资源描述
People are, on the whole, poor at considering background information when making individual decisions. At first glance this might seem like a strength that the ability to make judgments which are unbiased by 2 factors. But Dr. Uri Simonsohn speculated that an inability to consider the big was leading decision-makers to be biased by the daily samples of information they were working with. 4 , he theorised that a judge 5 of appearing too soft 6 crime might be more likely to send someone to prison 7 he had already sentenced five or six other defendants only to forced community service on that day.To 8 this idea, he turned to the university-admissions process. In theory, the 9 of an applicant should not depend on the few others 10 randomly for interview during the same day, but Dr Simonsohn suspected the truth was 11 .He studied the results of 9,323 MBA interviews 12 by 31 admissions officers. The interviewers had 13 applicants on a scale of one to five. This scale 14 numerous factors into consideration. The scores were 15 used in conjunction with an applicants score on the Graduate Management Admission Test, or GMAT, a standardised exam which is 16 out of 800 points, to make a decision on whether to accept him or her.Dr Simonsonh found if the score of the previous candidate in a daily series of interviewees was 0.75 points or more higher than that of the one 17 that, then the score for the next applicant would 18 by an average of 0.075 points. This might sound small, but to 19 the effects of such a decrease a candidate would need 30 more GMAT points than would otherwise have been 20 .参考译文总的来说，人们在做个人决定时，并不擅长考虑背景信息。乍一看，这似乎是一种优势，它赋予人们不受外界因素影响而做判断的能力。但是，Simonsohn博士推测，缺乏考虑大局的能力，会导致决策者受其日常所接触信息的影响而形成偏见。例如，他这样推理，如果一个法官害怕（别人说他）对犯罪太心慈手软，而且他在那天已经对五、六个被告做出缓刑判决，那么他更可能会判接下来的人入狱。为了验证这种想法，他开始关注大学招生程序。理论上讲，申请人的成功不应该依赖于同一天里随机抽取的其他面试者，但是Simonsohn博士怀疑事实并非如此。他研究了由31位招生人员主考的9323位MBA考生的面试结果。经过考虑众多因素，面试官将申请人划分成1至5五个等级。然后，（他们）将这些分数与申请人的经企管理研究生入学考试（或称GMAT）成绩综合起来，由此来决定他或她是否被录取。GMAT是一种满分为800分的标准化考试。Simonsohn博士发现，在每天的一连串面试者当中，如果前一个应试者的分数比其前的应试者的分数高出0.75个点或高出更多的话，那么下一个申请者的分数就会平均下降0.075个点。这一分差听起来很小，但是要想抵消掉它所带来的影响，应试者就要在GMAT考试中比实际所需要的分数再多出30分才行。Text 1In the 2006 film version of The Devil Wears Prada, Miranda Priestly, played by Meryl Streep, scold her unattractive assistant for imagining that high fashion doesnt affect her. Priestly explains how the deep blue color of the assistants sweater descended over the years from fashion shows to department stores and to the bargain bin in which the poor girl doubtless found her garment.This top-down conception of the fashion business couldnt be more out of date or at odds with feverish world described in Overdressed, Elizabeth Clines three-year indictment of “fast fashion”. In the last decades or so, advances in technology have allowed mass-market labels such as Zara, H&M, and Uniqlo to react to trends more quickly and anticipate demand more precisely. Quicker turnarounds mean less wasted inventory, more frequent releases, and more profit. Those labels encourage style-conscious consumers to see clothes as disposablemeant to last only a wash or two, although they dont advertise thatand to renew their wardrobe every few weeks. By offering on-trend items at dirt-cheap prices, Cline argues, these brands have hijacked fashion cycles, shaking an industry long accustomed to a seasonal pace.The victims of this revolution, of course, are not limited to designers. For H&M to offer a $5.95 knit miniskirt in all its 2,300-plus stores around the world, it must rely on low-wage, overseas labor, order in volumes that strain natural resources, and use massive amounts of harmful chemicals.Overdressed is the fashion worlds answer to consumer-activist bestsellers like Michael Pollans The Omnivores Dilemma. “Mass-produced clothing, like fast food, fills a hunger and need, yet is non-durable, and wasteful,” Cline argues. Americans, she finds, buy roughly 20 billion garments a yearabout 64 items per personand no matter how much they give away, this excess leads to waste. Towards the end of Overdressed, Cline introduced her ideal, a Brooklyn woman named Sarah Kate Beaumont, who since 2008 has made all of her own clothesand beautifully. But as Cline is the first to note, it took Beaumont decades to perfect her craft; her example cant be knocked off.Though several fast-fashion companies have made efforts to curb their impact on labor and the environmentincluding H&M, with its green Conscious Collection LineCline believes lasting change can only be effected by the customer. She exhibits the idealism common to many advocates of sustainability, be it in food or in energy. Vanity is a constant; people will only start shopping more sustainably when they cant afford not to.