单选题Why did the Japanese staff complain to the American manager?

单选题According to Linda Kristiansen, Wal-Mart

单选题Come on—Everybody"s doing it. That whispered message, half invitation and half forcing, is what most of us think of when we hear the words peer pressure. It usually leads to no good—drinking, drugs and casual sex. But in her new book Join the Club , Tina Rosenberg contends that peer pressure can also be a positive force through what she calls the social cure, in which organizations and officials use the power of group dynamics to help individuals improve their lives and possibly the word. Rosenberg, the recipient of a Pulitzer Prize, offers a host of examples of the social cure in action: In South Carolina, a state-sponsored antismoking program called Rage Against the Haze sets out to make cigarettes uncool. In South Africa, an HIV-prevention initiative known as loveLife recruits young people to promote safe sex among their peers. The idea seems promising, and Rosenberg is a perceptive observer. Her critique of the lameness of many pubic-health campaigns is spot-on: they fail to mobilize peer pressure for healthy habits, and they demonstrate a seriously flawed understanding of psychology. "Dare to be different, please don"t smoke!" pleads one billboard campaign aimed at reducing smoking among teenagers—teenagers, who desire nothing more than fitting in. Rosenberg argues convincingly that public-health advocates ought to take a page from advertisers, so skilled at applying peer pressure. But on the general effectiveness of the social cure, Rosenberg is less persuasive. Join the Club is filled with too much irrelevant detail and not enough exploration of the social and biological factors that make peer pressure so powerful. The most glaring flaw of the social cure as it"s presented here is that it doesn"t work very well for very long. Rage Against the Haze failed once state funding was cut. Evidence that the loveLife program produces lasting changes is limited and mixed. There"s no doubt that our peer groups exert enormous influence on our behavior. An emerging body of research shows that positive health habits—as well as negative ones—spread through networks of friends via social communication. This is a subtle form of peer pressure: we unconsciously imitate the behavior we see every day. Far less certain, however, is how successfully experts and bureaucrats can select our peer groups and steer their activities in virtuous directions. It"s like the teacher who breaks up the troublemakers in the back row by pairing them with better-behaved classmates. The tactic never really works. And that"s the problem with a social cure engineered from the outside: in the real world, as in school, we insist on choosing our own friends.

单选题As for their children, parents are supposed by Darrah to

单选题What have been done to guarantee quality education?

单选题As one works with color in a practical, or experimental way, one is impressed by two apparently unrelated facts. Color as seen is a mobile, changeable thing (1) to a large extent on the relationship of the color (2) other colors (3) simultaneously. It is not (4) in its relation to the direct stimulus which (5) it. On the other hand, the properties of surfaces that give (6) to color do not seem to change greatly under a wide variety of illumination color, usually (but not always) looking much the same in artificial light as in daylight. Both of these effects seem to be (7) in large part to the mechanism of color (8) . When the eye is (9) to a colored area, there is an immediate readjustment of the (10) of the eye to color in and around the area (11) . This readjustment does not promptly affect the color seen but usually does affect the next area to which the (12) is shifted. The longer the time of viewing, the higher the (13) , and the larger the area, the greater the effect will be (14) its persistence in the (15) viewing situation. As indicated by the work of Wright and Schouten, it appears that, at (16) for a first approximation, full adaptation takes place over (17) time if the adapting source is moderately bright and the eye has been in (18) darkness just previously. Also, (19) of the persistence of the effect if the eye is shifted around from one object to another, all of which are at similar brightness or have similar colors, the adaptation will tend to become (20) over the whole eye.

