1、考研英语（一）模拟试卷 186 及答案与解析一、Section I Use of EnglishDirections: Read the following text. Choose the best word(s) for each numbered blank and mark A, B, C or D. (10 points) 0 A new study published in the journal Proceedings of the Royal Society B by the teams of Dr. Gregory West and Dr. Veronique Bohbot
2、shows that【B1】_ video game players (VGPs) 【B2】_ more efficient visual attention abilities, they are【 B3】_much more likely to use navigation strategies that【B4】_on the brains reward system and not the brains spatial memory system.Past research has shown that people who【B5】_the reward system-dependent
3、 navigation strategies have decreased grey matter and【 B6】_functional brain activity in the memory system. However, the effects of intense video gaming on the brain are only beginning to be【B7】_.The study was conducted【B8】_a group of adult gamers who were spending at least six hours per week on this
4、 activity. “ For more than a decade now, research has demonstrated that action video game players display more【B9】_visual attention abilities, and our【B10】_study has once again confirmed this【B11】_says first author Dr. Gregory West. “【B12】_ , we also found that gamers rely on the reward system to a
5、greater【B13 】_than non-gamers. Past research has shown that people who rely on the reward-system-dependent strategies have lower grey matter and functional brain activity in the hippocampus. This means that people who spend a lot of time playing video games may have【B14】_hippocampal integrity, which
6、 is associated with an increased risk of neurological disorders【B15】_Alzheimer s disease.“【B16 】_past research has shown video games as having positive effects on attention , it is important for future research to confirm that gaming does not have a【B17】_effect on the hippocampus. Future research us
7、ing neuroimaging will be necessary to further【B18】_our current findings, and these studies should investigate the【B19 】_effects of specific video games【B20】_the integrity of the reward system and hippocampus.1 【B1 】（A）while（B） until（C） as（D）unless2 【B2 】（A）acquire（B） assess（C） measure（D）exhibit3 【B3
8、 】（A）instead（B） also（C） thus（D）again4 【B4 】（A）focus（B） count（C） rely（D）check5 【B5 】（A）plan（B） follow（C） offer（D）employ6 【B6 】（A）greater（B） lower（C） sharper（D）higher7 【B7 】（A）expressed（B） remembered（C） understood（D）foreseen8 【B8 】（A）with（B） for（C） by（D）among9 【B9 】（A）effective（B） competent（C） efficie
9、nt（D）sufficient10 【B10 】（A）previous（B） current（C） original（D）rigorous11 【B11 】（A）concept（B） notion（C） conception（D）theory12 【B12 】（A）Otherwise（B） Moreover（C） Therefore（D）However13 【B13 】（A）point（B） scale（C） degree（D）rate14 【B14 】（A）reduced（B） augmented（C） boosted（D）reflected15 【B15 】（A）similar to（B）
10、 along with（C） such as（D）aside from16 【B16 】（A）Suppose（B） Unless（C） Whereas（D）Because17 【B17 】（A）negative（B） minimal（C） profound（D）conspicuous18 【B18 】（A）complete（B） qualify（C） withdraw（D）emphasize19 【B19 】（A）occasional（B） predictable（C） direct（D）dubious20 【B20 】（A）for（B） with（C） on（D）into Part ADir
11、ections: Read the following four texts. Answer the questions below each text by choosing A, B, C or D. (40 points)20 It is a movement building steady momentum; a call to make research data, software code and experimental methods publicly available and transparent. A spirit of openness is gaining tra
12、ction in the science community, and is the only way, say advocates, to address a “crisis“ in science whereby too few findings are successfully reproduced. Furthermore, they say, it is the best way for researchers to gather the range of observations that are necessary to speed up discoveries or to id
13、entify large-scale trends.The open-data shift poses a conundrum for junior researchers, who are carving out their niche. On the one hand, the drive to share is gathering official steam. Since 2013, global scientific bodiesincluding the European Commission, the U. S. Office of Science and Technology
14、Policy and the Global Research Councilhave begun to back policies that support increased public access to research.On the other hand, scientists disagree about how much and when they should share data, and they debate whether sharing it is more likely to accelerate science and make it more robust, o
15、r to introduce vulnerabilities and problems.As more journals and funders adopt data-sharing requirements, and as agrowing number of enthusiasts call for more openness, junior researchers must find their place between adopters and those who continue to hold out, even as they strive to launch their ow
16、n careers.One key challenge facing young scientists is how to be open without becoming scientifically vulnerable. They must determine the risk of jeopardizing a job offer or a collaboration proposal from those who are wary ofor unfamiliar withopen science. And they must learn how to capitalize on th
17、e movements benefits, such as opportunities for more citations and a way to build a reputation without the need for conventional metrics, such as publication in high-impact journals.And although there is a time cost associated with uploading and organizing raw data, subsequent queries can often be a
