六级考前冲刺试题二.docx

资源描述

六级考前冲刺试题二.docx

《六级考前冲刺试题二.docx》由会员分享，可在线阅读，更多相关《六级考前冲刺试题二.docx（20页珍藏版）》请在冰豆网上搜索。

六级考前冲刺试题二.docx

六级考前冲刺试题二

PartIWriting（30minutes）

Directions:

Forthispart,youareallowed30minutestowriteashortessayonthetopicofStudents’StartingTheirOwnBusinesses.Youshouldwriteatleast150wordsaccordingtotheoutlinegivenbelow.

目前有不少大学生开始创业

1.对此不少人给予了肯定

2.也有人有不同的看法

3.我认为

Students’StartingTheirOwnBusinesses

______________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________

PartIIReadingComprehension（SkimmingandScanning）（15minutes）

Directions:

Inthispart,youwillhave15minutestogooverthepassagequicklyandanswerthequestionsonAnswerSheet1.Forquestions1-7,choosethebestanswerfromthefourchoicesmarkedA）,B）,C）andD）.Forquestions8-10,completethesentenceswiththeinformationgiveninthepassage.

Choiceblindness:

Youdon’tknowwhatyouwant

Wehaveallheardofexpertswhofailbasictestsofsensorydiscriminationintheirownfield:

winesnobs（自命不凡的人）whocan’ttellredfromwhitewine（thoughinblackenedcups）,orartcriticswhoseedeepmeaninginrandomlinesdrawnbyacomputer.Wedelightinsuchstoriessinceanyoneclaimingtobeanauthorityisfairgame.Butwhatifweshinethespotlightonchoiceswemakeabouteverydaythings?

Expertsmightbeforgivenforbeingwrongaboutthelimitsoftheirskillsasexperts,butcouldwebeforgivenforbeingwrongaboutthelimitsofourskillsasexpertsonourselves?

Wehavebeentryingtoanswerthisquestionusingtechniquesfrommagicperformances.Ratherthanplayingtrickswithalternativespresentedtoparticipants,wesecretlyalteredtheoutcomesoftheirchoices,andrecordedhowtheyreact.Forexample,inanearlystudyweshowedourvolunteerspairsofpicturesoffacesandaskedthemtochoosethemostattractive.Insometrials,immediatelyaftertheymadetheirchoice,weaskedpeopletoexplainthereasonsbehindtheirchoices.

Unknowntothem,wesometimesusedadouble-cardmagictricktosecretlyexchangeonefacefortheothersotheyendedupwiththefacetheydidnotchoose.Commonsensedictatesthatallofuswouldnoticesuchabigchangeintheoutcomeofachoice.Buttheresultshowedthatin75percentofthetrialsourparticipantswereblindtothemismatch,evenoffering“reasons”fortheir“choice”.

Wecalledthiseffect“choiceblindness”,echoingchangeblindness,thephenomenonidentifiedbypsychologistswherearemarkablylargenumberofpeoplefailtospotamajorchangeintheirenvironment.RecallthefamousexperimentswhereXasksYfordirections;whileYisstrugglingtohelp,XisswitchedforZ—andYfailstonotice.Researchersarestillponderingthefullimplications,butitdoesshowhowlittleinformationweuseindailylife,andunderminestheideathatweknowwhatisgoingonaroundus.

Whenwesetout,weaimedtoweighinontheenduring,complicateddebateaboutself-knowledgeandintentionality.Foralltheintimatefamiliaritywefeelwehavewithdecision-making,itisverydifficulttoknowaboutitfromthe“inside”:

oneofthegreatbarriersforscientificresearchisthenatureofsubjectivity.

Asanyonewhohaseverbeeninaverbaldisagreementcanprove,peopletendtogiveelaboratejustificationsfortheirdecisions,whichwehaveeveryreasontobelievearenothingmorethanrationalisations（文过饰非）aftertheevent.Toprovesuchpeoplewrong,though,orevenprovideenoughevidencetochangetheirmind,isanentirelydifferentmatter:

whoareyoutosaywhatmyreasonsare?

Butwithchoiceblindnesswedrivealargewedgebetweenintentionsandactionsinthemind.Asourparticipantsgiveusverbalexplanationsaboutchoicestheynevermade,wecanshowthembeyonddoubt—andproveit—thatwhattheysaycannotbetrue.Soourexperimentsofferauniquewindowintoconfabulation（虚构）（thestory-tellingwedotojustifythingsafterthefact）thatisotherwiseverydifficulttocomeby.Wecancompareeverydayexplanationswiththoseunderlabconditions,lookingforsuchthingsastheamountofdetailindescriptions,howcoherentthenarrativeis,theemotionaltone,oreventhetimingorflowofthespeech.Thenwecancreateatheoreticalframeworktoanalyseanykindofexchange.