单选题The first sentence in Paragraph 1 is used by American school children because

单选题{{B}}Text 3{{/B}} How efficient is our system of criminal trial? Does it really do the basic job we ask of it—convicting the guilty and acquitting the innocent? It is often said that the British trail system is more like a game than a serious attempt to do justice. The lawyers on each side are so engrosses in playing hard to win, challenging each other and the judge on technical points, that the object of finding out the truth is almost forgotten. All the effort is concentrated on the big day, on the dramatic cross examination of the key witnesses in front of the jury. Critics like to compare our "adversarial" system (resembling two adversaries engaged in a contest) with the continental "inquisitorial" system, under which the judge plays a more important inquiring role. In early times, in the Middle Ages, the systems of trial across Europe were' similar. At that time trial by "ordeal"—especially a religious event--was the main way of testing guilt or innocence. When this way eventually abandoned the two systems parted company. On the continent church-trained legal officials took over the function of both prosecuting and judging, while in England these were largely left to lay people, the Justice of the Peace and the jurymen who were illiterate and this meant that all the evidence had to be put to them orally. This historical accident dominates procedure even today, with all evidence being given in open court by word of mouth on the crucial day. On the other hand, in France for instance, all the evidence is written before the trial under supervision by an investigating judge. This exhaustive pretrial looks very undramatic; much of it is just a public checking of the written records already gathered. The Americans adopted the British system lock, stock and barrel and enshrined it in their constitution. But, while the basic features of our systems are common, there are now significant differences in the way serious cases are handled. First, because the U. S. A. has virtually no contempt of court laws to prevent pretrial publicity in the newspaper and on television, Americans lawyers are allowed to question jurors about knowledge and beliefs. In Britain this is virtually never allowed, and a random selection of jurors who are presumed not to be prejudiced are empanelled. Secondly, there is no separate profession of barrister in the United States, and both prosecution and defense lawyers who are to present cases in court prepare themselves. They go out and visit the scene, track down and interview witnesses, and familiarize themselves personally with the background. In Britain it is the solicitor who prepares the case, and the barrister who appears in court is not even allowed to meet witness beforehand, British barristers also alternate doing both prosecution and defense work. Being kept distant from the preparation and regularly appearing for both sides, barristers are said to avoid becoming too personally involved, and can approach cases more dispassionately. American lawyers, however, often know their cases better. Reformers rightly want to learn from other countries~ mistakes and successes. But what is clear is that justice systems, largely because they are the result of long historical growth, are peculiarly difficult to adapt piecemeal.

单选题First two hours, now three hours—this is how far in advance authorities are recommending people show up to catch a domestic flight, at least at some major U.S. airports with increasingly massive security lines. Americans are willing to tolerate time-consuming security procedures in return for increased safety. The crash of EgyptAir Flight 804, which terrorists may have downed over the Mediterranean Sea, provides another tragic reminder of why. But demanding too much of air travelers or providing too little security in return undermines public support for the process. And it should: Wasted time is a drag on Americans" economic and private lives, not to mention infuriating. Last year, the Transportation Security Administration (TSA) found in a secret check that undercover investigators were able to sneak weapons—both fake and real—past airport security nearly every time they tried. Enhanced security measures since then, combined with a rise in airline travel due to the improving economy and low oil prices, have resulted in long waits at major airports such as Chicago"s O"Hare International. It is not yet clear how much more effective airline security has become—but the lines are obvious. Part of the issue is that the government did not anticipate the steep increase in airline travel, so the TSA is now rushing to get new screeners on the line. Part of the issue is that airports have only so much room for screening lanes. Another factor may be that more people are trying to over pack their carry-on bags to avoid checked-baggage fees, though the airlines strongly dispute this. There is one step the TSA could take that would not require remodeling airports or rushing to hire: Enroll more people in the PreCheck program. PreCheck is supposed to be a win-win for travelers and the TSA. Passengers who pass a background check are eligible to use expedited screening lanes. This allows the TSA to focus on travelers who are higher risk, saving time for everyone involved. The TSA wants to enroll 25 million people in PreCheck. It has not gotten anywhere close to that, and one big reason is sticker shock: Passengers must pay $85 every five years to process their background checks. Since the beginning, this price tag has been PreCheck"s fatal flaw. Upcoming reforms might bring the price to a more reasonable level. But Congress should look into doing so directly, by helping to finance PreCheck enrollment or to cut costs in other ways. The TSA cannot continue diverting resources into underused PreCheck lanes while most of the traveling public suffers in unnecessary lines. It is long past time o make the program work.

