阅读理解   Like many Americans, Mark Seery watched the Virginia Tech school shooting unfold on the cable news networks in April 2007. It wasn't just the catastrophe that disturbed him—it was how some psychologists were advising the campus community to respond in the wake of the devastating tragedy. 'There's a sense that's very much alive within the professional community that if people don't talk about what they're feeling, and try to suppress it, somehow it will only rebound down the road and make things worse,' says Seery, an assistant professor of psychology at the University of Buffalo.
    That, says Seery, is one of many examples of situations in which the first response to a tragedy's psychological ramifications is to encourage victims and bystanders to talk about their emotions in the wake of the event. That idea is constantly reinforced by a battery of television therapists who harp on the importance of sharing your feelings. But is that really the best medicine?
    Seery's new research offers an alternative to that philosophy. His work suggests that those who do not reveal their feelings in the wake of a collective trauma turn out just fine, if not better, than those who do. Seery used an online survey to query a national sample about their reactions to the 9/11 attacks, beginning on the day itself. The respondents were divided into two groups: those who said they were initially unwilling to talk about their feelings, and the rest.
    At the end of the two-year survey period, those who decided not to share their feelings reported fewer related mental and physical problems. That effect was even more pronounced among those who lived close to the tragedy. Seery also found an interesting correlation between the level of sharing and well-being. Participants could decide how much they wanted to report about their feelings on the survey. Seery found that there was a correlation between those who wrote the lengthier, more in-depth descriptions of their feelings and those who had worse mental and physical statuses.
    Does the study turn conventional wisdom completely on its head, suggesting that it's better to stay quiet in the aftermath of a traumatic event? Not quite. Seery explains that the respondents who felt the need to divulge their emotions started off in a worse mental and physical state in the first place, likely a bit more susceptible to the stress of a collective traumatic event. 'The people who were talking were probably more distressed by the event,' says Seery. 'The initial distress motivated them to want to have some place to talk about it...whereas people who chose not to talk were less likely to say that they were trying cope.' The take-home message, then, is that there is no one right way to react to traumatic events; there is a wide range of normal and healthy responses to tragedy.
单选题     What advice do some psychologists give to victims after a disaster? ______
 
【正确答案】 C
【答案解析】事实细节题。第一、二段都提到,遇到灾难性事件时,人们通常给受害者或旁观者的建议是:通过讲述自己对事件的感受来缓解心理压力,Seery对这样的建议很担心。因此,正确答案为C。
单选题     According to Seery, in the wake of disastrous events ______
 
【正确答案】 B
【答案解析】推理判断题。第三段开始论述Seery了的观点:第一句说Seery最新的研究提出了另一种看法,引起读者注意;接着第二句陈述研究内容,在灾难性事件发生之后不立刻谈论自己感受的受害者或旁观者,与那些在事件发生后谈论自己感受的人一样,都不会有心理问题,因此可以推断分享自己的感受未必是应对灾难性事件的最好办法,故B正确。A是传统的看法;C说法本身错误;D文中未提及。
单选题     In the survey, the respondents who witnessed the 9/11 attacks at a short distance ______
 
【正确答案】 A
【答案解析】事实细节题。第四段提到,两年的调查结束后发现,那些决定不向别人谈论自己对9·11恐怖袭击感受的人,产生的相关身心问题反而更少,这一效果在那些当时靠近这场悲剧的人身上表现得更加明显。因此答案为A。
单选题     Contrary to traditional wisdom, Seery found that ______
 
【正确答案】 C
【答案解析】事实细节题。由第四段最后一句得知,分享感受的程度和健康状况之间存在相关性:倾诉自己感受的人与那些不倾诉自己感受的人相比,前者的身心状况更差,故C正确。A、B文中没有提及,D与Seery的发现相反。
单选题     What can be inferred from the last paragraph? ______
 
【正确答案】 D
【答案解析】主旨大意题。最后一段提到,Seery的研究结果并没有推翻传统的做法,不能因此就说灾难事件发生后受害者最好不要谈论对它的感受,这些研究给我们的最终启迪是:在应对灾难性事件时不存在唯一正确的方法,各种反应都可能是正常的或健康的。言外之意,对于灾难性事件的受害者来说,既不能说事后倾诉就好,也不能说不倾诉就好,而应该按受害者个人的情况来判断到底哪种做法更适合,故D的表述正确。