Questions 31 to 35 are based on the following passage.
【真题来源：2016年12月大学英语四级真题（第三套）Part Ⅲ，Section C，第51-55题】
Passage Two
The secret to eating less and being happy about it may have been cracked years ago--by McDonald's. According to a new study from Cornell University's Food and Brand Lab, small non-food rewards--like the toys in McDonald's Happy Meals--stimulate the same reward centers in the brain as food does.
The researchers, led by Martin Reimann, carried out a series of experiments to see if people would choose a smaller meal ff it was paired with a non-food item.
They found that the majority of both kids and adults opted for a haft-sized portion when combined with a prize. Both options were priced the same.
Even more interesting is that the promise of a future reward was enough to make adults choose the smaller portion. One of the prizes used was a lottery ticket (彩票), with a $10, $ 50 or $100 payout,and this was as effective as a tangible gift in persuading people to eat less.
"The fact that participants were willing to substitute part of a food item for the mere prospect of a relatively small monetary award is interesting," says Reimann.
He theorizes that it is the emotional component of these intangible prizes that make them effective.In fact, vaguely-stated possibilities of winning a prize were more effective than options with hard odds included.
"One explanation for this finding is that possible awards may be more emotionally provoking than certrainty Reimann." The of added attraction and awards," says uncertainty winning provides desirability through emotional 'thrills.' The possibility of receiving an award also produces a state of hope--a state that is in itself psychologically rewarding. " In other words, there's a reason why people like to gamble.
How might this knowledge be used to help people eat more healthily?
One possibility is a healthy option that offers the chance to win a spa (温泉疗养) weekend. Ormay be the reward of a half-sized portion could be a half-sized dessert to be claimed only on a future date. That would get you back in the restaurant--and make you eat a little less.
What do we learn about McDonald's inclusion of toys in its Happy Meals?
由题干中的McDonald's和inclusion of toys定位到第一段：The secret to eating less and being happy about it may have been cracked years ago--by McDonald's. According to a new study...small non-food rewards--like the toys in McDonald's Happy Meals--stimulate the same reward centers in the brain as food does.
推理判断题。定位段指出，麦当劳欢乐套餐中的玩具可以和食物一样刺激大脑中的奖赏中枢，让人们吃得少，还可以感受到快乐，故答案为D。
A.“有助于理解人们破解秘密的欲望”，首段第一句提到了麦当劳或许在几年前就破解了怎么让人们吃得少还可以感受到快乐的秘密，并未提到人们有破解秘密的 欲望，故排除该项；B.“证实了麦当劳商业成功的关键”，文中并没有阐述麦当劳是如何成功的，故排除该项；C.“它能满足孩子们想要知道里面藏了什么的好 奇心”，文章中也并未提到这一点，故排除C。
What is the finding of the researchers led by Martin Reimann?
由题干中的finding of the researchers定位到第三段第一句：they found that the majority of both kids and adults opted for a half-sized portion when combined with a prize. 事实细节题。定位句指出，他们发现，绝大多数的孩子和成年人都愿意选择带有奖励的减半食物。此处的他们是指代上一段中提到的莱曼领导的研究人员，故答案为 D。
A.“如果人们多光顾麦当劳，减少食物摄入并不难”，文章只在第一段提到，类似麦当劳欢乐套餐中的玩具可以让人在减少食量的同时感到愉悦，并没有提到去麦 当劳一定会使人们减少食物摄入，故排除该项；B.“绝大多数孩子和成年人在减半了每餐的食物后并不会真正地感到饥饿”，文中并未提到相关内容，可以排除该 项；C.“吃小份的食物对孩子和成年人的健康有同样的好处”，这一点在文章中也未涉及，可以排除C。
What is most interesting in Martin Reimann's fmding?
由题干中的most interesting和findings定位到第四段第一句：Even more interesting is that the promise of a future reward was enough to make adults choose the smaller portion．事实细节题。定位句中提到，更为有趣的是，一个对未来奖励的承诺足以让成年人选择小份食物，故答案为B。
“比起玩具来孩子们更喜欢金钱形式的奖励”，此选项在文中并未涉及，故排除；C“孩子和成人都对半份食物感到满足”，文中只是提到，不论是孩子还是成 人，都愿意选择带有一定奖品的小份食物，并未明确说明他们对此一定会感到满足，并且这也不属于莱曼的发现，故排除该项；D“孩子和成人都无法拒绝免费玩 具的诱惑”，这一项文中并未提及，故排除。
How does Martin Reimann interpret his finding?
由题干中的Reimann，interpret和 finding定位到第六段第一句：He theorizes that it is the emotional component of these intangible prizes that make them effective． 语义理解题。本题问到莱曼如何解读他的研究。文章的第三、四、五段都是对莱曼及其领导的研究人员的发现的描述。从第六段起，他开始分析其研究结果。该段首句即提出，从理论上来说，是这些无形奖励中的感情成分使得这些奖励起了作用，这就是他对研究发现的解读，故答案为A。
B.“比起数量，人们更看重质量”，这句话并不是实验研究的结论，故排除B；C.“比起可能的奖励，人们更喜欢确定的奖励”，第六段第二句明确提到，描述 不清晰的得奖的可能性比那些有着明确的得奖概率的选择更有效果，正好与此项表达的意思相反，故排除该项；D.“对未来奖励的欲望压倒了一切”，文章中确实 提到了人们喜欢这种未来的不确定的奖励，但并没有提及这种欲望强大到了压倒一切，故排除该项。
What can we infer from Martin Reimann's finding?
由题干中的eat less和restaurant定位到文章最后一段最后一句：That would get you back in the restaurant--and make you eat a little less． 推理判断题。题目中问到我们能从莱曼的研究发现中推断出什么。莱曼的研究主要发现了人们愿意为奖品放弃大份食物，而当这种奖品存在某种不确定性时，对人们 的吸引力更大，这是由于人们的欲望被不确定性所刺激。文章最后一段提出，如果饭店能利用这一发现，设置一些奖励，不仅可以让顾客再次光临，也可以让人们吃 得更少，故答案为C。
A.“如果人们想要健康快乐就该少吃一点”，文章中只是提到人们愿意接受用小奖励代替部分食物的方法，并未提到想要健康快乐就一定要少吃，故排除A；B. “大部分快餐店都很可能效仿麦当劳的做法”，文中并没提到这一类的内容，故无法推理得出这样的结论，故排除该项；D.“需要更多关于情感对行为影响的研究”，文中提到的研究发现已经很明确，而且研究主题也并非情感对行为的影响，故排除该项。