单选题{{B}}Text 2{{/B}} With only about 1,000 pandas left in the world, China is desperately trying to clone the animal and save the endangered species. That's a move similar to what a Texas A＆M University researcher has been undertaking for the past five years in a project called "Noah's Ark". Dr. Duane Kraemer, a professor in Texas A＆M's College of Veterinary Medicine and a pioneer in embryo transfer work and related procedures, says he salutes the Chinese effort and "I wish them all the best success possible. It's a worthwhile project, certainly not an easy one, and it's very much like what we're attempting here at Texas A＆M—to save animals from extinction. " Noah's Ark is aimed at collecting eggs, embryos, semen and DNA of endangered animals and storing them in liquid nitrogen. If certain species should become extinct, Kraemer says there would be enough of the basic building blocks to reintroduce the species in the future. It is estimated that as many as 2,000 species of mammals, birds and reptiles will become extinct over the next 100 years. The panda, native only to China, is in danger of becoming extinct in the next 25 years. This week, Chinese scientists said they grew an embryo by introducing cells from a dead female panda into the egg cells of a Japanese white rabbit. They are now trying to implant the embryo into a host animal. The entire procedure could take from three to five years to complete. "The nuclear transfer of one species to another is not easy, and the lack of available panda eggs could be a major problem," Kraemer believes. "They will probably have to do several hundred transfers to result in one pregnancy. It takes a long time and it's difficult, but this could be groundbreaking science if it works. They are certainly not putting any live pandas at risk, so it is worth the effort , "adds Kraemer, who is one of the leaders of the Missyplicity Project at Texas A＆M, the first-ever attempt at cloning a dog. "They are trying to do something that's never been done, and this is very similar to our work in Noah's Ark. We're both trying to save animals that face extinction. I certainly applaud their effort and there's a lot we can learn from what they are attempting to do. It's a research that is very much needed. "

单选题 In 1999 a Native American writer published an essay, The Blood Runs like a River Through My Dreams. It earned a National Magazine Award nomination. That rags-to-riches tale of courage and salvation sounds like a Horatio Alger story, doesn't it? It should be a movie. Of course, I'm biased because it's my story. Kind of. Raised fragile and poor on the Spokane Indian Reservation in Washington State, I published a story, This Is What It Means to Say Phoenix. Arizona, in 1993. My story, which features an autobiographical character named Thomas Builds-the-Fire who suffers a brain injury at birth and experiences visionary seizures into his adulthood was a finalist for a National Magazine Award. Nasdijj, the one-name author of The Blood Runs like a River Through My Dreams, claimed to be the son of a Navajo mother and a white father, who suffers from and dies of a seizure disorder. Quite the coincidence, don't you think? Of course, after reading Nasdijj's essay and book, I suspected that he was a literary thief and a liar. Angry, saddened, self-righteous and more than a little jealous that this guy was stealing some of my autobiographical story, I approached Nasdijj's publishers. I told them his book not only was borderline cheating but also failed to mention specific tribal members, clans, ceremonies and locations, all of which are vital to the concept of Indian identity. They took me seriously, but they didn't believe me. And how do I feel now that the author of an investigative story in L.A. Weekly believes that Nasdijj is a fraud and actually a white writer named Timothy Barrus? Justified and satisfied? Well, sure. I dream of leaving "I told you so" messages on many voice mails, although unlike James Frey's publisher, who initially supported his lies and moral evasions about his exaggerated memoir, A Million Little Pieces, Nasdijj's publisher dropped him because of personality conflicts even before the L.A. Weekly story came out. So why should we be concerned about his lies? His lies matter because he was co-opted as a literary style the very real suffering endured by generations of very real Indians because of very real injustices caused by very real American aggression that destroyed very real tribes. I can only hope that Nasdijj's readers will look to Oprah for inspiration. After initially defending the essential truth of Frey's memoir, a selection for her book club, Oprah changed her mind, admitted that she had been duped, invited Frey back onto her show and called him a fraud. I think all the people who profited from Nasdijj's fraud should consider that lesson and issue public apologies to Native Americans in general and to Navajo in particular.

