请阅读 Passage 1,完成 21~25 小题。
Passage 1
In the field of psychology, there has long been a certain haziness surrounding the definition of creativity, an I-know-it-when-I-see-it attitude that has eluded a precise formulation. During our conversation, Mark Beeman, a cognitive neuroscientist at Northwestern University, told me that he used to be reluctant to tell people what his area of study was, for fear of being dismissed or misunderstood. What, for instance, crosses your mind when you think of creativity? Well, we know that someone is creative if he produces new things or has new ideas. And yet, as John Kounios, a psychologist at Drexel University who collaborates frequently with Beeman, points out, that view is wrong, or at least not entirely right. “Creativity is the process, not the product,” he says.
To illustrate, Beeman offers an example. Imagine someone who has never used or seen a paperclip and is struggling to keep a bunch of papers together. Then the person comes up with a new way of bending a stiff wire to hold the papers in place. “That was very creative,” Beeman says. On the flip side, if someone works in a new field—Beeman gives the example of nanotechnology— anything that he produces may be considered inherently “creative.” But was the act of producing it actually creative? As Beeman put it,“Not all artists are creative. And some accountants are very creative.”
Insight, however, has proved less difficult to define and to study. Because it arrives at a specific moment in time, you can isolate it, examine it, and analyze its characteristics. “Insight is only one part of creativity,”Beeman says. “But we can measure it. We have a temporal marker that something just happened in the brain. I’d never say that’s all of creativity, but it’s a central, identifiable component.” When scientists examine insight in the lab, they are looking at what types of attention and thought processes lead to that moment of synthesis: If you are trying to facilitate a breakthrough, are there methods you can use that help? If you feel stuck on a problem, are there tricks to get you through?
In a recent study, Beeman and Kounios followed people’s gazes as they attempted to solve what’s called the remote-associates test, in which the subject is given a series of words, like“pine,”“crab,”and “sauce,” and has to think of a single word that can logically be paired with all of them. They wanted to see if the direction of a person’ s eyes and her rate of blinking could shed light on her approach and on her likelihood of success. It turned out that if the subject looked directly at a word and focused on it—that is, blinked less frequently, signaling a higher degree of close attention—she was more likely to be thinking in an analytical, convergent fashion, going through possibilities that made sense and systematically discarding those that didn’t. If she looked at “pine,” say, she might be thinking of words like “tree,” “cone,” and “needle,” then testing each option to see if it fit with the other words. When the subject stopped looking at any specific word, either by moving her eyes or by blinking, she was more likely to think of broader, more abstract associations. That is a more insight-oriented approach. “You need to learn not just to stare but to look outside your focus,” Beeman says. (The solution to this remote-associates test: “apple.”)
As it turns out, by simple following someone’s eyes and measuring her blinks and fixation times, Beeman’s group can predict how someone will likely solve a problem and when she is nearing that solution. That’s an important consideration for would-be creative minds: it helps us understand how distinct patterns of attention may contribute to certain kinds of insights.
Which of the following is closest in meaning to the underlined word “haziness” in PARAGRAPH ONE?
词义题。根据第一段“In the field of psychology, there has long been a certain haziness surrounding the definition of creativity, an I-know-it-when-I-see-it attitude that has eluded a precise formulation.”可知，在心理学领域，“创造性”一直没有形成准确的定义。大家所持的态度 就是“当我看到创造力的时候，我就知道什么是创造力”，以这种态度避开了对创造力定义的精确化。 既然是避开了精确化，那么当然就是模糊不清的。即长期以来人们对于创造力的定义一直处于模糊 或朦胧的状态。vagueness 的意思是“含糊”，与 haziness 的意思最接近。正确答案为 B 项。
According to John Kounios, what does the underlined word “that” in PARAGRAPH TWO refer to?
指代题。根据画线单词 that 前的句子“To illustrate, Beeman offers an example. Imagine someone who has never used or seen a paperclip and is struggling to keep a bunch of papers together. Then the person comes up with a new way of bending a stiff wire to hold the papers in place.”可 知，为了解释其观点，Beeman 举了一个例子。试想一个从未使用过或者见过回形针的人正在努力 将一堆纸叠在一起。然后他想到将一根金属丝掰弯以固定纸堆的办法。又根据第一段最后一句 “Creativity is the process, not the product”可知 that 指的是做回形针的过程。所以正确答案为 D 项。
In PARAGRAPH FOUR, which of the following shows the purpose of describing the experiment?
细节题。根据第三段“When scientists examine insight in the lab, they are looking at what types of attention and thought processes lead to that moment of synthesis”，当科学家们在 实验室检测洞察力时，他们所观察的是何种类型的注意力和思维过程可以带来顿悟，即实验目的是 通过对比实验中两种人的观察和思维方式，反映的是注意力与洞察力之间的相互作用。故选 B。
Based on the experiment, which of the following may signal that the subject is nearing the solution?
推断题。根据原文“When he subject stopped looking at any specific word,either by moving her eyes or by blinking,she was more likely to think of broader,more abstract associations.”当 实验主体通过转动眼睛或眨眼，不再聚焦某一特定词语，他联想的词语可能更抽象，范围也更广。 也就是说当实验主体转移注意力，不再聚焦在某一特定词语时，可以预测他解决问题的可能性以及 何时能得出正确答案，即 C 项正确。B 项 looks away at something else“看向别处”，与原文表述是 不一样的。
What is the best title for this passage?
主旨题。文章前两段主要讲 creativity 的定义。第二段指出 insight 是 creativity 的核心组成部分；虽然 creativity 不容易理解，但 insight 比较容易定义和研究。第四段描述了一个实 验，实验目的是发现 attention 和 insight 之间的关系。第五段指出实验结果，即不同类型的 attention 能够影响 insight，这给了想成为有创造力的人（would-be creative minds）一个重大的启示。由此可 以推断，attention 能够影响 insight，从而产生 creativity。可见文章从探讨 creativity 的定义，到研究 insight，归根到底是想发现怎样成为有创造力的人。D 项 Where Do Creativity Moments Come?作为本 文的标题最恰当。