下载试题
当前位置:
学科首页
>
话题分类
>
人际交往
>
试题详情
难度:
使用次数:100
更新时间:2020-12-04
纠错
1.

    In a recent series of experiments at the University of California, researchers studied toddlers’ thinking about winners and losers, bullies (欺凌) and victims.

In the first experiment, toddlers (学步儿童) watched a scene in which two puppets (木偶) had conflicting goals: One was crossing a stage from right to left, and the other from left to right. The puppets met in the middle and stopped. Eventually one puppet bowed down and moved aside, letting the other one pass by. Then researchers asked the toddlers which puppet they liked. The result: 20 out of 23 toddlers picked the higher-status puppet — the one that did not bow or move aside. It seems that individuals can gain status for being dominant (占优势的) and toddlers like winners better than losers.

But then researchers had another question: Do toddlers like winners no matter how they win? So, researchers did another experiment very similar to the one described above. But this time, the conflict ended because one puppet knocked the other down and out of the way. Now when the toddlers were asked who they liked, the results were different: Only 4 out of 23 children liked the winner.

These data suggest that children already love a winner by the age of 21-31 months. This does not necessarily mean that the preference is inborn: 21 months is enough time to learn a lot of things. But if a preference for winners is something we learn, we appear to learn it quite early.

Even more interesting, the preference for winners is not absolute. Children in our study did not like a winner who knocked a competitor down. This suggests that already by the age of 21-31 months, children’s liking for winners is balanced with other social concerns, including perhaps a general preference for nice or helpful people over aggressive ones.

In a time when the news is full of stories of public figures who celebrate winning at all costs, these results give us much confidence. Humans understand dominance, but we also expect strong individuals to guide, protect and help others. This feels like good news.

245One of the purposes of the experiments is to ________.

Ateach toddlers how to gain higher status

Boffer toddlers a chance to watch a scene

Cobserve the process of toddlers’ solving a conflict

Dfind out toddlers’ attitude toward winners and losers

246The toddlers regarded bowing and moving aside as a sign of ________.

Aobeying rules

Bgaining status

Cgiving in to the other

Dshowing good manners

247What does the second experiment tell us about toddlers?

AThey are excellent learners.

BThey are always changeable.

CThey show mercy to the loser.

DThey value kindness over winning.

248What does the author think of the results of the series of experiments?

ADisappointing.                                           BEncouraging.

CUnexpected.                                              DControversial.

查看答案
题型:阅读理解
知识点:人际交往
下载试题
复制试题
【答案】

245D

246C

247D

248B

【分析】

本文是一篇说明文,介绍了研究人员进行了一系列的试验研究幼儿对赢家和输家、欺凌者和受害者的态度。

245细节理解题。根据第一段中的researchers studied toddlers’ thinking about winners and losers, bullies (欺凌) and victims.可知,研究人员研究了幼儿对赢家和输家、欺凌者和受害者的看法,由此可知,试验的其中一个目的是查明幼儿对赢家和输家的态度,故D项正确。

246细节理解题。根据第二段中的The result: 20 out of 23 toddlers picked the higher-status puppet — the one that did not bow or move aside. It seems that individuals can gain status for being dominant (占优势的) and toddlers like winners better than losers.可知,23名幼儿中有20名选择了地位较高的玩偶,即不鞠躬也不让开的玩偶,似乎每个人都可以通过占优势而获得地位,幼儿更喜欢赢家而不是输家,由此可知,幼儿把鞠躬和让开看作是向对方屈服的标志,故C项正确。

247细节理解题。根据倒数第二段中的Children in our study did not like a winner who knocked a competitor down. This suggests that already by the age of 21-31 months, children’s liking for winners is balanced with other social concerns, including perhaps a general preference for nice or helpful people over aggressive ones.可知,第二个试验中孩子不喜欢击倒对方的赢家,这表明到21-31个月大时,孩子们对赢家的喜爱已经与其他社会问题相平衡,其中包括对友善或乐于助人的人的普遍偏爱,而不是好斗的人,由此可知,第二个试验表明21-31个月大的孩子看重友善胜过获胜,故D项正确。

