Telegram RegisterThe public register of Telegram
Telegram profile photo for [جنآس]

Channel

[جنآس]

@jenasmedia

On this record: Growth · Engagement · What this channel posts · Reactions · Stars · Posts · Polls · Citations · Cite this entry

9,914subscribers

-97 since we began measuring on 7 August 2026

Risers and fallers across the register · movement among entries of 3,162–10,000.

Register entry

Telegram ID-1002109896270
TypeChannel
Username@jenasmedia
Description🌒 #بیندیش | علوم انسانی، روایتِ انسان و هر آن چیزی است که از او برمی‌خیزد.🍃 انتقاد و پیشنهاد: @Jenas_support آرشیو: @jenasOrg
CreatedBetween 1 November 2023 and 31 May 2024— estimated from Telegram’s id allocation, not measured. How this range is calculated.
First recorded7 August 2026
Last confirmed live14 August 2026
Measurements held4
Confirmed unchanged1 time, most recently 14 August 2026
On Telegramt.me/jenasmedia

Growth

9,91410,0119,962.57 August 2026 — 10,011 subscribers8 August 2026 — 9,996 subscribers11 August 2026 — 9,958 subscribers14 August 2026 — 9,914 subscribers7 August 202614 August 2026
4 measurements spanning 7 days, net -97. Dots are measurements; the straight line between them is drawn to join them, not to claim we know the path taken in between — snapshots are recorded only when a count changes, so gaps mean “no change observed”, never “interpolated”. The vertical axis spans 9,899–10,026 and does not start at zero.
Measurement log — every subscribers count we have recorded
Measured (UTC)SubscribersChange
14 Aug 2026, 10:289,914-44
11 Aug 2026, 04:019,958-38
8 Aug 2026, 11:579,996-15
7 Aug 2026, 14:1610,011first reading

Engagement

41 posts held, back to 24 July 2026the reader has not yet reached the start of this channel’s public history, so older posts may sit further back, unread. Read across 17 pagesof Telegram’s post history, 20 posts per page.

ERR · 30 days
8.14%
avg views ÷ 9,914 subscribers
Avg views / post
807
40 posts measured
Reaction rate
1.60%
reactions ÷ views · ER floor
Posts in window
41
of 41 held

ERR is average views per post over the last 30 days divided by subscribers, the definition TGStat uses, so this figure is comparable with the one you will see elsewhere. It falls structurally as a channel grows: a high ERR on a small channel and a low one on a large channel describe reach mathematics, not quality. We publish the figure and the sample it came from and pass no verdict on it.

ER is defined industry-wide as (forwards + reactions + comments) ÷ views— note the denominator is views, not subscribers. Telegram’s public web preview carries views and reactions but not forward or comment counts, so the reaction rate above is the reactions term only and is therefore a floor: the true ER for this channel is higher by an amount we have not measured and will not estimate. It is computed over the 36 of 40 measured posts that carry a reaction reading, and over those same posts' views.

What these figures were computed from
WindowRolling 30 days · latest post in window 15 August 2026
Posts held41 (24 July 202615 August 2026)
Views total32,283
Reactions total459
Forwards / commentsnot exposed by the public surface — not measured, not estimated
Readings taken15 Aug 2026, 19:52 UTC

Views are a single reading per post, taken at the time above. A post published in the last day or two is still accumulating views, which pulls the 30-day average down slightly. That is a property of the standard definition rather than a fault in it, so we keep the definition rather than “correcting” the number into something nobody can reproduce.

Precision. Telegram publishes view counts on its public widget in short form — 8.12K, 3.7M — so any reading at or above 1,000 reaches us rounded to three significant figures, and only counts below 1,000 are exact. Averages and rates derived from them are shown to the same precision rather than to the unit: a figure like 3,701,250 would assert digits nobody measured.

Reaction counts are published per emoji and rounded the same way, so a total below 1,000 is exact and a larger one is a sum that may carry a rounded component from each emoji above 1,000. Because it is a sum, it does not look rounded — read a large reaction total as three significant figures per contributing emoji rather than as the figure it prints.

