 100-point sale. “This may seem small,” Mutz acknowledged in a press release, “but for someone who has read all seven books, the total impact could lower their estimation of Trump by 18 points out of 100.”

To a lesser extent, Harry Potter readership was also associated with a more positive attitude toward Muslim and gay people, and a more negative one toward questions about the use of torture and killing terrorists.

Mutz believes that the books’ message of tolerance and respect for each others’ differences may play a key role in influencing readers’ political views.

For example, she writes, Harry Potter advocates for oppressed house-elves and opposes the evil Lord Voldemort’s quest for “blood purity” among wizards. Trump, on the other hand, has called for a temporary ban on Muslims entering the United States, and made comments about minorities, including women, Mexicans, and disabled people.

The protagonists in Rowling’s books are also reluctant to use violence to settle disputes, she writes, while Trump has supported waterboarding and bombing terrorists’ families.

Finally, Mutz writes, “it may simply be too difficult for Harry Potter readers to ignore the similarities between Trump and the power-hungry Voldemort.”

The study will appear in a special election edition of the journal PS: Political Science and Politics. Mutz concludes—with obvious bias of her own—that she’s not sure if Harry Potter can “defeat Donald Trump” in this year’s election, but that her research raises hope that the values the book preaches could prevail…

Meditation might be the biggest self-care trend since yoga, and for good reason—it’s been shown to help with everything from easing anxiety to boosting your sex life. Problem is, meditation isn't quite as simple as it seems, and it doesn't come easy for everyone. If you’ve tried (and tried, and tried) meditating to no avail, you’re not alone. Here, Elisha Goldstein, PhD, co-founder of The Center for Mindful Living in Los Angeles and featured expert on Meditation Studio, solves the most common meditation problems so you can finally find your Zen. 

I can’t clear my mind

Legs crossed, eyes closed, body relaxed—you’re all ready for a meditation session. There’s just one problem: you can’t stop thinking about all those errands on your to-do list, that fight you just had with your sister, or what you’re going to make for dinner. Sound familiar? Try as we might, sometimes it’s downright impossible to totally empty our minds. “It’s easy to get frustrated because we have certain expectations about what meditation is supposed to be like,” says Goldstein. “There’s this misconception that meditation is supposed to be concentration. But it’s not.”

If you’re having trouble staying focused, Goldstein suggests trying mindfulness meditation. With this type of meditation, the goal is not to completely clear your mind of all thoughts; instead, it's to be fully aware of your thoughts and surroundings in the present moment. “If your mind wanders that’s perfectly fine, just realize your mind is going off and be aware of that,” Goldstein says. Most importantly, he points out: “It’s perfectly okay to be imperfect about this practice.”

RELATED: A Meditation to De-Stress

I get restless

Many people feel fidgety when they try to meditate. Just because you struggle to sit still, though, Goldstein says you shouldn't assume meditation is not for you. “The only way we can be more at ease and at peace with our lives is to learn how to deal with that restlessness differently, and to learn how to settle it down,” he says. Test out different types of meditation. Your restlessness may be well suited for a walking meditation, in which you focus on staying mentally present while moving your body.  

It’s physically painful to sit still

When you imagine somebody meditating, you may picture them sitting cross-legged on the floor. That may be the ideal position for some, but ultimately, you just need to get into a comfortable position that allows you to relax and breathe, whether you're sitting on a mediation cushion or a chair, or even lying down, Goldstein says. Take a few deeps breaths, and really try to soften your muscles. The main goal: “Come to a place where you’re settling in and taking the time for you,” Goldstein says…

Once the optic nerve that’s responsible for sight is damaged, it’s impossible to see again. At least that’s been the dogma. But a group of U.S. scientists has upended that thinking and helped mice with destroyed optic nerves to see again. It does not have immediate implications for humans yet, but it points researchers in promising new directions.