248推理判断题。根据最后一段中的these results give us much confidence.(这些结果给了我们很大的自信)及This feels like good news.(这听起来是个好消息)可知,作者认为试验结果是令人鼓舞的,故B项正确。

【点睛】

涉及到观点态度的推理判断题难度较大,文章一般不会直接标明作者的态度,需要我们根据措辞的褒贬来揣摩作者的态度,例如本篇第4题,根据最后一段中的these results give us much confidence.可知,这些结果给了我们很大的自信,再根据This feels like good news.可知,这听起来是个好消息,confidencegood表明了作者认为试验结果是令人鼓舞的。

=
类题推荐:
人际交往
难度:
使用次数:142
更新时间:2020-11-13
加入组卷
1.

When a friend comes to you after a stressful day, how do you comfort them? Do you let them complain? Do you pour them a glass of wine? Those could work. But a new study finds that a very effective technique is also simple and easy — hugging.

Michael Murphy is a psychology expert at Carnegie Mellon University in Pittsburgh. He wanted to know if people who received hugs regularly could handle stress and conflict belief. " Individuals who report perceiving the availability of a network of supportive individuals lead to show better adaptation when faced with stress. But your just having a support network does not mean that you definitely feel that support, he said. "So some researchers have argued that many of the behaviors we use to support others who are stressed might actually be counterproductive, because  behaviors might unintentionally communicate to others that they're not able to manage stress."  he added.

Murphy and his team interviewed 404 men and women every evening for two weeks. During these interviews, the participants were asked a simple yes — or — no question — whether somebody had hugged them that day — and a simple yes or no question of whether they had experienced conflict or tension with somebody that day.

They also were asked questions about their social interactions — how many socialinteractions they had that day and responded to questions about negative and positive mood states . And the researchers found that individuals who experienced a conflict were not as negatively affected if they received a hug that day as were participants who experienced conflict and didn't get a hug. Murphy and his team also saw that people who received a hug didn't carry the negative effect to the next day, while those who did not receive a hug would. The findings are in the journal PLOS ONE.

Murphy does include this warning: "So our findings should not be taken as evidence that people should just start hugging anyone and everyone who seems distressed. A hug from one boss at work or a stranger on the street could be viewed as neither agreeable nor positive. " The idea is to relieve stress. Not add to it.

12What does the first paragraph serve as?

AA lead-in                                                  BA background

CAn argument                                             DA summary.

13Why did the researchers interview those people?

ATo test the influence of hugging.

BTo find out causes of their conflicts.

CTo ask for advice on relieving stress.

DTo seek ways to comfort troubled people.

14What do Murphy's words warn in the end?

AThe interview results prove their findings.

BA boss should comfort workers by hugging.

CThere are some limitations of their findings.

DPeople should hug others regularly and actively.

15Which can be the best title for the text?

AEveryone Needs Hugs                                BA Hug Could Do Anything

CHow to Comfort Your Friends                     DHugs Seem to Reduce Stress

题型:未分类
知识点:人际交往
复制
试题详情
纠错
难度:
使用次数:181
更新时间:2020-11-17
加入组卷
1.

When you set a foot outside of your door to drop trash, go to a social event or go for a walk, thoughts like “I hope I don't see anyone I know” or “please don’ t talk to me” may run through your mind. I’ ve also said such things to myself. Sometimes the last thing you want to do is talk with someone, especially someone new.

Why do we go out of our ways to avoid people? Do we think meeting new people is a waste of time? Or are we just lazy, thinking that meeting someone new really is a trouble?

Communication is the key to life. We have been told that many times. Take the past generations, like our parents, for example. They seem to take full advantage of that whole “communication” idea because they grew up talking face to face while Generation-Y grew up staring at screens. We spend hours of our days sitting on Facebook. We send messages to our friends and think about all of the things we want to say to certain people that we don't have the courage to actually do in reality.

