单选题
Making choices is hard. That would be why researcher Moran Cerf has eliminated it from his life. As a rule, he always chooses the second menu item at a restaurant. This is informed by his research in neuroeconomics (神经经济学) (a somewhat new, divisive field) at Northwestern University. As Business Insider describes, Cerf has extended his ideas—which draw on some controversial ideas in psychology, including ego depletion (自我损耗)—out into a piece of advice that, to maximize happiness, people should 'build a life that requires fewer decisions by surrounding themselves with people who embody traits they prefer.' On an intuitive level, Cerf's idea makes sense: Many choices people make are the product of social pressures and the inputs of trusted people around them. One example Cerf furnishes is that, in addition to consistently ordering the second menu item, he never picks where to eat. Rather, he limits his decision to his dining partner—which friend he plans to eat with, presumably one he trusts—and always lets them pick. While it's unclear what, if any, scientific principles underlie those pieces of advice, there is no shortage of research showing that choices can sometimes feel more confusing than liberating. An example from Quanta posits (假设): If you have a clear love of Snickers, choosing that over an Almond Joy or a Milky Way should be a no-brainer. And, as an experiment conducted by neuroscientist Paul Glimcher at NYU shows, most of the time it is. Until you introduce more choices. When the participants were offered three candy bars (Snickers, Milky Way, and Almond Joy) they had no problem picking their favorite, but when they were given the option of one among 20, including Snickers, they would sometimes stray from their preference. When the choices were taken away in later trials, the participants would wonder what caused them to make such a bad decision. As Quanta details, according to a model called 'divisive normalization (分裂归一化), which has gained some traction, the way the brain encodes choices has a lot to do with how it values all its options. So if you have two things that are clearly distinct, brain areas involved in decision-making fire in a pattern that makes the decision clear. When the choices are comparable, the brain does its best to focus on the distinctions between the two, but more choices crowd that out.
单选题
What should people do to build a life with less decision-making in Cerf's opinion?______
【正确答案】
D
【答案解析】由题干中的build a life定位到文章的第二段最后一句。 细节辨认题。由定位句可知，要构建需要做更少决定的生活，人们应当和具有自己比较喜欢的特征的人们待在一起。这与D选项表述相一致，故答案为D。 [参考译文] 做选择是很困难的。那就是研究员莫兰·瑟夫将其从他的生活中消除的原因。作为一项准则，他在餐厅就餐时总是选择第二菜单项。 这是在他的西北大学神经经济学(一个有点儿新的分支领域)研究中了解到的。据商业内幕网描述，瑟夫将他的思想进行扩展——借鉴心理学中的一些有争议的观点，包括自我损耗——进而得出一条建议：想要使快乐最大化，人们应当“和具有自己比较喜欢的特征的人们待在一起，构建需要做更少决定的生活。” 在直观的层面上，瑟夫的想法是有道理的：人们做的很多选择都是社会压力和身边所信任的人观念输入的产物。瑟夫提供了这样一个例子：除了一贯选择第二菜单项，他从不选择去哪里吃饭，而是仅选择用餐伙伴——他打算一起吃饭的朋友，很可能是可以信任的人——并且总是让他们进行挑选。 尽管还不清楚这些建议所包含的科学原则(如果有的话)，但是有不少研究表明，选择有时会让人感到更加困惑而不是有更多自由。《量子杂志》设想了这样一个例子：如果你明确喜爱的是士力架巧克力，那么选择它而舍弃杏仁乐巧克力或米奇威巧克力应该是不需要思索的事。而且，神经学家保罗·格利姆彻在纽约大学所做的实验表明，大部分时间是这样。直到你引入更多的选项。当给参与者提供三种条形糖果(士力架巧克力、米奇威巧克力和杏仁乐巧克力)时，他们会毫不费劲地选出自己的最爱，但当给他们提供包括士力架巧克力在内的20种选择时，他们有时会偏离他们的喜好。当这些多余的选择在随后的试验中被去除后，参与者会奇怪是什么原因导致他们做出如此糟糕的决定。 正如《量子杂志》详细描述的那样，有个名为“分裂归一化”的模型已经获得一些关注。根据该模型，大脑对选择进行编码的方式与它对所有选项进行价值评估的方式密切相关。因此，如果你有两种差异明显的东西，那么进行决策所涉及的大脑区域就会产生一种使决策清晰的模式。当选择变得可比较的时候，大脑会尽最大努力关注两者之间的区别，但更多的选择就把这种情况排挤在外了。
单选题
What does Cerf always do when he eats out?______