18、verted by adding reader-friendly instructions at the start. Hogg recommends that researchers simultaneously upload tutorials and examples of how to use the content.In the end, sharing data, software and materials with colleagues can help an early-career researcher to garner recognitiona crucial comp
19、onent of success. “The thing you are searching for is reputation,“ says Titus Brown, a genomics researcher at the University of California, Davis. “To get grants and jobs, you have to be relevant and achieve some level of public recognition. Anything you do that advances your presenceespecially in a
20、 larger sphere, outside the communities you knowis a net win.“21 It is generally believed that data sharing（A）goes against the interests of researchers.（B） makes research findings more reproducible.（C） will benefit the scientific community.（D）can produce a range of new discoveries.22 The reaction of
21、 junior researchers to the trend seems to be（A）doubtful.（B） puzzled.（C） enthusiastic.（D）confident.23 To embrace the change, it is crucial that young scientists（A）curb their ambitions to seek fame.（B） stay away from risks in job offers.（C） overcome their human weaknesses.（D）make full use of its poten
22、tial benefits.24 According to the author, uploading raw materials is advisable in that（A）the content is easier for readers to use.（B） it conforms to the practice of academic journals.（C） the effort may save readers some troubles.（D）it arouses further questions from the readers.25 Browns comments sug
23、gest that the move to make scientific findings transparent（A）prevents malpractices in scientific communities.（B） no longer emphasizes relevant achievements.（C） helps young researchers secure recognition.（D）complies with the conventions of science.25 This week, many Americans will be buying into the
24、same dream: winning the unprecedentedly large $1.3 billion Powerball jackpot on Wednesday night. Since last week, when the jackpot had accrued to over $500 million, Powerball tickets have been reportedly flying off bodega and convenience-store counters. The odds of winning remain 1 in 292 milliontha
25、ts why the lottery is sometimes called a “stupidity tax“ but a tickets $2 price tag does make it a low-risk impulse buy. (Alex Tabarrok, over at Marginal Revolution, suggests that those who participate should buy tickets early in order to enjoy their real valuethe pleasure of anticipationfor longer)
26、.A reader complains: “The lottery is a scheme acted on the poorest and most gullible.“ Many people are hoping to acquire this tremendous windfall, but is what theyre after something that will actually make them happy? Anecdotes about how winning the lottery can be bad luck abounda winning ticket has
27、 led some “lucky“ winners into bankruptcy, or worse. But theres also the possibility that all of the lottery winners who are living comfortably dont make headlines.Researchers have tried to figure out which of these narratives is more accurate by looking into two questions whose answers lottery play
28、ers assume to be in the affirmative; Does winning the lottery make people rich in the long run? And does an influx of tons of cash make people happier? Their results, though, suggests that these answers arent so straightforward.In the late 1970s and 80s, the sociologist H. Roy Kaplan performed now-c
29、lassic research on what became of lottery winners. His most famous study asked lottery winners how happy they had been before and after their big checks arrived. That 1978 study, which had a very small sample size, famously found that lottery winners were not that much happier than the control group
30、a bunch of people who didnt win the lotteryafter their win. (A 2008 Dutch study concluded the same thing.) Kaplan did a bigger study in 1987 on 576 lottery winners, and found that “popular myths and stereotypes about winners were inaccurate“by which he meant that American lottery winners did not typ
31、ically quit their jobs and spend lavishly.In the end, while winning can turn out bad, the real bad thing is probably the lottery itself; America, especially its poor households, spends way too much on it, and the odds are worse than at a casino.26 Which of the following is true of the Powerball lott
32、ery?（A）The lasting feelings of fulfilment.（B） The players active participation.（C） The stupid marketing tricks.（D）The room for increasing value.27 We learn from Paragraph 2 that（A）buying lottery is a permanent source for gossip.（B） lucky winners deserve our greater admiration.（C） some stories about
33、winners may not be reliable.（D）poor families cannot escape the trap of lottery.28 Lottery players often take it for granted that suddenly receiving a large sum of money（A）makes them temporarily richer .（B） warns them of oncoming doom.（C） brings with it more happiness.（D）depends largely upon pure luc