Nowadays, we are so caught up in our little circle of friends — our comfort zone. We love it that they laugh at our jokes, understand our feelings and can read our minds. Most importantly, they know when we want to be alone. They just get us.

Holding a conversation with someone new means agreeing with things that you don’t actually believe and being someone you think they want you to be — it is, as I said before, a trouble. It takes up so much energy, and at some point or another, it is too tiring.

But meeting new people is important. Life is too short, so meet all the people you can meet, make the effort to go out and laugh. Remember, Every “hello” leads to a smile — and a smile is worth a lot.

28What do we learn about the author?

AHe likes to be alone.

BHe feels stressed out lately.

CHe's active in attending social events.

DHe's afraid of talking to others at times.

29What's the problem of Generation-Y in the author’s eyes?

AThey rely on the Internet to socialize.

BThey are less confident in themselves.

CThey have difficulty in communicating.

DThey are unwilling to make new friends.

30Why do many young people avoid meeting new people?

AThey think it troublesome.

BThey are busy with their study.

CThey fear to disappoint their old friends.

DThey want to take time to do meaningful work.

31Why does the author write the text?

ATo tell about the importance of friends.

BTo give tips on how to meet new people.

CTo encourage people to meet new people.

DTo introduce the disadvantages of Generation-Y.

题型:阅读理解
知识点:人际交往
复制
试题详情
纠错
难度:
使用次数:172
更新时间:2020-12-04
加入组卷
1.

 We’ve all been there: in a lift, in line at the bank or on an airplane, surrounded by people who are, like us, deeply focused on their smartphones or, worse, struggling with the uncomfortable silence.

What’s the problem? It’s possible that we all have compromised conversational intelligence. It’s more likely that none of us start a conversation because it’s awkward and challenging, or we think it’s annoying and unnecessary. But the next time you find yourself among strangers, consider that small talk is worth the trouble. Experts say it’s an invaluable social practice that results in big benefits.

Dismissing small talk as unimportant is easy, but we can’t forget that deep relationships wouldn’t

even exist if it weren’t for casual conversation. Small talk is the grease(润滑剂) for social communication, says Bernardo Carducci, director of the Shyness Research Institute at Indiana University Southeast. "Almost every great love story and each big business deal begins with small talk," he explains. "The key to successful small talk is learning how to connect with others, not just communicate with them."

In a 2014 study, Elizabeth Dunn, associate professor of psychology at UBC, invited people on their way into a coffee shop. One group was asked to seek out an interaction(互动) with its waiter; the other, to speak only when necessary. The results showed that those who chatted with their server reported significantly higher positive feelings and a better coffee shop experience. "It’s not that talking to the waiter is better than talking to your husband," says Dunn. "But interactions with peripheral(边缘的) members of our social network matter for our well-being also."

Dunn believes that people who reach out to strangers feel a significantly greater sense of belonging, a bond with others. Carducci believes developing such a sense of belonging starts with small talk. "Small talk is the basis of good manners," he says.

100What phenomenon is described in the first paragraph?

AAddiction to smartphones.

BInappropriate behaviours in public places.

CAbsence of communication between strangers.

DImpatience with slow service.

101What is important for successful small talk according to Carducci?

AShowing good manners.                             BRelating to other people.

CFocusing on a topic.                                   DMaking business deals.

102What does the coffee-shop study suggest about small talk?

AIt improves family relationships.                  BIt raises people’s confidence.

CIt matters as much as a formal talk.              DIt makes people feel good.

103What is the best title for the text?

AConversation Counts                                  BWays of Making Small Talk

CBenefits of Small Talk                                DUncomfortable Silence

题型:阅读理解
知识点:人际交往
复制
试题详情
纠错
难度:
使用次数:178
更新时间:2020-12-24
加入组卷
1.

