1、沪江考研 http:/ Part ADirections:Read the following four texts. Answer the questions below each text by choosing A, B, C or D. Mark your answers on ANSWER SHEET 1. (40 points)Text 1Come on Everybodys doing it. That whispered message, half invitation and half forcing, is what most of us think of when we
2、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 dyn
3、amics to help individuals improve their lives and possibly the word.Rosenberg, the recipient of a Pulitzer Prize, offers a host of example 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
4、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
5、habits, and they demonstrate a seriously flawed understanding of psychology.” Dare to be different, please dont 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 advocat
6、es 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 pre
7、ssure so powerful. The most glaring flaw of the social cure as its presented here is that it doesnt 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.Theres no doubt that our peer gr
8、oups 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
9、certain, however, is how successfully experts and bureaucrats can select our peer groups and steer their activities in virtuous directions. Its 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 thats th
10、e problem with a social cure engineered from the outside: in the real world, as in school, we insist on choosing our own friends.21. According to the first paragraph, peer pressure often emerges as根据第一段，同龄人的压力通常以什么样的状态出现：A a supplement to the social cure对于社会治疗的补充B a stimulus to group dynamics对于团队活力的
11、刺激C an obstacle to school progress学校进步的阻碍D a cause of undesirable behaviors一些不良行为的原因解析：这是一个细节题：对应文中It usually leads to no good-drinking, drugs and casual sex.题干中的often对应原文中的usually;选项中undesirable behaviors对应no good-drinking, drugs and casual sex. lead对于cause.完美替换，四级难度，出题人很仁慈。22. Rosenberg holds that
12、 public advocates should罗森博格认为公共支持者应该：A recruit professional advertisers招募职业的广告人B learn from advertisers experience从广告人那里学习经验C stay away from commercial advertisers远离商业广告人D recognize the limitations of advertisements认识到广告的局限性解析：本题为细节题，根据题干定位到：三段最后一句：Rosenberg argues convincingly that public-health a
13、dvocates ought to take a page from advertisers, so skilled at applying peer pressure. 这样的句子的理解难点是一个短语：take a page from向谁学习，如果不懂，可以看后面的so skilled at applying，也能熟练的运用，一个“也”道出天机，小词有大乾坤啊!23. In the authors view, Rosenbergs book fails to作者认为Rosenberg未能：A adequately probe social and biological factors足够的探
14、究社会和生物因素B effectively evade the flaws of the social cure有效地逃避社会治疗的缺点C illustrate the functions of state funding例证出国家基金的功能Dproduce a long-lasting social effect产生长期的社会影响解析：细节题问观点;对应句子But on the general effectiveness of the social cure, Rosenberg is less persuasive. 指出不足;后面一句中的主语Join the Club 为此人所写，所以后
15、面的表述就是他的观点： not enough exploration of the social and biological factors that make peer pressure so powerful.：完美替换exploration对probe;24. Paragraph 5shows that our imitation of behaviors第五段表明对于行为的模仿：A is harmful to our networks of friends对于朋友的网络是有害的B will mislead behavioral studies会误导对于行为的研究C occurs wi
16、thout our realizing it在没有意识到的时候就出现了D can produce negative health habits会产生不良的健康习惯解析：细节题 ;对应句子This is a subtle form of peer pressure: we unconsciously imitate the behavior we see every day.对 unconsciously完美替换。25. The author suggests in the last paragraph that the effect of peer pressure is作者在最后一段中认为同
17、龄人压力的效果是：A harmfulB desirableC profoundD questionable解析：局部态度题 对应Far less certain, however, isThe tactic never really works表明作者对于这个事物的看法是不确定的所以选最后一个。Text 2A deal is a deal-except, apparently ,when Entergy is involved. The company, a major energy supplier in New England, provoked justified outrage in
18、Vermont last week when it announced it was reneging on a longstanding commitment to abide by the strict nuclear regulations.Instead, the company has done precisely what it had long promised it would not challenge the constitutionality of Vermonts rules in the federal court, as part of a desperate ef
19、fort to keep its Vermont Yankee nuclear power plant running. Its a stunning move.The conflict has been surfacing since 2002, when the corporation bought Vermonts only nuclear power plant, an aging reactor in Vernon. As a condition of receiving state approval for the sale, the company agreed to seek