34、k.29 The authors overall attitude toward lottery in America is one of（A）tolerance.（B） indifference.（C） cautiousness.（D）disapproval.30 Which of the following may be the best title of the text?（A）What becomes of lottery winners?（B） Does lottery promise a work-free life?（C） Are Powerball tickets worth
35、buying?（D）How do winners manage their finances?30 Who would you trust more, someone whose moral principles are absolute, black and white, or someone who carefully considers the rights and wrongs of specific situations before leaping to judgment? My guess is that most people reading this would say th
36、e former. “ Rigidity“ is a dirty word for most thinking folk, and being comfortable with ambiguity the hallmark of sophistication. But according to new research by experimental psychologists at Oxford and Cornell, in practice most people trust the absolutists more than the ponderers.In fact, all the
37、 experiments show is that people who refuse to kill an innocent person to save the lives of many others are considered more trustworthy than those who would do so for the greater good. Its quite an inferential leap to go from that to the view that rigidity in general confers trust.Nonetheless, there
38、 is something suggestive in these findings that challenges an assumption weve inherited from the kind of religious ethics most in Britain no longer follow. Its the idea that morality in some sense stands above human behaviour, representing an external standard we have to conform to. Our goal is to d
39、o the right thing, to make the choice that is judged as the best one from some kind of impartial viewpoint. But what if this is profoundly misguided? What if morality is in fact nothing more than a system for managing social interaction, a way of promoting harmony and keeping us from each others thr
40、oats?We have very good reasons for thinking this is precisely how we should view morality, and it is none the worse for it. Morality is primarily a matter of how we should treat others, for the good of everyone. You dont need to posit any kind of transcendental source for the principles that should
41、govern this. All you need to think about is what helps us to live and flourish.If this is what morality is, then it is not difficult to see why we should prefer simple, fixed rules to case-by-case calculations. First, for morality to work as a social system we need others to be predictable. If we ca
42、nnot be sure whether someone might decide to kill us tomorrow in order to save others, we can never be sure that we are safe from anyone. We can have no faith in a justice system that allows the odd innocent to be punished in order to deter those who might otherwise harm even more. So although havin
43、g a fixed rule that we should never harm the innocent might sometimes result in more innocent people being harmed, on balance the price we pay for that is much less than the cost of uncertainty. From a social point of view, the predictability and reliability of moral behaviour are much more importan
44、t than getting it right from some abstract, intellectual perspective.31 It is generally believed that “rigidity“ connotes something（A）sophisticated.（B） mechanical.（C） changeable.（D）sociable.32 When mentioning “people who refuse to kill an innocent person (Para. 2) ,“ the author is trying to make the
45、 point that（A）public interests should be emphasized.（B） victims should be properly attended to.（C） great thinkers can win much respect.（D）absolutists may earn more trust.33 According to Paragraph 3, the morality seen from a religious perspective is（A）misleading.（B） impartial.（C） soothing.（D）convinci
46、ng.34 To put morality in perspective, it is crucial that you should（A）stick to commonsense morality.（B） rise above moral principles.（C） show sympathy for the innocent.（D）have faith in the justice system.35 It can be safely concluded from the text that most people are much attracted to（A）those who do
47、 no harm to the common good.（B） people who follow religious rituals.（C） those of great reliability rather than intellectuals.（D）victims whose sufferings are predictable.35 This year isnt the first time an overwhelmingly white field of nominees has led to an Academy Awards protest. The run-up to the
48、Academy Awards always includes the usual debate over who got snubbed. This year, however, that conversation has taken on a new level of gravity: for the second year in a row, every nominated actor is white.That situation has led Hollywood insiders and fans alike to speak out. On Twitter, observers s
49、tarted to voice their outrage. Whatever the solution may be, its clear that the protest is being heardwhich is a marked change from earlier protests over the exact same thing. In fact, it was exactly 20 years ago, in 1996, that a protest over Oscars diversity erupted and led to a very different response; ridicule.The 68th Academy Awards featured a lineup of actors that was just as white as this years is. By the time the nominees were announced,
