There are many things computers already do better than we do. In fact, a 2013 Oxford study forecast that machines might be able to perform half of all U.S jobs in the next 20 years.

I never imagined my job could ever be “computerizable.” How on earth could a machine do a better job than I do in evaluating patients, providing therapy and recommending treatment?

Well, in some cases, it can. By using cameras to follow subtle cues such as micro-facial expressions, the frequency of looking at the floor, as well as speech patterns, new research reveals computers can spot symptoms of depression that psychiatrists may not catch.

Other research suggests people are more honest in therapy sessions when they believe they are communicating with computers, because unlike humans they do not pass moral judgment. Similarly, people are more likely to report suicidal feelings on a smartphone than on a printed questionnaire at a doctor’s office. Computers provide an anonymous and a shame-free environment. Indeed:

Google and WebMD already may be answering questions once reserved for one’s therapist.

Scientists are also using smartphones to collect passive data (such as how many steps someone takes each day, how many emails they send, etc.) and active data (voice samples, mood trackers) to provide objective measurements of mental health.

That said, I don’t think anyone is proposing that computers replace psychiatrists just yet. The secret sauce seems to lie in the combination of the two.

It might seem old-fashioned, but if you want to get something done or make a good impression, pick up the phone. Better yet, say it in person.

New research shows that text-based communications may make individuals sound less intelligent and employable than when the same information is communicated orally.

In other words, if you are trying to impress someone, close a deal, get a job, or make yourself more appealing, don’t let your fingers do the talking.

As the lead researcher explains:

How do we know that another person has a mind at all? The closest you ever get to the mind of another person is through their mouth.

One area where this is loud and clear is on the dating scene. Interpreting text messages is particularly challenging. Punctuation, capital letters, and response time are open to interpretation.

For example, when someone writes “I’ll text you later,” do they really mean they will text later? Is it a blow off? Wired.com offers some insightful decoding tips. For example, an exclamation point can fundamentally alter the meaning of a message. Compare:

Sounds good. Not sure if we’re going but I might see you at the party. If you leave, let me know.

Sounds good. Not sure if we’re going but I might see you at the party. If you leave, let me know!

The tone of the first one is passive whereas the tone of the latter example is enthusiastic and encouraging. Even with a punctuation guide as in this example, it is often impossible to read the tone of a text message.

My advice: pick up the phone.

Great news for those who are terrible at wrapping presents. A study found that badly wrapped gifts are better received than those that look like they belong under Martha Stewart’s Christmas tree.

This is especially true for gifts that aren’t expected to knock the recipient’s socks off. An exquisitely wrapped present with crisp edges, expertly hidden tape, and a beautiful velvet ribbon tied in a perfect bow heightens expectations. If what’s inside the box underwhelms, the recipient’s high hopes will be dashed.

According to the study, a messily wrapped gift is less likely to disappoint and more likely to delight. Plus, it’s better for the environment not to waste all those unnecessary wrapping materials.

Bottom Line: The holidays are stressful enough—it’s okay if you can’t wrap like Santa’s elves.