20、permission from state regulators to operate past 2012. In 2006, the state went a step further, requiring that any extension of the plants license be subject to Vermont legislatures approval. Then, too, the company went along.Either Entergy never really intended to live by those commitments, or it si
21、mply didnt foresee what would happen next. A string of accidents, including the partial collapse of a cooling tower in 2007 and the discovery of an underground pipe system leakage, raised serious questions about both Vermont Yankees safety and Entergys management especially after the company made mi
22、sleading statements about the pipe. Enraged by Entergys behavior, the Vermont Senate voted 26 to 4 last year against allowing an extension.Now the company is suddenly claiming that the 2002 agreement is invalid because of the 2006 legislation, and that only the federal government has regulatory powe
23、r over nuclear issues. The legal issues in the case are obscure: whereas the Supreme Court has ruled that states do have some regulatory authority over nuclear power, legal scholars say that Vermont case will offer a precedent-setting test of how far those powers extend. Certainly, there are valid c
24、oncerns about the patchwork regulations that could result if every state sets its own rules. But had Entergy kept its word, that debate would be beside the point.The company seems to have concluded that its reputation in Vermont is already so damaged that it has nothing left to lose by going to war
25、with the state. But there should be consequences. Permission to run a nuclear plant is a public trust. Entergy runs 11 other reactors in the United States, including Pilgrim Nuclear station in Plymouth. Pledging to run Pilgrim safely, the company has applied for federal permission to keep it open fo
26、r another 20 years. But as the Nuclear Regulatory Commission (NRC) reviews the companys application, it should keep it mind what promises from Entergy are worth.文章出处：http:/ Yankee plants owner must honor its own promises这篇文章的主题是从一个公司的违约事件引出对于地方和联邦司法权力的讨论。26. The phrase “reneging on”(Line 3.para.1) i
27、s closest in meaning to短语“reneging on” 最接近那个意思：A condemning.谴责B reaffirming.再次确认C dishonoring.不守信用D securing.安全解析：词意题：A deal is a deal之后出现except，表明前后相反；还有一次题眼：commitment to abide by；前面出现provoked justified outrage，一个是正当的愤怒，一个是守承诺，那么中间就只能是不受承诺了。答案为C dishonoring.27. By entering into the 2002 agreement,
28、 Entergy intended to同意2002年的协议，Entergy 公司希望： A obtain protection from Vermont regulators.获得Vermont 监管者的保护B seek favor from the federal legislature.寻求联邦立法机关的帮助C acquire an extension of its business license .要求延长商业执照的有效期D get permission to purchase a power plant.获得购买一个电厂的许可解析：细节题 根据题干对应文中The conflict
29、has been surfacing since 2002, when the corporation bought Vermonts only nuclear power plant, an aging reactor in Vernon. 冲突从2002年开始就出现了，那个时候公司购买了Vermont唯一的一家核电站；在Vernon的一家很旧的反应堆。As a condition of receiving state approval for the sale, the company agreed to seek permission from state regulators to o
30、perate past 2012.作为获得州政府购买批准的条件，公司同意在2012年以后的运营需要征得州监管者的同意。2002 agreement对应the company agreed to；intended to对应As a condition of 因此答案为：receiving state approval for the sale；D get permission to purchase a power plant.完美替换。28. According to Paragraph 4, Entergy seems to have problems with its根据第四段，Enter
31、gy存在哪些方面的问题：A managerial practices.管理实践B technical innovativeness.技术创新C financial goals.财务目标D business vision经营愿景解析：细节题：A string of accidents, including the partial collapse of a cooling tower in 2007 and the discovery of an underground pipe system leakage, raised serious questions about both Vermon
32、t Yankees safety and Entergys management一系列的事故，包括2007年冷凝塔的部分坍塌，发现地下管道系统的泄露，这些都引起了对于Vermont Yankee 安全和公司管理的强烈关注。所以答案应该是A managerial practices.29. In the authors view, the Vermont case will test作者认为Vermont 的案例将会测试：A Entergys capacity to fulfill all its promises.Entergy履行其承诺的能力B the mature of states pa
33、tchwork regulations.各州临散规定的成熟程度C the federal authority over nuclear issues .对于核问题的联邦权威D the limits of statespower over nuclear issues.对于核问题各州权力的局限性解析：细节题：对应句子：whereas the Supreme Court has ruled that states do have some regulatory authority over nuclear power, legal scholars say that Vermont case wi