Thisframeworkcouldprovideaclinicaluseforchoiceblindness:

forexample,twoofourongoingstudiesexaminehowmalingering（装病）mightdevelopintotruesymptoms,andhowconfabulationmightplayaroleinobsessive-compulsivedisorder（强迫症）.

Importantly,theeffectsofchoiceblindnessgobeyondsnapjudgments.Dependingonwhatourvolunteerssayinresponsetothemismatchedoutcomesofchoices（whethertheygiveshortorlongexplanations,givenumericalratingorlabelling,andsoon）wefoundthisinteractioncouldchangetheirfuturepreferencestotheextentthattheycometopreferthepreviouslyrejectedalternative.Thisgivesusarareglimpseintothecomplicateddynamicsofself-feedback（“Ichosethis,Ipubliclysaidso,thereforeImustlikeit”）,whichwesuspectliesbehindtheformationofmanyeverydaypreferences.

Wealsowanttoexploretheboundariesofchoiceblindness.Ofcourse,itwillbelimitedbychoicesweknowtobeofgreatimportanceineverydaylife.Whichbrideorbridegroomwouldfailtonoticeifsomeoneswitchedtheirpartneratthealtarthroughamazingsleightofhand（巧妙的手段）?

Yetthereisampleterritorybetweentheabsurdideaofspouse-swapping,andtheresultsofourearlyfaceexperiments.

Forexample,inonerecentstudyweinvitedsupermarketcustomerstochoosebetweentwopairedvarietiesofjamandtea.Inordertoswitcheachparticipant’schoicewithoutthemnoticing,wecreatedtwosetsof“magical”jars,withlidsatbothendsandadividerinside.Thejarslookednormal,butweredesignedtoholdonevarietyofjamorteaateachend,andcouldeasilybeflippedover.

Immediatelyaftertheparticipantschose,weaskedthemtotastetheirchoiceagainandtellusverballywhytheymadethatchoice.Beforetheydid,weturnedoverthesamplecontainers,sothetastersweregiventheoppositeofwhattheyhadintendedintheirselection.Strikingly,peopledetectednomorethanathirdofallthesetricktrials.Evenwhenweswitchedsuchremarkablydifferentflavorsasspicycinnamonandappleforbittergrapefruitjam,theparticipantsspottedlessthanhalfofallswitches.

Wehavealsodocumentedthiskindofeffectwhenwesimulateonlineshoppingforconsumerproductssuchaslaptopsorcellphones,andevenapartments.Ourlatesttestsareexploringmoralandpoliticaldecisions,adomainwherereflectionanddeliberationaresupposedtoplayacentralrole,butwhichwebelieveisperfectlysuitedtoinvestigatingusingchoiceblindness.

Throughoutourexperiments,aswellasregisteringwhetherourvolunteersnoticedthattheyhadbeenpresentedwiththealternativetheydidnotchoose,wealsoquizzedthemabouttheirbeliefsabouttheirdecisionprocesses.Howdidtheythinktheywouldfeeliftheyhadbeenexposedtoastudylikeours?

Didtheythinktheywouldhavenoticedtheswitches?

Consistently,between80and90percentofpeoplesaidthattheybelievedtheywouldhavenoticedsomethingwaswrong.

Imaginetheirsurprise,evendisbelief,whenwetoldthemaboutthenatureoftheexperiments.Ineverydaydecision-makingwedoseeourselvesasknowingalotaboutourselves,butlikethewinebufforartcritic,weoftenoverstatewhatweknow.Thegoodnewsisthatthisformofdecisionsnobberyshouldnotbetoodifficulttotreat.Indeed,afterreadingthisarticleyoumightalreadybecured.

1.Whatdoestheauthorsayaboutsomeexperts?

A）Theyareauthoritiesonlyintheirownfields.

B）Theyaren’teasilyfooledbythetrickytests.

C）Themistakesthey’vemadeareinevitable.

D）Theysometimesfailtodowellasclaimed.

2.Whatdidtheresearchersdotoparticipantsintheexperiments?

A）Theyputonamagicperformancetotheparticipants.

B）Theydivertedtheparticipants’attentionanddisruptedtheirchoosing.

C）Theychangedthethingsparticipantschosewithouttheirnoticing.

D）Theyaddedconfusiontothetwooptionstheparticipantsfaced.

3.Whatdoestheresultofthefacechoosingexperimentsreveal?

A）Peoplecouldexplainwellwhytheymadetheirchoices.

B）Onlyafewofparticipantshadchoiceblindnessinmakingdecision.

C）Usuallyparticipantswereawareofthelimitsoftheirskills.

D）Mostparticipantsdidn’trealizethattheirchoiceshadbeenswitched.

4.Changeblindnessreferstothephenomenonthat________.

A）manypeoplefailtonoticethebigchangearoundthem

B）peopletendtoignorethesmallchang

展开阅读全文