阅读理解
Text 3
Scientists have found that although we are prone to snap overreactions, if we take a moment and think about how we are likely to react, we can reduce or even eliminate the negative effects of our quick, hard-wired responses.
Snap decisions can be important defense mechanisms; if we are judging whether someone is dangerous, our brains and bodies are hard-wired to react very quickly, within milliseconds. But we need more time to assess other factors. To accurately tell whether someone is sociable, studies show, we need at least a minute, preferably five. It takes a while to judge complex aspects of personality, like neuroticism or open-mindedness.
But snap decisions in reaction to rapid stimuli aren’t exclusive to the interpersonal realm. Psychologists at the University of Toronto found that viewing a fast-food logo for just a few milliseconds primes us to read 20 percent faster, even though reading has little to do with eating. We unconsciously associate fast food with speed and impatience and carry those impulses into whatever else we’re doing, Subjects exposed to fast-food flashes also tend to think a musical piece lasts too long.
Yet we can reverse such influences. If we know we will overreact to consumer products or housing options when we see a happy face (one reason good sales representatives and real estate agents are always smiling), we can take a moment before buying. If we know female job screeners are more likely to reject attractive female applicants, we can help screeners understand their biases-or hire outside screeners.
John Gottman, the marriage expert, explains that we quickly “thin slice” information reliably only after we ground such snap reactions in “thick sliced” long-term study. When Dr. Gottman really wants to assess whether a couple will stay together, he invites them to his island retreat for a muck longer evaluation; two days, not two seconds.
Our ability to mute our hard-wired reactions by pausing is what differentiates us from animals: doge can think about the future only intermittently or for a few minutes. But historically we have spent about 12 percent of our days contemplating the longer term. Although technology might change the way we react, it hasn’t changed our nature. We still have the imaginative capacity to rise above temptation and reverse the high-speed trend.
单选题
John Gottman says that reliable snap reaction are based on____.
【正确答案】
D
【答案解析】【解析】细节题。题干问的是“John Gottman认为可靠的快速反映是基于_____的。”由题干John Gottman 定位到全文倒数第二段。其中第一句:John Gottman, the marriage expert,the marriage expert,explains that we quickly”thin slice”information reliably only after we gound such snap reactions in ”thick sliced”long-term study.婚姻专家约翰.古德曼解释说,我们快速反应的信息的可靠性是建立在这样的快速反应的行为是以长期的研究为基础而做出的快速反应行为。其中 gound是题干中base on 的同意置换,long-term study长期的研究与D选项adequate information相互呼应。由此可判断出[D] adequate information(足够的信息)是本题正解。该段第二句话是When Dr,Gottman really wants to assess whether a couple will stay together, he invites them to his island retreat for a much longer eveluation,two days ,not two seconds.当古德曼博士想去评估一对夫妻是否应该继续在一起时,他会邀请他们到他的岛上进行一个更为长期的调查,是两天而不是两秒。第二句是对第一 句的举例说明,更加验证此选项。
单选题
The author’s attitude toward reversing the high-speed trend is____.
【正确答案】
C
【答案解析】【解析】态度题。根据35题题干reversing the high-speed trend是全文的最后一句,所以解此题可先定位到全文的最后一段。最后一段最后两句:Although technology might change the way we react, it hasn’t changed our nature. We still have the imaginative capacity to rise above temptation and reverse the high-speed trend.译为:尽管技术可能改变我们反应的方式,但是它并没有改变我们的本性。我们仍然有能力去克服诱惑并扭转这种高速度的趋势。由此我们可以看出作 者的态度是非常确定的,因此B选项uncertain(不确定)首先排除;We still have the imaginative capacity…表面作者对于我们的能力是有信心的。因此[C] optimistic(乐观的)是正解。A选项tolerant(容忍的) 、D选项doubtful(怀疑的)在原文中没有体现,属于无中生有的选项。