    “Without trust,” writes Rachel Botsman, “society cannot survive, and it certainly cannot thrive."

Clearly, we are in trouble. Two-thirds of people surveyed last year in 28 countries expressed low levels of trust in "mainstream institutions" of business, government and media.

In “Who Can You Trust?” Botsman, an Oxford lecturer offers a timely and accessible framework for understanding what trust is, how it works, why it matters and how it is evolving. It is an important guidance to the obstacles and opportunities we face as a society if we are to repair and redefine trust.

Through human history, trust has evolved in three basic stages: Local trust was enough when people lived in small communities and everybody knew everybody else; industrialization and urbanization required institutional trust so that people could trust complete strangers running governments, corporations, and standards for international trade, commerce and finance. We are now living through a massive global .shift of trust from institutions to individuals: distributed trust facilitated by high-tech platforms, many of which are run by the private sector.

This shift is caused by several factors. First, accountability is unequal. Rich, powerful and well-connected individuals have been able to accumulate vast quantities of often undocumented wealth by avoiding tax and anti-bribery laws, while ordinary people are likely to be caught and punished for lawbreaking. Second, people in power are no longer seen to deserve greater respect as the details of their lives are exposed.

Botsman does not prescribe how we deal with that. But if the old ways of giving and cancelling trust such as voting, markets and consumer choice are no longer functioning, then we must change or replace them. Systems must be "driven democratically and rationally," become more "transparent, inclusive, and accountable" and, most important, be designed to "put people first," which profit-driven platforms have failed to do sufficiently.

Tech executives are responding to the trust crisis mainly with promises of more and better technology. But Batsman warns that the responsibility for ensuring that the robots being used are trustworthy lies with the human beings who design and use them. We have not thought through how we hold those people accountable, let alone their robots. She warns against a natural tendency "to become over-reliant on machines." Ideally machines should be programmed to "understand" their own limitations and even seek human help or intervention.

A growing number of people hope that new trust mechanisms can be established through the use of exciting new technologies such as the blockchain(区块链). In essence, blockchains are digital public ledgers of transactions that cannot be changed, thereby creating greater transparency and accountability and making corruption much harder.

However, Botsman warns that the blockchain is no panacea for human trust. Whether blockchain systems lead to more accountable governance and a more just global economy will depend on their design and the intentions of those who build them. There is no app for fixing trust.

"Who Can You Trust?" does make a clear case for why it is important for the companies, governments and other institutions to be much more transparent and subject themselves to new mechanisms that can credibly hold them accountable. It is the only way they can hope to earn and maintain trust in the future.

41Which of the following orders of trust evolution is right?

Ainstitutional trust→ industrialized trust→ individual trust

Burbanized trust→ local trust→ institutional trust

Clocal trust→ institutional trust→ distributed trust

Dlocal trust→ urbanized trust →individual trust

42What can we conclude from the passage?

AProfit-driven platforms pay no attention to the importance of people.

BIt is the people who design and use technology that count in restoring trust.

CNew technologies, such as the blockchain can prevent corruption from happening.

DPeople should rely on new technologies to create transparency and accountability.

43What do the underlined words “no panacea" mean?

Anot a Herculean task                                   Ba hard nut

Cnot a cure-all medicine                               Da catch -22

44What's the author's attitude toward the possibility of using technology to restore trust?

ASupportive                                                BNegative

CIndifferent                                                DSkeptical

题型:阅读理解
知识点:人际交往
复制
试题详情
纠错
加入组卷
进入组卷
下载知识点
知识点:
版权提示

该作品由: 用户wo分享上传

可圈可点是一个信息分享及获取的平台。不确保部分用户上传资料的来源及知识产权归属。如您发现相关资料侵犯您的合法权益,请联系 可圈可点 ,我们核实后将及时进行处理。
终身vip限时199
全站组卷·刷题终身免费使用
立即抢购


0
使用
说明
群联盟
收藏
领福利