2021.06四级真题第3套.pdf

Part I Writing(30 minutes)Directions:For this part,you are allowed 30 minutes to write an essay titled Do violent video games lead to violence?.The statement given below is for your ref ere nee.You should write at least 120 words but no more than 180 words.A growing body of research finds that violent video games can make kids act aggressively in their real world relationships,causing an increase in violence.Part:U:Listening Comprehension(25 minutes)&:Eil=f 2021 6 IZQOOTWIl!Jrfl*;l.lml!Jrfl!fi!WIfflfRJ,J=U!JZtl3i!flll1EJ,1!1 JtttE*-r:pff:m:tll:$Part I Section A Reading Comprehension(40 minutes)Directions:In this section,there is a passage with ten blanks.You are required to select one.word for each blank from a list of choices given in a word bank following the passage.Read the passage through carefully before making your choices.&eh choice in the bank is identified by a letter.Please mark the correspondirtg letter for each item on Answer Sheet 2 with a single line through the centre.You may not use any of the words in the bank more than once.Nowadays you cant buy anything without then being asked to provide a rating of a companys performance on a five-star scale.Ive been asked to rate my store on the EFTPOS terminal before I can pay.Even the most _JJ_ activities,such as calling Telstra or picking up a parcel from Australia Post,are followed by texts or emails with surveys asking,How did we do?Online purchases are followed up by a customer satisfaction survey.Companies are so for a hit of stars that if you delete the survey the company sends you another one.Were _lQ_ to rate our apps when weve barely had a chance to use them.One online course provider I use asks you what you think of the course after youve only completed 2 per cent of it.Economist Jason Murphy says that companies use customer satisfaction ratings because a display of star feedback has become the nuclear power sources of the modem economy.However,you cant help but if these companies are basing their business on fabrications(:it it?1t-).I that with online surveys 1 just click the thats closest to my mouse cursor(it#)to get the damn thing off my screen.Often the star rating I give has far more to do with the kind of day Im having than the purchase 1 just made.A)announceB)commonplaceC)confess-maesperate E)experienceF)fascinatedG)optionH)promptedl)roughlyJ)routinelyK)shiningL)showeringM)variety-N)voyage _ _ 0)wonder(JTJ20216 47 Section B Directions:In this section,you are going to read a passage with ten statements attached to it.&eh statement contains information given in one of the paragraphs.Identify the paragraph from which the information is derived.You may choose a paragraph more than once.&eh paragraph is marked with a letter.Answer the questions by marking the corresponding letter on Answer Sheet 2.Science of setbacks:How failure can improve career prospects A)How do early career setbacks affect our long-term success?Failures can help us learn and overcome ourfears.But disasters can still wound us.They can screw us up and set us back.Wouldnt it be nice ifthere was genuine,scientifically documented truth to the expression what doesnt kill you makes youstronger?B)One way social scientists have probed the effects of career setbacks is to look at scientists of verysimilar qualifications.These scientists,for reasons that are mostly arbitrary,either just missed gettinga research grant or just barely made it.In social sciences,this is known as examining near misses andnarrow wins in areas where merit is subjective.That allows researchers to measure only the effectsof being chosen or not.Studies in this area have found conflicting results.In the competitive game ofbiomedical science,research has been done on scientists who narrowly lost or won grant money.Itsuggests that narrow winners become even bigger winners down the line.In other words,the rich getricher.C)A 2018 study published in the Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences,for example,followedresearchers in the Netherlands.Researchers concluded that those who just barely qualified for a grantwere able to get twice as much money within the next eight years as those who just missed out.And thenarrow winners were 50 percent more likely to be given a professorship.D)Others in the US have found similar effects with National Institutes of Health early-career fellowshipslaunching narrow winners far ahead of close losers.The phenomenon is often referred to as theMatthew effect fosp1red-6y ilie Bibles-wisdom diaf fo-those who have,more will be-given:Theres-a-good explanation for the phenomenon in the book The Formula:The Universal Laws of Success by Albert Laszlo Barabasi.According to Barabasi,its easier and less risky for those in positions of power to choose to hand awards and funding to those whove already been so recognized.E)This is bad news for the losers.Small early career setbacks seem to have a disproportionate effectdown the line.What didnt kill them made them