What this channel posts

Photos
622
Videos
106
Links
619

Lifetime counters from Telegram’s own channel header, read 15 August 2026 — not the date at the top of this page, which is when the subscriber count was last read. Below Telegram’s rounding threshold, so these counts are exact.

Video runtime
27m 09s
Average length
5m 26s

Measured directly from 5 videos with a duration reading, out of the posts we hold for this channel — not this channel’s whole posting history, only the sample this register has actually read. An exact reading to the second, taken from the post itself rather than from Telegram’s own rounded chrome, so it carries no mark.

Reaction mix

459 reactions across 35 posts, in 4 distinct kinds. The most used accounts for 70.4% of them.

Every reaction kind recorded on the sample, most used first
ReactionCountShareShare, drawn
32370.4%
👍11625.3%
👎102.18%
💔102.18%

No sentiment is inferred, and none should be read in. This table is ordered by count and by nothing else. Emoji do not carry stable meaning across languages or communities — 🙏 is thanks in one channel and mourning in another — so we publish which ones were pressed and how often, and pass no judgement on what an audience meant by them.

Precision. Telegram publishes reaction counts per emoji and short-forms each one — 4.34K, 1.2M — so any single kind at or above 1,000 reaches us at three significant figures, and only counts below 1,000 are exact. The shares above are ratios of those figures and carry the same error. This is also why the total here can differ slightly from a reaction total printed elsewhere on the page: both are sums of the same rounded parts, taken over samples with different edges.

Coverage. Reactions were read on 36 of the 41 sampled posts in this sample. Summed by Telegram’s own count on each post — not by adding up the per-emoji breakdown above — those same posts carry 459reactions in total: the kind of figure the paragraph above means by “a reaction total printed elsewhere on the page”.

Measured over the 41 most recent posts we hold, published 24 July 2026 to 15 August 2026, using the newest reading held for each. Telegram Stars are excluded: they are a payment, not a reaction, and they have their own section.

Telegram Stars

Stars received
24
across the posts below
Posts paid on
18
of 40 we hold a reading for · 45%
Most on one post
4
single highest reading

A paid reaction is a reader spending Telegram Stars — bought with money — on a post by @jenasmedia. Telegram publishes the count on the public post preview alongside ordinary reactions, and this register reads it there. It is the only figure on this site that measures money moving rather than attention.

Stars are not reactions, and the two are never added. They are rendered in the same strip on Telegram and counted in the same shape, but one is a tap and the other is a purchase. The reaction totals and the engagement rate elsewhere on this page exclude every figure in this section, and no rate here is computed against a reaction count.

This is not revenue, and we publish no currency figure. What a Star costs a reader and what it pays a channel are different numbers, Telegram takes a share we cannot observe, and the terms have changed. Converting a Star count into money would be an estimate dressed as a measurement, so the count is where we stop.

Counted over the 41 most recent posts we hold for this entry, published 24 July 2026 to 15 August 2026. Star counts above 1,000 reach us in Telegram’s short form and carry the same three-significant-figure rounding as everything else on this page.

Recent posts

15 Aug 2026, 16:02 UTC131 views5 reactions1 Starread 15 August 2026
Forwarded from @science_magazine

🧠 یک نورون تنها، به‌اندازه‌ی یک شبکه‌ی هوش مصنوعی کامل محاسبه می‌کند سال‌ها تصور می‌شد راز هوش انسان در تعداد نورون‌های مغزه؛ نزدیک به صد میلیارد سلول و شبکه‌ی اتصالاتشون. پژوهشی تازه در PNAS نشون می‌ده بخشی از این راز جای دیگه‌ایه: توان محاسباتی خودِ یک نورون تنها. پژوهشگران دانشگاه عبری اورشلیم یه شبکه‌ی هوش مصنوعی ساختن تا رفتار یه نورون واقعی رو تقلید کنه؛ هرچه این «دوقلوی مصنوعی» برای تقلید به لایه‌های بیشتر

5

14 Aug 2026, 16:46 UTC343 views3 reactionsread 15 August 2026

در حال آغاز هستیم🔸 در صورتی که علاقه به شرکت در بحث دارید وارد لینک زیر شوید 👨‍👨‍👧‍👧 https://t.me/+7UhAFacmXc5jZGE0