Andrew Huberman, an associate professor of neurobiology at Stanford University, and his team describe their advance in a study published in Nature Neuroscience. To learn about the way vision nerves grow, they crushed the optic nerve in one eye of mice. Once destroyed, the long finger-like extensions sent out by nerve cells from the eye to the brain start to shrivel, eventually severing any connection to the brain and resulting in blindness. Huberman and his colleagues, however, found that a combination of visual stimulation of the nerve, along with nerve-growing chemicals, can rescue these extensions, called axons, and coax them to stretch out again. Not only that, but the axons are able to find their appropriate connections to the correct sight-dedicated parts of the brain to restore vision. Mice with similar damage to the nerve that didn’t receive the treatment did not show much regrowth of the axons.

About three weeks after the optic nerves in the mice were damaged, the researchers saw evidence of axons extending back into the brain from the eye, something that previous efforts to regenerate eye nerves haven’t done with much reliability. The combination of keeping the damaged but remaining axons stimulated, by exposing the mice to bars on a screen that are moving in different directions, and the nerve growth factors lead to a 500-fold increase in axon regrowth. Granted, not all of the axons managed to sprout again, but those that did were able to do so with impressive speed and distance to reach the brain.

When the researchers conducted four different tests to verify how much of the regrowth contributed to actual restoration of vision in the animals, the animals passed two of the tests that detected large objects and movement.

“For the longest time people in the field wondered if neurons could regenerate and form the correct patterns to connect to the brain, and we found that they did,” says Huberman.

The most compelling finding is that the study suggest that once nerves are coaxed to grow again, they retain the instructions to find their proper connections in the brain’s visual center. If nerves growing toward the brain are like visitors to New York’s Grand Central Station, these nerves are like well-equipped travelers with maps and specific instructions for finding their destination. “It means that neurons remember the way home; they never forget,” says Huberman.

That’s encouraging him and his team to start considering how to translate the results to treat blindness in people. Keeping the axons stimulated by exposing them to stimuli is an easy first step; if these axons are kept alive, then they have a chance of regrowing again, as the mouse study showed…

The summer’s no vacation for blood banks, and this one has been especially hard: Just after the fourth of July, the American Red Cross issued an emergency call for blood and platelet donations. This time of year, “blood donors are typically out of town and unable to give," explains Justin Kreuter, MD, medical director of the Mayo Clinic Blood Donor Center in Rochester, Minnesota; or they may not be eligible to donate after traveling to certain areas outside the United States. “It really hits us in the summer months,” Dr. Kreuter says. Your community needs your help now; here’s what you should know about pitching in.

Eligibility is always changing, and Zika’s a concern this year

The Red Cross maintains an alphabetical list of eligibility criteria for potential donors—from acupuncture (thumbs up) to Zika (thumbs down)—and can give you the latest information on whether or not you’re good to give. There have been no reported cases of Zika transmission via blood transfusion so far, according to the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC), but there’s a strong possibility that the virus can be transmitted that way. “What we’re doing now, per the FDA, is deferring [donors who may have been exposed to Zika] for 28 days, which is twice the known period of infectivity,” Dr. Kreuter says. Because Zika can be transmitted by sexual contact (via semen) as well, women with male partners who have visited Zika-affected areas are deferred for three additional months.

RELATED: 4 Unexpected Benefits of Donating Blood

The FDA regulates donor blood just as aggressively as it regulates drugs

“It takes a lot of money to do the infectious-disease testing that we do [on donor blood], and when we create blood products out of the donation, that’s done to the same standards as any drug manufactured in this country. The FDA holds us to those same standards, so it’s a very high level of quality and also resources that are invested,” Dr. Kreuter explains. “These tests and high standards are what’s keeping the blood supply safe, so that if my wife or one of my daughters needs a blood transfusion, I can feel assured that I can just sit at their bedside and hold their hand rather than worry about what that might result [in] for them later down the road.”  

You’ll get a mini-physical before you donate

The flip side of donor blood screening (which ensures that it’s safe for the eventual recipient) is confirming the donor’s health (which ensures that the blood draw won’t have a negative effect on them). “We check blood pressure and pulse, we do a pinprick to check red blood cells to make sure they’re safe—we don’t want to make our donors iron deficient,” Dr. Kreuter says. He makes no specific suggestions about what you eat and drink prior to donation; just be sure you have breakfast and lunch under your belt, and take it easy on caffeine…