weaker.But other studies using the same techniquehave shown theres sometimes no penalty to a near miss.Students who just miss getting into top highschools or universities do just as well later in life as those who just manage to get accepted.In this case,what didnt kill them simply didnt matter.So is there any evidence that setbacks might actuallyimprove our career prospects?There is now.F)In a study published in Nature Communications,Northwestern University sociologist Dashun Wangtracked more than 1,100 scientists who were on the border between getting a grant and missing outbetween 1990 and 2005.He followed various measures of performance over the next decade.Theseincluded how many papers they authored and how influential those papers were,as measured by thenumber of subsequent citations.As expected,there was a much higher rate of attrition(g!)amongIm 2021&f 6 3 48 scientists who didnt get grants.But among those who stayed on,the close losers performed even better than the narrow winners.To make sure this wasnt by chance,Wang conducted additional tests using different performance measures.He examined how many times people were first authors on influential studies,and the like.G)One straightforward reason close losers might outperform narrow winners is that the two groups havecomparable ability.In Wangs study,he selected the most determined,passionate scientists from theloser group and culled(J1J)what he deemed the weakest members of the winner group.Yet thepersevering losers still came out on top.He thinks that being a close loser might give people apsychological boost,or the proverbial kick in the pants.H)Utrecht University sociologist Arnout van de Rijt was the lead author on the 2018 paper showing therich get richer.He said the new finding is apparently reasonable and worth some attention.His ownwork showed that although the narrow winners did get much more money in the near future,the actualperformance of the close losers was just as good.I)He said the people who should be paying regard to the Wang paper are the funding agents whodistribute government grant money.After all,by continuing to pile riches on the narrow winners,thetaxpayers are not getting the maximum bang for their buck if the close losers are performing just aswell or even better.Theres a huge amount of time and effort that goes into the process of selectingwho gets grants,he said,and the latest research shows that the scientific establishment is not verygood at distributing money.Maybe we should spend less money trying to figure out who is better thanwho,he said,suggesting that some more equal dividing up of money might be more productive andmore efficient.Van de Rijt said hes not convinced that losing out gives people a psychological boost;It may yet be a selection effect.Even though Wang tried to account for this by culling the weakestwinners,its impossible to know which of the winners would have quit had they found themselves onthe losing side.J)For his part,Wang said that in his own experience,losing did light a motivating fire.He recalled arecent paper he submitted to a journal,which accepted it only to request extensive editing,and thenreversed course and rejected it.He submitted the unedited version to a more respected journal and gotaccepted.K)In sports and many areas of life,we think of failures as evidence of something we could have donebetter.We regard these disappointments as a fate we could have avoided with more carefulpreparation,different training,a better strategy,or more focus.And there it makes sense thatfailures show us the road to success.These papers deal with a kind of failure people have little controlover-rejection.Others determine who wins and who loses.But at the very least,the research isstarting to show that early setbacks dont have to be fatal.They might even make us better at our jobs.Getting paid like a winner,though?Thats a different matter.36.Being a close loser could greatly motivate one to persevere in their research.37.Grant awarders tend to favor researchers alretJ.dy recoized i:11 their repective fif?Jd_s _._38.Suffering early setbacks might help people improve their job performance.39.Research by social scientists on the effects of career setbacks has produced contradictory findings.fillfl!2021 6 J3 49 40.It is not to the best interest of taxpayers to keep giving money to narrow winners.41.Scientists who persisted in research without receiving a grant made greater achievements than thosewho got one with luck,as suggested in one study.42.A research paper rejected by one journal may get accepted by another.43.According to one recent study,narrow winners of research grants had better chances to be promotedto professors.44.One researcher suggests it might be more fruitful to distribute grants on a relatively equal basis.45.Minor setbacks in their early career may have a strong negative effect on the career of close losers.Section C Directions:There are 2 passa,ges in this section.F.ach passage is followed by