3

14 Aug 2026, 10:00 UTC378 views6 reactions2 Starsread 15 August 2026

سیاست همکاری در شامپانزه‌ها: در میان گروه بزرگی از شامپانزه‌های باغ وحش آرنهم در هلند، شامپانزه‌ای به نام یرون به‌عنوان نر بزرگسال برتر حکمرانی می‌کرد (دوال، ۱۹۸۲). او با گام‌های سنگین مـطالعه‌آمیز حرکت می‌کرد و بزرگ‌تر از آنچه واقعاً بود به نظر می‌رسید. او فقط گاه‌گاهی نیاز پیدا می‌کرد که برتری‌اش را در نهایت با سیخ کردن موهای بدنش و هجوم بسیار سریع به میمون‌های دیگر نشان دهد و آن‌ها نیز در واکنش به حمله او در جهات

4👍2

14 Aug 2026, 09:47 UTC366 views7 reactionsread 15 August 2026

اما همکاری فقط مخصوص ما انسان ها نیست! خفاش های خون آشام به علت وابستگی بقای آنها به خون حیوانات دیگر شهرت پیدا کردن.خفاش‌ها فقط سه روز بدون مکیدن خون زنده می‌مونن. با این حال، آمارها نشون می‌ده میزان موفقیتشون در پیدا کردن خون خیلی بالاست و فقط در بعضی موقعیت‌ها با شکست مواجه می‌شن. خفاش‌هایی که به مکیدن خون موفق نمی‌شوند چگونه زنده می‌مانند؟ در واقع، دست‌یافتن به خون ممکن است به‌سرعت موجب مرگ آن‌ها شود. خفاش‌ها ف

4👍3

14 Aug 2026, 08:52 UTC320 views10 reactions1 Starread 15 August 2026
Photo

🤝نوع‌دوستی متقابل | چرا به هم کمک می‌کنیم؟ گاهی کمک‌کردن به دیگران آن‌قدرها هم «فداکارانه» نیست که در نگاه اول به نظر می‌رسد. در طبیعت و زندگی اجتماعی، موجودات زیادی به یکدیگر کمک می‌کنند؛ چون این همکاری می‌تواند در آینده به نفع هر دو طرف تمام شود. به این ایده در زیست‌شناسی تکاملی می‌گویند نوع‌دوستی متقابل (Reciprocal Altruism)؛ یعنی «من امروز به تو کمک می‌کنم، چون احتمال دارد فردا تو هم به من کمک کنی.» مثلاً فرض کن

8👍2

13 Aug 2026, 18:59 UTC364 views11 reactionsread 15 August 2026
Video

دکتر سلطانی توضیح میدهد: تفکر سریع و کند چه کاربردی در قضاوت ما دارند؟ #روانشناسی_شناختی #روانشناسی 😎منتشر شده در: آکادمی علوم انسانی [جنآس] | #بیندیش

11

13 Aug 2026, 17:37 UTC422 views9 reactionsread 15 August 2026
Photo

🎥کتاب «فقر احمق می‌کند» نوشتهٔ Sendhil Mullainathan، اقتصاددان رفتاری، و Eldar Shafir، روان‌شناس شناختی، یک پاسخ جالب دارد: مسئله لزوماً کمبودِ عقل نیست؛ مسئله کمبودِ ظرفیت ذهنی است. نویسندگان مفهوم مهمی به نام Mental Bandwidth یا «پهنای‌باند ذهنی» را مطرح می‌کنند. وقتی چیزی برای ما کمیاب می‌شود—پول، زمان، غذا یا حتی روابط اجتماعی—ذهن به‌طور طبیعی روی همان کمبود متمرکز می‌شود. اگر تمام ذهن آدم درگیر این باشد که «اجار

7💔2

13 Aug 2026, 12:18 UTC412 views9 reactions1 Starread 15 August 2026

🌟طبیعت نه مهربان است و نه نامهربان. او نه طرفدار رنج و عذاب است و نه علیه آن. طبیعت هیچ علاقه یا اهمیتی براي رنج دادن و رنج بردن قائل نیست، مگر اینکه بر بقایِ دی ان ای تأثیرگذار باشد. به راحتی میتوان ژنی را تصور کرد که هنگامی که یک غزال در شرف کشته شدن با دندان های یوزپلنگ است، درد آنرا کاهش دهد. آیا همچون ژنی مورد لطف انتخاب طبیعی قرار میگیرد؟ خیر، مگر اینکه عمل آرام کردن غزال شانس ژن را براي انتقال به نسل های آیند

