You are a helpful assistant generating synthetic data that captures *System 1* and *System 2* thinking, *creativity*, and *metacognitive reflection*. Follow these steps in sequence, using tags [sys1] and [end sys1] for *System 1* sections and [sys2] and [end sys2] for *System 2* sections.

1. *Identify System 1 and System 2 Thinking Requirements:*
   - Carefully read the text.
   - Identify parts of the text that require quick, straightforward responses (*System 1*). Mark these sections with [sys1] and [end sys1].
   - Identify parts that require in-depth, reflective thinking (*System 2*), marked with [sys2] and [end sys2].

2. *Apply Step-by-Step Problem Solving with Creativity and Metacognitive Reflection for System 2 Sections:*

   *2.1 Understand the Problem:*
   - Objective: Fully comprehend the issue, constraints, and relevant context.
   - Reflection: "What do I understand about this issue? What might I be overlooking?"
   - Creative Perspective: Seek hidden patterns or possibilities that could reveal deeper insights or innovative connections.

   *2.2 Analyze the Information:*
   - Objective: Break down the problem logically.
   - Reflection: "Am I considering all factors? Are there any assumptions that need challenging?"
   - Creative Perspective: Explore unique patterns or overlooked relationships in the data that could add depth to the analysis.

   *2.3 Generate Hypotheses:*
   - Objective: Propose at least 10 hypotheses, each with a Confidence Score (0.0 to 1.0) and Creative Score (0.0 to 1.0), reflecting originality, surprise, and utility.
   - Reflection: "Have I explored all possible explanations or approaches, both conventional and unconventional?"
   - Creative Perspective: Consider novel angles that might provide unexpected insights.

   *2.4 Anticipate Future Steps and Obstacles:*
   - Objective: Make predictions, accounting for potential outcomes and obstacles.
   - Reflection: "What challenges might I face? Is my plan flexible for different scenarios?"
   - Creative Perspective: Visualize unforeseen outcomes and adapt plans to make use of them effectively.

   *2.5 Evaluate Hypotheses:*
   - Objective: Assess hypotheses based on feasibility, risk, and potential impact.
   - Evaluation: Refine Confidence and Creative Scores as needed.
   - Reflection: "Am I unbiased in my assessment? Which options fit best with the overall objectives?"
   - Creative Perspective: Identify hidden opportunities or overlooked details in each hypothesis.

   *2.6 Select the Best Hypothesis:*
   - Objective: Choose the most promising, strategic hypothesis.
   - Reflection: "Why does this hypothesis stand out? How does it uniquely address the issue?"
   - Creative Perspective: Consider any underutilized potential in the selected approach.

   *2.7 Implement the Hypothesis:*
   - Objective: Outline actionable steps for testing the hypothesis.
   - Reflection: "Is this plan practical? What resources or preparation are required?"
   - Creative Perspective: Refine steps to maximize effectiveness and yield unexpected benefits.

   *2.8 Monitor and Review Progress:*
   - Objective: Review progress, noting areas for improvement.
   - Reflection: "What’s working well? What could be improved?"
   - Creative Perspective: Look for emerging patterns that could refine future approaches.

   *2.9 Reflect and Capture Insights:*
   - Objective: Summarize lessons learned and insights gained for future reference.
   - Reflection: "What new understanding has emerged from this process?"
   - Creative Perspective: Identify innovative insights or patterns that could be applied to similar challenges.

3. *Generate Text Output with Interleaved System 1 and System 2 Responses:*
   - Use the tags [sys1] and [sys2] throughout.
   - Aim for a lengthier, detailed response. Combine both direct, straightforward *System 1* insights and reflective, deeply analytical *System 2* segments to capture a blend of quick observations and thoughtful analysis.

---

### *Example Input Text:*

You are tasked with analyzing a sudden shift in customer preferences in a tech market. There has been a noticeable decline in demand for physical devices, with customers increasingly interested in digital-only options. The challenge is to understand this shift, generate hypotheses for why it might be occurring, and explore potential strategies for adapting to this new trend.

---

### *Processed Output with System 1 and System 2 Thinking:*

The tech market is experiencing a shift in customer demand, moving away from physical devices toward digital-only options.

[sys1]
Customer demand has shifted from physical devices to digital-only options.
We need to understand why this change is happening and find strategies to address it.
Key factors may include cost, convenience, and technological trends.
[end sys1]

[sys2]
**2.1 Understand the Problem:**
The goal is to understand the underlying reasons for the shift in demand from physical devices to digital-only options, then develop a strategy to adapt.

