【考研类试卷】考研英语（阅读）-试卷80及答案解析.doc

1、考研英语（阅读）-试卷 80及答案解析(总分：60.00，做题时间：90 分钟)一、Reading Comprehensio(总题数：6，分数：60.00)1.Section II Reading Comprehension（分数：10.00）_2.Part ADirections: Read the following four texts. Answer the questions below each text by choosing A, B, C or D.（分数：10.00）_Neuroscientists have long understood that the brain c

2、an rewire itself in response to experiencea phenomenon known as neuroplasticity. But until recently, they didn“t know what causes gray matter to become plastic, to begin changing. Breakthrough research by a team at MIT“s Picower Institute for Learning and Memory has documented one type of environmen

3、tal feedback that triggers plasticity: success. Equally important and somewhat surprising: Its opposite, failure, has no impact. Earl Miller, the lead researcher on the study, says understanding the link to environmental feedback is crucial to improving how people teach and motivate because it“s a b

4、ig part of how we learn. But we absorb more from success than from failure, according to the study. Miller“s researchers gave monkeys a simple learning task: They presented one of two pictures. If it was Picture A, the monkeys were supposed to look to the left; if Picture B, to the right. When the m

5、onkeys looked in the correct direction, they were rewarded with a drop of juice. All the while the team recorded brain function. “Neurons(cells specialized to conduct nerve impulses)in the prefrontal cortex and striatum, where the brain tracks success and failure, sharpened their tuning after succes

6、s,“ says Miller. What“s more, those changes lingered for several seconds, making brain activity more efficient the next time the monkey did the task. Thereafter, each success was processed more efficiently. That is, the monkey had learned. “But after failure,“ Miller points out, “there was little ch

7、ange in brain activity.“ In other words, the brain didn“t store any information about what went wrong and use it the next time. The monkey just tried, tried again. Miller says this means that on a neurological level, success is actually a lot more informative than failure. If you get a reward, the b

8、rain remembers what it did right. But with failure(unless there is a clear negative consequence, like the shock a child feels when she sticks something in an electrical outlet), the brain isn“t sure what to store, so it doesn“t change at all. Does this research confirm the management tenet of focusi

9、ng on yourand your team“sstrengths and successes? Miller cautions against making too tidy a connection between his findings and an environment like the workplace, but he offers this suggestion: “Maybe the lesson is to know that the brain will learn from success, and you don“t need to dwell on that.

10、You need to pay more attention to failures and challenge why you fail.“（分数：10.00）(1).Which of the following is true of Earl Miller“s research?（分数：2.00）A.It discovers neuroplasticity.B.It is the first study of this kind.C.It studies one environmental feedback.D.It attests to one cause of neuroplastic

11、ity.(2).According to Miller“s study, failure as an environmental feedback（分数：2.00）A.has a great impact on our neuro-system.B.can cause gray matter to become plastic.C.plays a more important role in learning than success.D.provides less benefits than success.(3).During the experiment each failure mad

12、e the monkey（分数：2.00）A.repeat the task fruitlessly.B.realize the right way to do the task.C.give up trying eventually.D.become more efficient and closer to success.(4).The example of an electric shock to a child in Paragraph 5 is given to show（分数：2.00）A.success is much more informative than failure.

13、B.failure is instructive if it is impressive.C.failure confuses the storing process of the brain.D.failure is stored only when it brings obvious negative outcomes.(5).In the last paragraph, Miller suggests that we should（分数：2.00）A.apply his findings to the workplace.B.be cautious while pursuing succ

14、ess.C.not think about the satisfaction of success.D.strive to learn from failures as well.Newspapers are becoming more balanced businesses, with a healthier mix of revenues from readers and advertisers. American papers have long been highly unusual in their reliance on ads. Fully 87% of their revenu

15、es came from advertising in 2006, according to the OECD. In Japan the proportion is 35%. Not surprisingly, Japanese newspapers are much more stable. The whirlwind that swept through newsrooms harmed everybody, but much of the damage has been concentrated in areas where newspapers are least distincti

16、ve. Car and film reviewers have gone. So have science and general business reporters. Foreign bureaus have been savagely pruned. Newspapers are less complete as a result. But completeness is no longer a virtue in the newspaper business. Just look at the fate of Otis Chandler“s creation. Thanks to fa