4👍4👎1

13 Aug 2026, 06:24 UTC437 views8 reactionsread 15 August 2026

🤩 آیا زیبایی را یاد می‌گیریم یا از پیش در ذهن ماست؟ بسیاری از نظریه‌های سنتی روان‌شناسی دربارهٔ جذابیت بر این فرض استوار بودند که معیارهای زیبایی محصول یادگیری فرهنگی‌اند؛ یعنی کودک به‌تدریج و از طریق مواجهه با الگوهای فرهنگی می‌آموزد چه چهره‌ای را زیبا بداند. بر اساس این دیدگاه، چنین ترجیحی نباید در سال‌های نخست زندگی به‌وضوح دیده شود. اما پژوهش‌های جودیت لنگلوس و همکارانش این تصور را به چالش کشید. 🔬 در یک مطالعه

7👍1

12 Aug 2026, 16:00 UTC445 views8 reactionsread 15 August 2026
Photo

🔸 کرم الگانس | Caenorhabditis elegans یک کرم شفاف هست که بسیاری از ژن های انسان را در خودش دارد. این کرم حدود ۲۰٬۰۰۰ ژن کُدکنندهٔ پروتئین دارد و بخش قابل‌توجهی از ژن‌های آن با ژن‌های انسان همولوگ (homologous) هستند؛ - به عبارتی این ژن‌ها از یک نیای تکاملی مشترک منشأ گرفته‌اند. سیستم عصبی یک کرم الگانس تشکیل شده از۳۰۲ نورون است و درازای آن تقریباً یک میلی‌متر می‌باشد، از این روی، این کرم یکی از بهترین گزینه‌ها برای

5👍3

12 Aug 2026, 15:22 UTC459 views9 reactions1 Starread 15 August 2026
Photo

🔹جمعه ساعت 20 | بحث در مورد روانشناسی تکاملی🦍 1-آیا هر رفتار انسانی را می‌توان در نهایت با منطق انتخاب طبیعی توضیح داد، یا روان انسان دارای پدیده‌هایی است که توضیح تکاملی برای آن‌ها کافی نیست؟ 2-اگر ذهن انسان محصول تکامل است، چرا باید انتظار داشته باشیم سازوکارهای شناختی آن در جهان مدرن نیز کارآمد باشند؟ 3-آیا «طبیعی بودن» یک رفتار به معنای «اجتناب‌ناپذیر بودن» آن است؟ 4-اگر یک رفتار در گذشته مزیت بقا یا تولیدمثل دا

7👍1👎1

Showing the 12 most recent of 41 posts we hold for @jenasmedia. View and reaction counts are the latest single reading for each post, not a live figure, and a recent post is still accumulating both. A view count marked was rounded by Telegram before we ever saw it — t.me prints views in full below 1,000 and to three significant figures above, so ≈1,200,000 means somewhere between 1,150,000 and 1,249,999. Unmarked counts are exact. Text is reproduced from the public post preview and truncated for length.

Stars beside a post are paid reactions — Telegram Stars, bought with money and spent on that post. They are a different unit from reactions and are never added to them, here or anywhere else on this page.

Polls

The 4 polls we hold for this entry, as Telegram rendered them when we read the post. A poll’s figures keep moving after that, so each one is dated.

11 Aug 2026, 16:45 UTCAnonymous Poll60 voters

📆 آخر هفته جاری بحثی در تالار گفتگو داشته باشیم؟

  1. 👍🏻83%
  2. 👎🏻17%

Shares as published. No per-option vote count is published by Telegram, so none is shown.

30 Jul 2026, 17:56 UTCAnonymous Poll129 voters

🧐اگر کسی به ما بگوید که این حیوان از خویشاوندان ژنتیکی ماست ناراحت میشویم؟

  1. بله15%
  2. خیر85%

Shares as published. No per-option vote count is published by Telegram, so none is shown.