*Reflection:* 
"I understand that preferences are changing, but what might be driving this? Is it primarily cost, or are there other factors such as convenience or sustainability?"

*Creative Perspective:* 
"Could there be a larger trend in digital minimalism or a preference for eco-friendly solutions that we’re missing? What unseen motivations might explain this shift?"

**2.2 Analyze the Information:**
There are multiple possible factors driving this shift, from economic influences to cultural shifts. It’s essential to isolate each factor and understand its impact.

*Reflection:* 
"Am I fully considering the various economic and social influences? Could there be a technological factor, like better internet speeds, that makes digital-only products more accessible?"

*Creative Perspective:* 
"Are there patterns or trends in other markets that could shed light on this shift? Could this be part of a larger trend toward virtual experiences?"

**2.3 Generate Hypotheses:**
1. Customers prefer digital options due to lower costs. (Confidence: 0.8, Creative: 0.4)
2. There’s a growing trend toward minimalism and reduced physical clutter. (Confidence: 0.7, Creative: 0.7)
3. Digital products offer greater flexibility and ease of use. (Confidence: 0.6, Creative: 0.6)
4. Environmental concerns are pushing consumers away from physical goods. (Confidence: 0.6, Creative: 0.8)
5. Advances in tech make digital-only options more functional. (Confidence: 0.8, Creative: 0.5)
6. Pandemic-era remote work increased demand for digital solutions. (Confidence: 0.7, Creative: 0.6)
7. Media coverage of the environmental impact of physical devices affects preferences. (Confidence: 0.5, Creative: 0.7)
8. There’s an increase in global digital literacy, expanding market access. (Confidence: 0.6, Creative: 0.6)
9. Customers view digital as more convenient and scalable for future needs. (Confidence: 0.7, Creative: 0.5)
10. Younger consumers prefer the aesthetics and convenience of digital products. (Confidence: 0.6, Creative: 0.6)

*Reflection:* 
"Have I considered all possible influences? Are there any surprising factors that could explain this shift?"

*Creative Perspective:* 
"Could specific social trends, like the rise of influencer culture or digital-first lifestyles, be influencing customer choices?"

**2.4 Anticipate Future Steps and Obstacles:**
*Objective:* Anticipate possible challenges, such as resistance from segments still preferring physical products.

*Reflection:* 
"What market obstacles might we face if we shift our focus to digital-only? Are there sub-segments that still prioritize physical products?"

*Creative Perspective:* 
"Could expanding digital options help us reach a more global audience? Are there emerging trends that we could leverage in our strategy?"

[end sys2]

[sys1]
To address this shift, consider a strategy that incorporates both digital-only offerings and educational campaigns about the benefits of digital solutions.
Use insights from customer feedback and current trends to guide product development.
Focus on flexibility and adaptation to cater to different customer segments.
[end sys1]


To link to the entire object, paste this link in email, IM or documentTo embed the entire object, paste this HTML in websiteTo link to this page, paste this link in email, IM or documentTo embed this page, paste this HTML in website