17、mily connections, Chandler ended up in control of the Los Angeles Times in 1960. The paper he inherited was parochial and conservative, reflecting the city it served. Chandler abandoned the anti-union dogma and set about building a west-coast rival to the New York Times. His paper was heavy on forei

18、gn news and serious, objective reporting. The result was hugely impressivebut not, as it turned out, suited to the internet era. In the past few years the paper has suffered repeated staff cuts. In 2007 it was acquired by a property magnate and in 2008 filed for bankruptcy protection. The problem wi

19、th such newspapers is that, although they do much that is excellent, they do little that is distinctive enough for people to pay for it. The Los Angeles Times“ foreign reporting is extremely good. But it is hard to argue that it is better than the stuff supplied by the New York Times or foreign pape

20、rs. Similarly, it has never been clear why each major newspaper needs its own car reviewer a Corolla is a Corolla, whether it is driven in Albuquerque or Atlanta. Papers should concentrate on what they do best, which means, in many cases, local news and sport. If the rest is bought in from wire serv

21、ices or national organizations, readers are unlikely to complainas long as there is enough competition between those larger providers to keep up standards. Specialization generally means higher quality. It is grim to forecast still more writers losing their jobs. But whether newspapers are thrown on

22、to doorsteps or distributed digitally, they need to deliver something that is distinctive. New technologies like Apple“s iPad only make this more true. The mere acquisition of a smooth block of metal and glass does not magically persuade people that they should start paying for news. They will pay f

23、or news if they think it has value. Newspapers need to focus relentlessly on that.（分数：10.00）(1).From Paragraph 1 we learn that American newspapers（分数：2.00）A.are balanced businesses now.B.are more stable than Japanese ones.C.get most revenues from readers.D.have been heavily relying on ads.(2).Newspa

24、pers in America are becoming less complete in that（分数：2.00）A.newspaper industry is in depression.B.newsrooms have suffered a whirlwind.C.many columns and foreign agencies are cut.D.Otis Chandler“s creation has failed.(3).Los Angeles Times managed by Chandler（分数：2.00）A.is narrow and conservative.B.no

25、w is a rival to New York Times.C.once was very successful.D.is serious and subjective.(4).According to the author, Los Angeles Times“ failure is due to its（分数：2.00）A.focus on foreign report.B.lack of unique features.C.ignorance of wire service.D.ignorance of complaints.(5).The author would most like

26、ly agree that（分数：2.00）A.newspaper industry will disappear soon.B.newspapers should strive to attract people.C.no more writers would lose their jobs in future.D.technology helps newspaper attract more readers.Many will doubt tobacco industry claims that it is sharpening its science to evaluate “healt

27、hier cigarettes“. But that“s what will happen if the US Food and Drug Administration(FDA)gets the job of regulating the industry, as a Senate vote on the issue was expected to decide this week. Then the health agency will be placed in the bizarre situation of deciding whether to approve new versions

28、 of products that have killed millions. Radicals will argue that the only way of preventing tobacco-related death and disease is to ban cigarettes, not encourage more tobacco products onto the marketeven if they might be safer. However, a ban is unlikely, and so helping people to quit, dissuading te

29、ens from smoking in the first place and helping people avoid second-hand smoke should remain at the heart of health policies. Such measures have already cut the number of US smokers from around 50 per cent of the population in the 1960s to around 20 per cent todaybut this is still well short of the

30、US government“s target of 12 per cent by 2010. Abstinence cannot be the only policy, however. Pragmatists will see the sense of safer cigarettes. There is a hard core of people who cannot or will not give up, and safer cigarettes could also help in poorer parts of the world, where more and more peop

31、le are taking up smoking: the World Health Organization predicts that by 2030 more than 80 per cent of tobacco-related deaths will be in low to middle-income countries. We need to find new ways of cutting the risks of tobacco. Nicotine replacements are one solution; reduced-harm products like modifi

32、ed cigarettes might be another. Without robust science to back up the claims of safety, however, they could make things worse, as has happened before. The marketing of “light“, “ultra-light“ and “low-tar“ cigarettes led many smokers to believe that these were healthier alternatives to stronger brand

33、s, yet we now know that they cause just as much cancer. The tobacco industry has a poor history of transparency when it comes to research. Tobacco companies are now developing biomarkers to assess risk more accurately. They should be applauded, but only if they are prepared to subject their research