参考译文在2006年上映的电影穿Prada的女魔头中，由梅丽尔斯特里普扮演的米兰达普利斯特里责备了她那没有魅力的助手，是因为她的助手认为顶级时尚对她没有影响。普利斯特里数落说，助手的深蓝色毛衣经历岁月的变迁从时尚秀场退化到百货商店，进而沦落到廉价商品处理区。而在这里，可怜的女孩毫不犹豫地挑选了这件衣服。时尚行业这种自上而下的理念都非常过时，也与伊丽莎白席琳历时三年完成的盛装一书中指责的“快速时尚”所描述的狂热的世界不相符。在过去十年左右的时间里，技术进步已使Zara, H&M, 和Uniqlo这样的大众市场品牌能够更迅速地应对潮流，更精准地预测需求。更快速的周转意味着更少的库存浪费，更频繁的新品发布以及更多的利润回收。那些商标促使对时尚敏感的消费者将服装看作一次性用品 只洗一两次就扔掉，虽然他们并没有做这样的广告宣传 并且每隔几周更新衣橱。席琳认为，通过以极低的价格提供时尚产品，这些品牌劫持了时尚圈，动摇了长期以来适应于季节周期的整个产业。当然，这场变革的受害者并不仅限于设计师。H&M品牌要想向世界各地2300多家分店供应价格为5.95美元的针织迷你裙，它必须依赖廉价的海外劳动力和大额订单，这些订单使得（服装企业）过度消耗自然资源并且使用大量的有害化学制品。席琳认为：“盛装是时尚界对于像Michael Pollan所著的杂食者的困境这样的消费者维权畅销书的一种回应。大批量生产的衣服像快餐一样，满足了饥饿和需求，却是非耐用品，而且是种浪费。”她发现，美国人一年购买大约200亿件衣服，平均每人64件，而且无论其花费多少，这样的过量置衣会造成浪费。在盛装的结尾，席琳介绍了她心目中的典范，一个名叫Sarah Kate Beaumont的布鲁克林女人，她从2008年开始所有的衣服都自己制作，而且很漂亮。但是正如席琳首次提到的那样，Beaumont花费了几十年来完善她制作衣服的手艺，她的成功不是一蹴而就的。尽管一些快速时尚公司（包括H&M 和它的绿色Conscious Collection 系列）已经努力遏制它们对劳动力和环境造成的影响，但是席琳认为持续的变化只能通过消费者达成。她对无论是在食品行业还是能源领域支持可持续性的人士，提出了他们共同的理念。每个人都有虚荣心；人们往往只有在无法支付的情况下才会进行可持续性的购买。21. Priestly criticizes her assistant for herA poor bargaining skill.B insensitivity to fashion.C obsession with high fashion.D lack of imagination.22. According to Cline, mass-market labels urge consumers toA combat unnecessary waste.B shut out the feverish fashion world.C resist the influence of advertisements.D shop for their garments more frequently.23. The word “indictment” (Line 3, Para.2) is closest in meaning toA accusation.B enthusiasm.C indifference.D tolerance.24. Which of the following can be inferred from the last paragraph?A Vanity has more often been found in idealists.B The fast-fashion industry ignores sustainability.C People are more interested in unaffordable garments.D Pricing is vital to environment-friendly purchasing.25. What is the subject of the text?A Satire on an extravagant lifestyle.B Challenge to a high-fashion myth.C Criticism of the fast-fashion industry.D Exposure of a mass-market secret.Text 2An old saying has it that half of all advertising budgets are wastedthe trouble is, no one knows which half. In the internet age, at least in theory, this fraction can be much reduced. By watching what people search for, click on and say online, companies can aim “behavioural” ads at those most likely to buy.In the past couple of weeks a quarrel has illustrated the value to advertisers of such fine-grained information: Should advertisers assume that people are happy to be tracked and sent behavioural ads? Or should they have explicit permission?In December 2010 Americas Federal Trade Commission (FTC) proposed adding a “do not track” (DNT) option to internet browsers, so that users could tell advertisers that they did not want to be followed. Microsofts Internet Explorer and Apples Safari both offer DNT; Googles Chrome is due to do so this year. In February the FTC and the Digital Advertising Alliance (DAA) agreed that the industry would get cracking on responding to DNT requests.On May 31st Microsoft set off the row. It said that Internet Explorer 10, the version due to appear with windows 8, would have DNT as a default.Advertisers are horrified. Human nature being what it is, most people stick with default settings. Few switch DNT on now, but if tracking is off it will stay off. Bob Liodice, the chief executive of the Association of National Advertisers, says consumers will be worse off if the industry cannot collect information about their preferences. People will not get fewer ads, he says. “Theyll get less meaningful, less targeted ads.”It is not yet clear how advertisers will respond. Getting a DNT signal does not oblige anyone to stop tracking, although some companies have promised to do so. Unable to tell whether someone really objects to behavioural ads or whether they are sticking with Microsofts default, some may ignore a DNT signal and press on anyway.Also unclear is why Microsoft has gone it alone. After all, it has an ad business too, which it says will comply with DNT requests, though it is still working out how. If it is trying to upset Google, which relies almost wholly on advertising, it has chosen an indirect method: There is no guarantee that DNT by default will become the norm. DNT does not seem an obviously huge selling point for windows 8though the firm has compared some of its other products favourably with Googles on that count before. Brendon Lynch, Microsofts chief privacy officer, blogged: “We believe consumers should have more control.” Could it really be that simple?26. It is suggested in Paragraph 1 that “behavioural” ads help advertisers to A ease competition among themselves.B lower their operational costs.C avoid complaints from consumers.D provide better online services.27. “The industry” (Line 6, Para.3) refers toA online advertisers.B e-commerce conductors.C