34、ll offer a precedent-setting test of how far those powers extend.但是最高法院判定各州确实有一些对于核电站的调控权力，法律学者说这个案例将提供先例设定的测试，决定这些权力能扩展多远。作者的观点借用legal scholars之口说出来这在以前的文章中也是多次提到，KK经常讲的这是作者的代言人。30. It can be inferred from the last paragraph that从最后一段中可以推知：A Entergys business elsewhere might be affected.Entergys在其他
35、地方的生意可能会受到影响B the authority of the NRC will be defied.NRC的权威会受到挑衅C Entergy will withdraw its Plymouth application.Entergy会撤回其在Plymouth的申请D Vermonts reputation might be damaged.Vermont的名誉会遭到破坏解析：段落推理题。重点对于段落中心和转折。这里没有中心却有转折The company seems to have concluded that its reputation in Vermont is already
36、so damaged that it has nothing left to lose by going to war with the state. But there should be consequences.公司似乎可以得出结论其在vermont的名誉已经受到破坏了，所以它已经没有任何东西可以丢失了，于是可以和州政府开战了。但是这是有后果的。后面句子开始描述其在其他州的生意，可以知道对应答案，常见的转折推理：且出现might; kk很确信大家能选出这个答案！Text 3In the idealized version of how science is done, facts abo
37、ut the world are waiting to be observed and collected by objective researchers who use the scientific method to carry out their work. But in the everyday practice of science, discovery frequently follows an ambiguous and complicated route. We aim to be objective, but we cannot escape the context of
38、our unique life experience. Prior knowledge and interest influence what we experience, what we think our experiences mean, and the subsequent actions we take. Opportunities for misinterpretation, error, and self-deception abound.在科学研究的理想状态下，关于世界的事实正在等待着那些客观的研究者来观察和搜集，研究者们会用科学的方法来进行他们的工作。但是在每天的科学实践中，
39、发现通常遵循一条模糊和复杂的路径。我们的目标是做到客观，但是我们却不能逃离我们所处的独特的生活经验的环境。之前的知识和兴趣会影响我们所经历的，会影响我们对于经验意义的思考，以及我们会采取的随后的行动。这里充满着误读，错误和自我欺骗的机会。Consequently, discovery claims should be thought of as protoscience. Similar to newly staked mining claims, they are full of potential. But it takes collective scrutiny and acceptan
40、ce to transform a discovery claim into a mature discovery. This is the credibility process, through which the individual researchers me, here, now becomes the communitys anyone, anywhere, anytime. Objective knowledge is the goal, not the starting point.所以，对于发现的申明应该被当做是科学的原型。这与新近开发的采矿资源比较类似，他们都充满着可能性
41、。但是将发现的申明变为一个成熟的发现是需要集体的审查和集体的接受。这个过程就配称之为“信用的过程”，通过这个过程一个单个研究者的“我”在这里就变成了这个社区中的任何人，任何地方和任何时间。客观的知识不应该是起点而是目标。Once a discovery claim becomes public, the discoverer receives intellectual credit. But, unlike with mining claims, the community takes control of what happens next. Within the complex socia
42、l structure of the scientific community, researchers make discoveries; editors and reviewers act as gatekeepers by controlling the publication process; other scientists use the new finding to suit their own purposes; and finally, the public (including other scientists) receives the new discovery and
43、 possibly accompanying technology. As a discovery claim works it through the community, the interaction and confrontation between shared and competing beliefs about the science and the technology involved transforms an individuals discovery claim into the communitys credible discovery. 一旦一个科学发现变成公开的
44、，那么发现者就获得了知识的认可。但是和采矿权不一样的是，科学协会将控制接下来会发生的事情。在复杂的科研机构的社会结构中，研究者去做出发现；编辑和审稿者通过控制出版过程扮演着看门人的角色；其他的科学家使用新的发现来满足他们自己的目标；最后，公众（也包括其他科学家）接受到新的发现和可能相伴随的技术。当一个发现的声明最终通过了机构的审查，在有关所涉及到的共享的和抵触的信念之间的互动和冲突将把一个人的发现变为一个机构的可信的发现。Two paradoxes exist throughout this credibility process. First, scientific work tends t
45、o focus on some aspect of prevailing Knowledge that is viewed as incomplete or incorrect. Little reward accompanies duplication and confirmation of what is already known and believed. The goal is new-search, not re-search. Not surprisingly, newly published discovery claims and credible discoveries t
46、hat appear to be important and convincing will always be open to challenge and potential modification or refutation by future researchers. Second, novelty itself frequently provokes disbelief. Nobel Laureate and physiologist Albert Azent-Gyorgyi once described discovery as “seeing what everybody has
47、 seen and thinking what nobody has thought.” But thinking what nobody else has thought and telling others what they have missed may not change their views. Sometimes years are required for truly novel discovery claims to be accepted and appreciated.在整个信任的过程中存在着两个悖论，第一：科学工作倾向于关注一些流行科学的某些方面，而这些方面又是被认为是不完全和不正确的。去复制和确认已经被人所知和所信的东西不会有多少回报。科学要做的是去探究新的东西而不是再次探究。不足为奇的是，新发表的重要的，有说服力发现和可信的发现将会被后来的研究者质疑，并带来潜在的修改甚至驳斥。第二个悖论是：新颖的东西本身就经常会招致怀疑。诺贝尔奖获得者，生理学家Albert Azent-Gyorgyi曾经将发现描述为：“观察每个人观察的，思考没有人想到的。”但是思考其他人没有想到的并且告诉其他人他们所遗漏的可能并不会改变这些人的观点。有时候