单选题The root cause of the resistance to recovery lies in that the patients

单选题It can be inferred that blues really became a musical pattern of its own right______

单选题How efficient is our system of criminal trial? Does it really do the basic job we ask of it—convicting the guilty and acquiring the innocent? It is often said that the British trail system is more like a game than a serious attempt to do justice. The lawyers on each side are so engrossed in playing hard to win, challenging each other and the judge on technical points, that the object of finding out the truth is almost forgotten. All the effort is concentrated on the big day, on the dramatic cross examination of the key witnesses in front of the jury. Critics like to compare our " adversarial " system (resembling two adversaries engaged in a contest) with the continental " inquisitorial " system, under which the judge plays a more important inquiring role. In early times, in the Middle Ages, the systems of trial across Europe were similar. At that time trial by " ordeal " —especially a religious event—was the main way of testing guilt or innocence. When this way eventually abandoned the two systems parted company. On the continent church-trained legal officials took over the function of both prosecuting and judging, while in England these were largely left to lay people, the Justice of the Peace and this meant that all the evidence had to be put to them orally. This historical accident dominates procedure even today, with all evidence being given in open court by word of mouth on the crucial day. On the other hand, in France for instance, all the evidence is written before the trial under supervision by an investigating judge. This exhaustive pretrial looks very undramatic; much of it is just a public checking of the written records already gathered. The Americans adopted the British system lock, stock and barrel and enshrined it in their constitution. But, while the basic features of our systems are common, there are now significant differences in the way serious cases are handled. First, because the U. S. A. has virtually no contempt of court laws to prevent pretrial publicity in the newspaper and on television, Americans lawyers are allowed to question jurors about knowledge and beliefs. In Britain this is virtually never allowed, and a random selection of jurors who are presumed not to be prejudiced are empanelled. Secondly, there is no separate profession of barrister in the United States, and both prosecution and defense lawyers who are to present cases in court prepare themselves. They go out and visit the scene, track down and interview witnesses, and familiarize themselves personally with the background. In Britain it is the solicitor who prepares the case, and the barrister who appears in court is not even allowed to meet witness beforehand. British barristers also alternate doing both prosecution and defense work. Being kept distant from the preparation and regularly appearing for both sides, barristers are said to avoid becoming too personally involved, and can approach cases more dispassionately. American lawyers, however, often know their cases better. Reformers rightly want to learn from other countries' mistakes and successes. But what is clear is that justice systems, largely because they are the result of long historical growth, are peculiarly difficult to adapt piecemeal.

单选题Marriage in Men's Lives is a courageous and innovative book: courageous because it tackles a politically and socially charged issue—marriage as a social institution—in a time when texts on the family portray marriage as just one of any number of equally valuable lifestyle choices; innovative because it looks closely at the ways in which a key social institution affects individuals, in this case, the way that marriage affects men. Even as sex differences within marriage have diminished, the role of husband still plays a unique function in the lives of men. Steven Nock argues that adolescent boys face challenges in becoming men that adolescent girls do not face in becoming women. According to Nock, "Masculinity is precarious and must be sustained in adulthood. Normative marriage does this. A man develops, sustains, and displays his masculine identity in his marriage. The adult roles that men occupy as husbands are core aspect of their masculinity." The behaviors expected of married men as husbands, according to Nock, are the same behaviors expected of husbands as men. So getting married and successfully doing the things that husbands do allows men to achieve and sustain their masculinity. Nock argues that if marriage provides a mechanism through Which men establish and maintain their masculinity, marriage should have consistent and predictable consequences. He reasons that normative marriage will have different consequences than other forms of marriage. Nock argues that marriage causes men to become more successful, participate in social life, and to become more philanthropic. This is, in today's climate of extreme caution about causal relationships, a bold claim. He tests it using data from the National Longitudinal Survey of Youth and fixed effect models, to separate changes that accompany aging from those that happen uniquely at marriage. To measure achievement, Nock uses annual income, annual weeks worked, and occupational prestige. He measures social participation with time spent on housework, social contacts, and organizational involvement; and he measures generosity with gifts to non-relatives and loans to relatives and non-relatives. To summarize his results too briefly, when men marry, their achievements rise on all measures; they reduce their time in housework; increase their contact with relatives, church services and church events, and coworkers; and decrease contact with friends and time in bars. When men marry, they give fewer and smaller gifts and loans to non-relatives and more and larger loans to relatives. Nock also looks at changes in each of the measures of adult achievement, social participation, and generosity with changes in each of the dimensions of normative marriage. He finds, generally, that moves toward normative marriage increase achievements, social participation with family and religious organizations, and generosity to relatives. Changes toward more normative marriage also reduce men's time in housework, their social contacts with friends, and social events in bars.