Student Newspaper of the University of Southern California Since 1912 | www.dailytrojan.com | VOL. 168, NO. 25 | Tuesday September 29, 2009
InDEX
2 · News Digest
4 · Opinion
5 · Lifestyle
8 · Classifieds
9 · Crossword
12 · Sports
By grace wong
Daily Trojan
Beginning in October, a new research center at
USC will be conducting research about health policy
in hopes of reforming the health debate in the coun-try.
F
unded by a $1.2 million donation made by Leonard
D. Schaeffer, a health care executive and professor at
USC, and his wife, Pamela Schaeffer, the Leonard D.
Schaeffer Center for Health Policy and Economics
will feature work done mainly by USC’s School of
Policy, Planning and Development and USC’s School
of Pharmacy.
Primarily a research facility, the new Schaeffer
Center will investigate how to provide research on
health policy and economics, how to offer better care
delivery systems, how to regulate and assist with fi-nancing
and how to train researchers, said Jack
Knott, dean of the policy, planning and development
school. The center’s ultimate goal will be to produce
knowledge for a better health care system.
Knott said the center will focus on real needs, such
as those of the aging baby boom generation. The in-formation
the research provides will be disseminated
to policymakers and the community in hopes of inf lu-encing
the decision-making process.
The center will also aim to have an international
impact.
Neeraj Sood, who will spearhead the center’s inter-national
research, said the center hopes to provide an
outlet for developing countries to share ideas about
health policy reform.
“We will be gathering information from other
countries, correcting gaps in our data and providing
innovative solutions to help solve their health policy
problems,” Sood said.
Sood said the center also intends to hold an annual
conference on health policy and economics that will
New research
center opens
next month
USC’s public policy and pharmacy schools hope
the new center will increase research abilities.
| see center, page 3 |
Dieuwertje Kast | Daily Trojan
Eat fresh · Jarod Wunneburger, a senior majoring in sociology, inspects produce at USC Hospitality’s Trojan Fresh Market on
Sept. 17. The Trojan Fresh Market is one of many options available on and around campus for students to buy organic food.
By Sabena suri
Daily Trojan
With students increasingly concerned
about health and sustainability, eating
organic produce has become more com-mon.
In response, a number of farmers
markets have popped up around campus
— but it may be that these farmers mar-kets
are not the healthiest, freshest or
most economical way to get food.
There are currently four farmers mar-kets
easily accessible to USC students: one
run by USC Hospitality at the University
Park Campus, one at the Health Sciences
Campus, a weekly market on Shrine
Place and a weekend farmers market at
Exposition Park. The Hospitality-run
markets began last year, but the others
are recent additions to the organic scene.
But some experts say students might
want to think twice before they flock to
farmers markets.
Dr. Roger Clemens, an expert in food
industry and health trends and an adjunct
professor at the USC School of Pharmacy,
said the miscalculation of the health ben-efits
of organic foods — which are often a
major selling point at farmers markets —
is the only thing that has turned the or-ganic
food market into a viable one.
“There’s a perceived health difference.
Perception drives much of the market. It’s
kind of a placebo effect,” Clemens said.
According to Clemens, the nutrition-al
value from an organic apple, for ex-ample,
is negligible compared to that of
a conventionally farmed apple. Citing a
study published in the American Journal
of Public Health in July, Clemens said it
Options abound, but organic might not be worth it
Four nearby farmers markets offer
fresh, organic produce, but students
are still wary of higher prices.
| see markets, page 3 |
By Louis lucero ii
Daily Trojan
With operations centered in a
small Figueroa Building set against
the eastern edge of campus, the
Office of Student Judicial Affairs
and Community Standards does
not appear threatening on first
glance.
But that may prove to be far from
