Enzyme purification, characterization, and identification are some of the best ways to introduce undergraduate students to many aspects of biochemistry, particularly as part of project‐based learning (PBL). These kinds of multi‐step laboratory experiments not only help students to better understand basic biochemistry concepts but also serve to introduce them to the scaffolded nature of the research environment. A 13‐week enzyme‐based laboratory project was designed as one of three components associated with the course titled Capstone Laboratory, which is delivered to second‐year undergraduate students at Weill Cornell Medicine in Qatar (WCM‐Q). The project incorporated several fundamental biochemical laboratory techniques, such as chromatography, centrifugation, spectrophotometry, electrophoresis, and kinetic assays, as well as enzyme inhibition and bioinformatic exercises. The aims of the project were to first purify, then to quantify, and finally to study a particular lactate dehydrogenase (LDH) isoenzyme extracted from different chicken organs. LDH was selected for investigation because its inhibition has potential as a therapeutic strategy for cancer treatment. Students enrolled in the Capstone Laboratory course were divided into three groups. Each group conducted experiments associated with one of the project's three aims over consecutive 3‐week periods. Relevant data and materials were passed from one group to the next, with individual students writing reports describing the results from their respective collection of experiments. Students in the third and final group gave presentations summarizing the results of the overall project. In the associated bioinformatic exercises, students assessed the similarities and differences between chicken‐sourced and human‐sourced LDH as well as the interaction between the LDH enzyme and the inhibitors. This PBL in biochemistry is a successful addition to the WCM‐Q premedical curriculum because (a) it affords the second‐year premedical students opportunities to improve and develop content knowledge and technical and communication skills, and also (b) it provides an opportunity to engage many of the undergraduate students in research.

T HE purposes of this experimental study are: (1) to determine whether or not there is any difference in the suggestibility of introverts as compared to extroverts and; (2) to measure and analyze these differences ORIENTATION A BRIEF ACCOUNT OF EARLIER STUDIESConsiderable controversy has raged around the idea that suggestibility is an indication of certain pathological conditions. For many years it has been the theory of the Charcot School that suggestibility is closely linked with neurotic tendency W. McDougall (10) stated m 1926 that "the suggestibility of any subject is a function of several factors, and varies with these factors " One of his three "great" factors is "susceptibility to dissociation " According to McDougall "This undoubtedly is a constitutional peculiarity; the extrovert being more liable than the introvert to dissociation. . ."Guilford and Braly (7) found that extroverts are more easily hypnotized Bartlett (3) in 1936 found a relationship to exist m the normal group between suggestibility and extroversion Dahm and Jenness (5) (1937) found that a pronounced negative relationship (-88 ± 05) seemed to exist between introversion and suggestibility m men. The relationship for women was positive but not significantly so Davis and Husband (6) (1931) found the correlation between hypnotic susceptibility and introversion to be low Bart-

It IS generally recognized that some individuals are more open to influence than others Whether this is a general trait or an algebraic combination of specific traits, the fact remains that to the layman both sexes, at all ages, exhibit what is called suggestibility Considerable controversy has raged around the idea that suggestibility IS an indication of certain pathologfical conditions McDougall (14) stated in 1926 that "the suggestibility of any subject IS a function of several factors and varies with these factors " One of his three "great" factors is "susceptibility to dissociation" According to McDougall "This undoubtedly is a constitutional peculiarity, the extrovert being more liable than the introvert to dissoaation and therefore more susceptible to hypnosis" (14, pp. 124-125) Moreover, he lmphes that this holds for suggestibihty alone Gull ford and Braly (6), in an expenmental test of McDougall's theory of extroversion-introversion, found that extroverts are more easily hypnotized Bartlett (1), working with the relation of suggestibility to other perscmahty traits, found in the normal group a small negative relationship between suggestibility and extroversion Dahms and Jenness (S), studying direct suggestion and social introversion as related to auditory threshold and reaction time dunng reverie, found that a pronounced negative relationship seemed to exist between social introversion (Nebraska Inventory) and direct suggestibility The relationship for women was positive but not significantly soIn an earlier study (15) we reported no significant differences found in heterosuggestibility of introverts and extroverts on a battery of five suggestibility tests Since the formulation of the concept of introversion-extroversion by Jung (12), there have been a number of criticisms advanced against it Guthrie (10), by finding little lntercorrelation between four tests purported to measure extrovertive or introvertive behavior.

No abstract