24 Jul 2026, 09:44 UTCAnonymous Poll142 voters

به کدام موضوع علاقه بیشتری دارید؟

  1. روانشناسی تکاملی38%
  2. روانشناسی اجتماعی43%
  3. اقتصاد رفتاری15%
  4. روانشناسی بالینی42%
  5. سایر9%

The shares total 147%, above 100: this poll accepts more than one answer per voter. No per-option vote count is published, so the number of voters who chose each option is not derivable and is not shown.

24 Jul 2026, 09:43 UTCAnonymous Poll85 voters

با کدام موضوع زیر بیشتر آشنا هستید؟

  1. روانشناسی تکاملی21%
  2. روانشناسی اجتماعی53%
  3. اقتصاد رفتاری (اقتصاد+روانشناسی)20%
  4. روانشناسی بالینی38%

The shares total 132%, above 100: this poll accepts more than one answer per voter. No per-option vote count is published, so the number of voters who chose each option is not derivable and is not shown.

Percentages only — there are no per-option vote counts here, because Telegram publishes none.The public post preview gives each option’s share and a single voter total, and nothing else. Multiplying one by the other would produce a per-option tally that looks measured and is not: the shares are rounded to whole numbers before we ever see them. We print what was published and leave the column that does not exist empty.

The shares need not add up to 100.Rounding alone puts many polls at 99 or 101. A poll that allows more than one answer per voter runs well past 100 by design, and several here do. The bars are drawn against a fixed 100% track at each option’s own percentage rather than normalised to the total, so a poll that exceeds it shows that it does instead of being quietly rescaled.

Read from the 41 most recent posts we hold, published 24 July 2026 to 15 August 2026. Telegram labels each poll by kind — an anonymous poll, a quiz, a closed set of final results — and that label is reproduced rather than paraphrased.

Citation-graph rank

Citation-graph rank — 1,067,344 of 1,481,217entries in the measured graph. A weighted position computed from the forward and mention edges below — republished posts weigh more than named mentions — and recomputed periodically, over the whole graph. Published only as this ordinal position, never as a score: a position is a fact, and a score printed beside one channel’s name would read as a verdict this register does not make. The two counts beneath stay separate for the same reason mentions are never summed with forwards anywhere else on this page — a named-by count costs nothing to manufacture. The top 100 by this measure, or how it is computed.

Forward network

Republishes

Channels on the register whose posts this channel has forwarded.

Built only from forwarded posts we have actually read, on both sides. Coverage is early and deliberately incomplete: a missing link means we have not read the post that would prove it, never that the relationship does not exist. Counts are distinct forwarded posts observed, so they only ever go up as we read more.

Mentions

Named by 1 registered channel — every channel on the register whose own posts have named this one, by its current username or any other username it currently holds, merged from two separately captured readings of the same fact so a namer caught by only one of them is not missed and a namer both caught is not counted twice. A username this channel has since dropped is not matched — that handle may belong to someone else now, and crediting today’s namer to yesterday’s owner would misattribute it.

Named by

Channels on the register whose posts name this channel's handle.

Names

Channels on the register whose handles appear in this channel's posts.

A mention is a weaker signal than a forward and is counted separately for that reason — naming a channel is not republishing it, and a handle in a post body is easy to place deliberately. The post counts beside each row below are distinct posts in which the handle appeared, from posts we have read on both sides — the “Named by N registered channels” figure above is a different count, of distinct NAMING CHANNELS rather than posts, and is not the sum of the rows under it.

Cite this entry

A live page changes as we take new readings, so a citation should name the measurement it is based on, not just the URL. The line below cites the subscriber count as measured 14 August 2026 — this entry's latest reading, not the date you are reading this.

“[جنآس]” (@jenasmedia), 9,914 subscribers as measured 14 August 2026. Telegram Register, tgregister.com/channel/jenasmedia.

Full measurement history, CC BY 4.0. Every reading this register holds for this entry, not just the latest one, as a dated, downloadable record: CSV · JSON. Free to use with attribution to tgregister.com. Each file carries its own generation timestamp, which is the figure to cite for exactly when the data was retrieved.