the case for some USC students, de-pending
on their particular college
experience.
SJACS, created in the early 1980s,
was given the task of conducting
student reviews in cases where stu-dents
violated the university’s rules
and regulations.
“The university decided to start
up a department that would review
everything and so it would be as
one centralized unit that would ad-judicate
and keep all the [disciplin-ary]
records for the university,” said
Dr. Raquel Torres-Retana, assistant
dean and director of SJACS.
A student’s experience with
SJACS begins with the submission
of a report detailing the alleged vi-olation.
Incident reports prepared by
DPS officers initiate the bulk of the
cases SJACS pursues, according to
Torres-Retana, though no case is
pursued until the report is deter-mined
to have sufficient evidence
to warrant proceeding with the stu-dent
conduct process. SJACS usu-ally
will not follow up on reports
based on anonymous calls or those
with insufficient details.
A prevalent misconception
about SJACS is that it deals with sit-uations
where a student is “written
up” in university-owned housing.
“If it’s at the [Resident Advisor]
level, and it’s a minor incident and
it just really has to do with the res-idential
community ... it doesn’t
come to judicial affairs,” Torres-
Retana said.
For more serious issues, stu-dents
are expected to arrange a
meeting with an SJACS hearing of-ficer
by a date specified in a let-ter
from the department. The
meeting, a one-on-one review with
a hearing officer, is designed to
minimize anxiety and intimidation
for students.
“I think the media for the most
part has portrayed college judi-cial
boards ... to be a panel of their
peers with 15 people around the ta-ble,
and that’s not how we do it here
at USC,” Torres-Retana said. “It’s an
administrative review, so it’s a one-on-
one ­—
the student who is being
written up, or the accused student
and the hearing officer.”
After the review, if the hearing
officer finds the student is guilty, he
or she can choose to either accept
or not accept responsibility. If they
choose to accept responsibility, the
item goes on their disciplinary re-cord
but not necessarily on their ac-ademic
one.
Students have 10 days to ap-peal
the decision before SJACS is-sues
a sanction, which may range
from a warning to outright expul-sion.
According to Torres-Retana,
the department aims to teach rath-er
than to punish outright with its
sanctions.
“Some of the misconceptions out
there are that students are going
to go through some type of puni-tive
process and, for the most part,
our process and our approach with
working with students is develop-mental,”
Torres-Retana said.
SJACS gives students a shot at making amends for university violations
Often misunderstood, the
Judicial Affairs process aims to
educate, rather than to punish.
| see Sjacs, page 3 |
Developing story:
USC running back Stafon Johnson underwent seven hours of emergency
surgery Monday after a weightlifting accident. See PAGE 12 for details.
R e p o r t is fi le d with SJACS that
a violation of the Student Conduct
Code may have occurred.
S tu d en t is n o t ifi e d via mail of
alleged violation and asked to meet with
a judicial officer by specified date.
Adm in is t ra t iv e R e v iew
Student meets with Judicial Officer to
review process and discuss allegations.
D e c is io n Judicial Officer determines
if student should be held responsible for
violation of Student Conduct Code.
Student signs Vo lu n ta r y Admin is -
t ra t iv e R e view including Conduct
Code Violations and Sanctions. (Stu-dent
may appeal sanctions only.)
Student sent S um m a r y Adm in is -
t ra t iv e R e v iew decision via mail.
(Student may appeal Conduct Code
Violations and sanctions.)
Ap p e a l P ro c e s s
Student has 10 business days to submit in writing to
either a voluntary or summary administrative review.
The Appeal Panel decision is final and binding.
Case D ism is s e d
or Student Given a
Wa rn in g
Student Judicial Affairs and
Community Standards
Administrative Review Flowchart
Student found
re sp o n s ib le
If student doesn’t
accept responsibility:
If student accepts
responsibility:
If student found not
responsible:
Celine Lam | Daily Trojan