some questions or unfinished statements.For each of them there are four choices marked A),B),C)and D).You should decide on the best choice and mark the corresponding letter on Answer Sheet 2 with a single line through the centre.Passage One Questions 46 to 50 are based on the following passage.Boredom has become trendy.Studies point to how boredom is good for creativity and innovation,as well as mental health.It is found that people are more creative following the completion of a tedious task.When people are bored,they have an increase in associative thought-the process of making new connections between ideas,which is linked to innovative thinking.These studies are impressive,but in reality,the benefits of boredom may be related to having time to clear your mind,be quiet,or daydream.In our stimulation-rich world,it seems unrealistic that boredom could occur at all.Yet,there are valid reasons boredom may feel so painful.As it turns out,boredom might signal the fact that you have a need that isnt being met.Our always-on world of social media may result in more connections,but they are superficial and can t in h _a_y_f buildin _a real se!_ b_elonging.Feeling bored may signal the desire for a greater senseof community and the feeling that you fit in with others around you.So take the step of joining an organization to build face-to-face relationships.Youll find depth that you wont get from your screen no matter how many likes you get on your post.Similar to the need for belonging,bored people often report that they feel a limited sense of meaning.Its a fundamental human need to have a larger purpose and to feel like were part of something bigger than ourselves.When people are bored,theyre more likely to feel less meaning in their lives.If you want to reduce boredom and increase your sense of meaning,seek work where you can make a unique contribution,or find a cause you can support with your time and talent.If your definition of boredom is being quiet,mindful,and reflective,keep it up.But if youre struggling with real boredom and the emptiness it provokes,consider whether you might seek new connections and more significant challenges.These are the things that will genuinely relieve boredom and make you more effective in the process.46.What have studies found about boredom?A)It facilitates innovative thinking.B)It is a result of doing boring tasks.fill 2021 6 Ji 50 C)It helps people connect with others.D)It does harm to ones mental health.47.What does the author say boredom might indicate?A)A need to be left alone.B)A desire to be fulfilled.C)A conflict to be resolved.D)A feeling to be validated.48.What do we learn about social media from the passage?A)It may be an obstacle to expanding ones connections.B)It may get in the way of enhancing ones social status.C)It may prevent people from developing a genuine sense of community.D)It may make people feel that they ought to fit in with the outside world.49.What does the author suggest people do to get rid of boredom?A)Count the likes they get on their posts.B)Reflect on how they relate to others.C)Engage in real-life interactions.D)Participate in online discussions.50.What should people do to enhance their sense of meaning?A)Try to do something original.B)Confront significant challenges.C)Define boredom in their unique way.D)Devote themselves to a worthy cause.Passage Two Questions 51 to 55 are based on the following passage.Can you remember what you ate yesterday?If asked,most people will be able to give a vague description of their main meals:breakfast,lunch,dinner.But can you be sure youve noted every snack bar in your car,or every handful of nuts at your desk?Most people will have a feeling that theyve missed something out.We originally had this suspicion back in 2016,puzzled by the fact that national statistics showed calorie consumption falling dramatically over past decades.We found reliable evidence that people were drastically under-reporting what they ate.Now the Office for National Statistics has confirmed that we are consuming 50%more calories than our national statistics claim.Why is this happening?We can point to at least three potential causes.One is the rise in obesity levels itself.Under-reporting rates are much higher for obese people,because they simply consume more food,and thus have more to remember.Another cause is that the proportion of people who are trying to lose weight has been increasing over time.People who want to lose weight are more likely to under-report their eating-regardless of whether they are overweight or not.This may be driven partly by self-deception or wishful thinking.The final potential cause is an increase in snacking and eating out over recent decades-both in terms of how often they happen and how much they contribute to our overall energy intake.Again,there is ll!I 2021 6 JI 51evidence that food conswned out of the home is one of the most poorly recorded categories in surveys.So,whats the message conveyed?For statistics,we should i