digital information analysis.D internet browser developers.28. Bob Liodice holds that setting DNT as a default.A may cut the number of junk ads.B fails to affect the ad industry.C will not benefit consumers.D goes against human nature.29. Which of the following is true according to Paragraph 6?A DNT may not serve its intended purpose.B Advertisers are willing to implement DNT.C DNT is losing its popularity among consumers.D Advertisers are obliged to offer behavioural ads.30. The authors attitude towards what Brendon Lynch said in his blog is one of A indulgence.B understanding.C appreciation.D skepticism.Text 3Up until a few decades ago, our visions of the future were largely though by no means uniformly glowingly positive. Science and technology would cure all the ills of humanity, leading to lives of fulfillment and opportunity for all.Now utopia has grown unfashionable, as we have gained a deeper appreciation of the range of threats facing us, from asteroid strike to epidemic flu to climate change. You might even be tempted to assume that humanity has little future to look forward to.But such gloominess is misplaced. The fossil record shows that many species have endured for millions of years so why shouldnt we? Take a broader look at our species place in the universe, and it becomes clear that we have an excellent chance of surviving for tens, if not hundreds, of thousands of years. Look up Homo sapiens in the “Red List” of threatened species of the International Union for the Conversation of Nature (IUCN), and you will read: “Listed as Least Concern as the species is very widely distributed, adaptable, currently increasing, and there are no major threats resulting in an overall population decline.”So what does our deep future hold? A growing number of researchers and organisations are now thinking seriously about that question. For example, the Long Now Foundation has as its flagship project a mechanical clock that is designed to still be marking time thousands of years hence.Perhaps willfully, it may be easier to think about such lengthy timescales than about the more immediate future. The potential evolution of todays technology, and its social consequences, is dazzlingly complicated, and its perhaps best left to science fiction writers and futurologists to explore the many possibilities we can envisage. Thats one reason why we have launched Arc, a new publication dedicated to the near future.But take a longer view and there is a surprising amount that we can say with considerable assurance. As so often, the past holds the key to the future: we have now identified enough of the long-term patterns shaping the history of the planet, and our species, to make evidence-based forecasts about the situations in which our descendants will find themselves.This long perspective makes the pessimistic view of our prospects seem more likely to be a passing fad. To be sure, the future is not all rosy. But we are now knowledgeable enough to reduce many of the risks that threatened the existence of earlier humans, and to improve the lot of those to come.31. Our vision of the future used to be inspired by A our desire for lives of fulfillment.B our faith in science and technology.C our awareness of potential risks.D our belief in equal opportunity.32. The IUCNs “Red List” suggests that human beings areA a sustained species.B a threat to the environment. C the worlds dominant power.D a misplaced race.33. Which of the following is true according to Paragraph 5?A Arc helps limit the scope of futurological studies.B Technology offers solutions to social problem.C The interest in science fiction is on the rise.D Our immediate future is hard to conceive.34. To ensure the future of mankind, it is crucial toA explore our planets abundant resources.B adopt an optimistic view of the world.C draw on our experience from the past.D curb our ambition to reshape history.35. Which of the following would be the best title for the text?A Uncertainty about Our FutureB Evolution of the Human SpeciesC The Ever-bright Prospects of MankindD Science, Technology and HumanityText 4On a five to three vote, the Supreme Court knocked out much of Arizonas immigration law Mondaya modest policy victory for the Obama Administration. But on the more important matter of the Constitution, the decision was an 8-0 defeat for the Administrations effort to upset the balance of power between the federal government and the states.In Arizona v. United States, the majority overturned three of the four contested provisions of Arizonas controversial plan to have state and local police enforce federal immigration law. The Constitutional principles that Washington alone has the power to “establish a uniform Rule of