Student Newspaper of the University of Southern California Since 1912 | www.dailytrojan.com | VOL. 168, NO. 25 | Tuesday September 29, 2009
InDEX
2 · News Digest
4 · Opinion
5 · Lifestyle
8 · Classifieds
9 · Crossword
12 · Sports
By grace wong
Daily Trojan
Beginning in October, a new research center at
USC will be conducting research about health policy
in hopes of reforming the health debate in the coun-try.
F
unded by a $1.2 million donation made by Leonard
D. Schaeffer, a health care executive and professor at
USC, and his wife, Pamela Schaeffer, the Leonard D.
Schaeffer Center for Health Policy and Economics
will feature work done mainly by USC’s School of
Policy, Planning and Development and USC’s School
of Pharmacy.
Primarily a research facility, the new Schaeffer
Center will investigate how to provide research on
health policy and economics, how to offer better care
delivery systems, how to regulate and assist with fi-nancing
and how to train researchers, said Jack
Knott, dean of the policy, planning and development
school. The center’s ultimate goal will be to produce
knowledge for a better health care system.
Knott said the center will focus on real needs, such
as those of the aging baby boom generation. The in-formation
the research provides will be disseminated
to policymakers and the community in hopes of inf lu-encing
the decision-making process.
The center will also aim to have an international
impact.
Neeraj Sood, who will spearhead the center’s inter-national
research, said the center hopes to provide an
outlet for developing countries to share ideas about
health policy reform.
“We will be gathering information from other
countries, correcting gaps in our data and providing
innovative solutions to help solve their health policy
problems,” Sood said.
Sood said the center also intends to hold an annual
conference on health policy and economics that will
New research
center opens
next month
USC’s public policy and pharmacy schools hope
the new center will increase research abilities.
| see center, page 3 |
Dieuwertje Kast | Daily Trojan
Eat fresh · Jarod Wunneburger, a senior majoring in sociology, inspects produce at USC Hospitality’s Trojan Fresh Market on
Sept. 17. The Trojan Fresh Market is one of many options available on and around campus for students to buy organic food.
By Sabena suri
Daily Trojan
With students increasingly concerned
about health and sustainability, eating
organic produce has become more com-mon.
In response, a number of farmers
markets have popped up around campus
— but it may be that these farmers mar-kets
are not the healthiest, freshest or
most economical way to get food.
There are currently four farmers mar-kets
easily accessible to USC students: one
run by USC Hospitality at the University
Park Campus, one at the Health Sciences
Campus, a weekly market on Shrine
Place and a weekend farmers market at
Exposition Park. The Hospitality-run
markets began last year, but the others
are recent additions to the organic scene.
But some experts say students might
want to think twice before they flock to
farmers markets.
Dr. Roger Clemens, an expert in food
industry and health trends and an adjunct
professor at the USC School of Pharmacy,
said the miscalculation of the health ben-efits
of organic foods — which are often a
major selling point at farmers markets —
is the only thing that has turned the or-ganic
food market into a viable one.
“There’s a perceived health difference.
Perception drives much of the market. It’s
kind of a placebo effect,” Clemens said.
According to Clemens, the nutrition-al
value from an organic apple, for ex-ample,
is negligible compared to that of
a conventionally farmed apple. Citing a
study published in the American Journal
of Public Health in July, Clemens said it
Options abound, but organic might not be worth it
Four nearby farmers markets offer
fresh, organic produce, but students
are still wary of higher prices.
| see markets, page 3 |
By Louis lucero ii
Daily Trojan
With operations centered in a
small Figueroa Building set against
the eastern edge of campus, the
Office of Student Judicial Affairs
and Community Standards does
not appear threatening on first
glance.
But that may prove to be far from
the case for some USC students, de-pending
on their particular college
experience.
SJACS, created in the early 1980s,
was given the task of conducting
student reviews in cases where stu-dents
violated the university’s rules
and regulations.
“The university decided to start
up a department that would review
everything and so it would be as
one centralized unit that would ad-judicate
and keep all the [disciplin-ary]
records for the university,” said
Dr. Raquel Torres-Retana, assistant
dean and director of SJACS.
A student’s experience with
SJACS begins with the submission
of a report detailing the alleged vi-olation.
Incident reports prepared by
DPS officers initiate the bulk of the
cases SJACS pursues, according to
Torres-Retana, though no case is
pursued until the report is deter-mined
to have sufficient evidence
to warrant proceeding with the stu-dent
conduct process. SJACS usu-ally
will not follow up on reports
based on anonymous calls or those
with insufficient details.
A prevalent misconception
about SJACS is that it deals with sit-uations
where a student is “written
up” in university-owned housing.
“If it’s at the [Resident Advisor]
level, and it’s a minor incident and
it just really has to do with the res-idential
community ... it doesn’t
come to judicial affairs,” Torres-
Retana said.
For more serious issues, stu-dents
are expected to arrange a
meeting with an SJACS hearing of-ficer
by a date specified in a let-ter
from the department. The
meeting, a one-on-one review with
a hearing officer, is designed to
minimize anxiety and intimidation
for students.
“I think the media for the most
part has portrayed college judi-cial
boards ... to be a panel of their
peers with 15 people around the ta-ble,
and that’s not how we do it here
at USC,” Torres-Retana said. “It’s an
administrative review, so it’s a one-on-
one ­—
the student who is being
written up, or the accused student
and the hearing officer.”
After the review, if the hearing
officer finds the student is guilty, he
or she can choose to either accept
or not accept responsibility. If they
choose to accept responsibility, the
item goes on their disciplinary re-cord
but not necessarily on their ac-ademic
one.
Students have 10 days to ap-peal
the decision before SJACS is-sues
a sanction, which may range
from a warning to outright expul-sion.
According to Torres-Retana,
the department aims to teach rath-er
than to punish outright with its
sanctions.
“Some of the misconceptions out
there are that students are going
to go through some type of puni-tive
process and, for the most part,
our process and our approach with
working with students is develop-mental,”
Torres-Retana said.
SJACS gives students a shot at making amends for university violations
Often misunderstood, the
Judicial Affairs process aims to
educate, rather than to punish.
| see Sjacs, page 3 |
Developing story:
USC running back Stafon Johnson underwent seven hours of emergency
surgery Monday after a weightlifting accident. See PAGE 12 for details.
R e p o r t is fi le d with SJACS that
a violation of the Student Conduct
Code may have occurred.
S tu d en t is n o t ifi e d via mail of
alleged violation and asked to meet with
a judicial officer by specified date.
Adm in is t ra t iv e R e v iew
Student meets with Judicial Officer to
review process and discuss allegations.
D e c is io n Judicial Officer determines
if student should be held responsible for
violation of Student Conduct Code.
Student signs Vo lu n ta r y Admin is -
t ra t iv e R e view including Conduct
Code Violations and Sanctions. (Stu-dent
may appeal sanctions only.)
Student sent S um m a r y Adm in is -
t ra t iv e R e v iew decision via mail.
(Student may appeal Conduct Code
Violations and sanctions.)
Ap p e a l P ro c e s s
Student has 10 business days to submit in writing to
either a voluntary or summary administrative review.
The Appeal Panel decision is final and binding.
Case D ism is s e d
or Student Given a
Wa rn in g
Student Judicial Affairs and
Community Standards
Administrative Review Flowchart
Student found
re sp o n s ib le
If student doesn’t
accept responsibility:
If student accepts
responsibility:
If student found not
responsible:
Celine Lam | Daily Trojan