34、 to tough examination. FDA regulation may force them to do this. It should also make the labeling of cigarettes even clearer, so that consumers understand the relative risks. Only good science can cut through the smokescreen that for decades has obscured the hazards of cigarettes.（分数：10.00）(1).From

35、the first two paragraphs we know that（分数：2.00）A.it is impossible for the tobacco industry to make safer cigarettes.B.the US Food and Drug Administration is going to ban smoking.C.discouraging people from smoking should be the first priority.D.the US government has met its target of reducing the smok

36、ing population.(2).When it comes to smoking, pragmatists believe（分数：2.00）A.people should be encouraged to smoke considering economic interests.B.it is sensible to introduce safer cigarettes since many people won“t quit.C.the US government should spare no effort to ban smoking in public.D.the tobacco

37、 industry should export cigarettes to undeveloped countries.(3).The marketing of “light“, “ultra-light“ and “low-tar“ cigarettes is mentioned to（分数：2.00）A.introduce some kinds of safer cigarettes.B.prove that it“s possible to cut the risks of tobacco.C.illustrate the inability of tobacco industry to

38、 do science research.D.show that the claimed safer cigarettes are risky.(4).It is important for FDA to regulate the tobacco industry in that（分数：2.00）A.it will impose tough examination on the tobacco industry in the US.B.it has stronger scientific methods to boost America“s tobacco industry.C.it can

39、evaluate the risks in the tobacco industry more accurately.D.it will introduce policies to ban smoking in the public places in the US.(5).Which adjective best describes the author“s attitude towards tobacco industry?（分数：2.00）A.Radical.B.Supportive.C.Objective.D.Disgustful.It was supposed to be the n

40、ew-media election. E-mail, blogging, social networking and tweeting were expected to surge in importance and perhaps to decide the race. Something else has happened. Britain“s first television debate, on April 15th, was followed by a ten-point swing to the Liberal Democrats. The debate and its after

41、math dominated political news for several days and has transformed the race. It is a triumph for old media. There were signs even before the debate that new media were not living up to expectations. A survey carried out during the first week in April by the National Endowment for Science, Technology

42、 and the Arts(NESTA)found that 79% of Britons could not recall seeing any online electioneeringnot even an e-mail. The organization concluded that politicians were failing to take advantage of new media“s huge potential to engage with voters. Perhaps. Or perhaps this is to confuse novelty with impor

43、tance. For several reasons, traditional media are rattier good at delivering political messages. The first television debate, on ITV, was watched by 9.4m Britons. That works out to 37% of the prime-time audiencebetter than the share of Americans who watched the first round between John McCain and Ba

44、rack Obama in 2008. Television is the only technology that can reach so many people in a single day. But others are not far behind. Although their circulation has declined, newspapers still reach large audiences. The Sun, which supports the Conservatives, is read by 8m people each day. By comparison

45、 much-touted social media like Twitter are so niche as to be almost invisible. And old media take up a big proportion of people“s leisure time. Each televised debate lasts for 90 minutes. The average reader spends 40 minutes with his daily newspaper and an hour with the Saturday and Sunday papers.

46、It takes just seconds to read an e-mail or a politician“s tweet. One must make some heroic assumptions about the appeal of digital media to think they influence people as much as traditional outlets. Unlike the internet, newspapers and television tilt towards the old, with fully 47% of the audience

47、for the first debate being aged 55 or older. Advertisers are less keen to reach the old than the young, which is one reason newspapers are losing money. But an aged audience is precisely what politicians want. The old are much more likely to vote than the young. Of course, the television debates hav

48、e been circulated through tweets and e-mails, just as they have been dissected by newspapers. New media are handy for firing up committed supporters, too. But when it comes to reaching the voters who matter, the old technologies are still the best.（分数：10.00）(1).In the opening paragraph, the author i

49、ntroduces his topic by（分数：2.00）A.posing a contrastB.explaining a phenomenon.C.making a analogy.D.citing an example.(2).The author mentions the survey conducted by NESTA to show that（分数：2.00）A.around 80% of the British people forget online-electioneering.B.new media are not as effective as expected in the election.C.most politicians have not put the new media into full play to win voters.D.the novelty of the ne