Naturalization” and that federal laws precede state laws are noncontroversial. Arizona had attempted to fashion state policies that ran parallel to the existing federal ones.Justice Anthony Kennedy, joined by Chief Justice John Roberts and the Courts liberals, ruled that the state flew too close to the federal sun. On the overturned provisions the majority held that Congress had deliberately “occupied the field,” and Arizona had thus intruded on the federals privileged powers.However, the Justices said that Arizona police would be allowed to verify the legal status of people who come in contact with law enforcement. Thats because Congress has always envisioned joint federal-state immigration enforcement and explicitly encourages state officers to share information and cooperate with federal colleagues.Two of the three objecting JusticeSamuel Alito and Clarence Thomasagreed with this Constitutional logic but disagreed about which Arizona rules conflicted with the federal statute. The only major objection came from Justice Antonin Scalia, who offered an even more robust defense of state privileges going back to the Alien and Sedition Acts.The 8-0 objection to President Obama turns on what Justice Samuel Alito describes in his objection as “a shocking assertion of federal executive power”. The White House argued that Arizonas laws conflicted with its enforcement priorities, even if state laws complied with federal statutes to the letter. In effect, the White House claimed that it could invalidate any otherwise legitimate state law that it disagrees with.Some powers do belong exclusively to the federal government, and control of citizenship and the borders is among them. But if Congress wanted to prevent states from using their own resources to check immigration status, it could. It never did so. The administration was in essence asserting that because it didnt want to carry out Congresss immigration wishes, no state should be allowed to do so either. Every Justice rightly rejected this remarkable claim.36.Three provisions of Arizonas plan were overturned because theyAdeprived the federal police of Constitutional powers.Bdisturbed the power balance between different states.Coverstepped the authority of federal immigration law.Dcontradicted both the federal and state policies.37.On which of the following did the Justices agree, according to Paragraph 4?AFederal officers duty to withhold immigrantsinformation. BStates independence from federal immigration law.CStates legitimate role in immigration enforcement. DCongresss intervention in immigration enforcement.38.It can be inferred from Paragraph 5 that the Alien and Sedition ActsAviolated the Constitution.Bundermined the states interests.Csupported the federal statute.Dstood in favor of the states.39.The White House claims that its power of enforcementAoutweighs that held by the states.Bis dependent on the states support.Cis established by federal statutes.Drarely goes against state laws.40.What can be learned from the last paragraph?AImmigration issues are usually decided by Congress.BJustices intended to check the power of the Administration.CJustices wanted to strengthen its coordination with Congress.DThe Administration is dominant over immigration issues.Part BDirections: In the following text, some sentences have been removed. For Questions 4145, choose the most suitable one from the list AG to fit into each of the numbered blanks. There are two extra choices, which do not fit in any of the blanks. Mark your answers on the ANSWER SHEET. (10 points)The social sciences are flourishing. As of 2005, there were almost half a million professional social scientists from all fields in the world, working both inside and outside academia. According to the World Social Science Report 2010, the number of social-science students worldwide has swollen by about 11% every year since 2000.Yet this enormous resource is not contributing enough to todays global challenges including climate change, security, sustainable development and health.(41) . Humanity has the necessary agro-technological tools to eradicate hunger, from genetically engineered crops to artificial fertilizers. Here, too, the problems are social: the organization and distribution of food, wealth and prosperity.(42) . This is a shamethe community should be grasping the opportunity to raise its influence in the real world. To paraphrase the great social scientist Joseph Schumpeter: there is no radical innovation without creative destruction.Today, the social sciences are largely focused on disciplinary problems and internal scholarly debates, rather than on topics with external impact. Analyses reveal that the number of papers including the keywords “environmental
展开阅读全文