试题库在线考试题库-历年真题模拟试题及答案-考博英语在线试题测试中心-希赛网

沈阳农业大学

Passage 3Questions 38 to 42 are based on the following passage.As anyone who has tried to lose weight knows, realistic goal-setting generally produces the best results. That’s partially because it appears people who set realistic goals actually work more efficiently, and exert more effort, to achieve those goals.What’s far less understood by scientists, however, are the potentially harmful effects of goal-setting.Newspapers relay daily accounts of goal-setting prevalent in industries and businesses up and down both Wall Street and Main Street, yet there has been surprisingly little research on how the long-trumpeted practice of setting goals may have contributed to the current economic crisis, and unethical behavior in general.“Goals are widely used and promoted as having really beneficial effects. And yet, the same motivation that can push people to exert more effort in a constructive way could also motivate people to be more likely to engage in unethical behaviors,” says Maurice Schweitzer, an associate professor at Penn’s Wharton School. His paper, titled “Goals Gone Wild: The Systematic Side Effects of Over-Praised Goal Setting,” appears in the February issue of the Academy of Management Perspectives.“It turns out there’s no economic benefit to just having a goal—you just get a psychological benefit,” Schweitzer says. “But in many cases, goals have economic rewards that make them more powerful.”A prime example Schweitzer and his colleagues cite is the 2004 collapse of energy-trading giant Enron, where managers used financial incentives to motivate salesmen to meet specific revenue goals. The problem, Schweitzer says, is that the actual trades were not profitable.Other studies have shown that saddling employees with unrealistic goals can compel them to lie, cheat or steal. Such was the case in the early 1990s when Sears imposed a sales quota on its auto repair staff. It prompted employees to overcharge for work and to complete unnecessary repairs on a companywide basis.Schweitzer concedes his research runs counter to a very large body of literature that commends the many benefits of goal-setting. Advocates of the practice have taken issue with his team’s use of such evidence as news accounts to support his conclusion that goal-setting is widely over-prescribed.In a rebuttal (反驳) paper, Dr. Edwin Locke writes: “Goal-setting is not going away. Organizations cannot thrive without being focused on their desired end results any more than an individual can thrive without goals to provide a sense of purpose.”But Schweitzer contends the “mounting causal evidence” linking goal-setting and harmful behavior should be studied to help spotlight issues that merit caution and further investigation. “Even a few negative effects could be so large that they outweigh many positive effects,” he says.“Goal-setting does help coordinate and motivate people. My idea would be to combine that with careful oversight, a strong organizational culture, and make sure the goals that you use are going to be constructive and not significantly harm the organization,” Schweitzer says.38. What message does the author try to convey about goal-setting?39. What does Maurice Schweitzer want to show by citing the example of Enron?40. How did Sears’ goal-setting affect its employees?41. What do advocates of goal-setting think of Schweitzer’s research?42. What is Schweitzer’s contention against Edwin Locke?

Passage 2Questions 35 to 37 are based on the following passageEconomists have received the unfair reputation of being unable to agree on anything. The image of economists in disagreement is part of our folklore. An English commentator wrote: “If parliament were to ask six economists for an opinion, seven answers could come back—two no doubt from the volatile Mr. Keynes.” The London Times laments the “rise in skepticism about what economists can tell us”, and Business Week complains about “the intellectual bankruptcy of economics profession”.The image of widespread disagreement among economists is overrated. The result of a survey of 100 professional economists confirm that there is considerable agreement among economists about what can be done (positive economists), especially in a microeconomic context. However, there is more disagreement over what ought to be done. Questions of what ought to be done (Should we equalize the distribution of income? Should we increase defense spending?) require moral and political value judgments on which individuals naturally differ. Finally, disagreement among professional economists receives more publicity than other scientific professions, which contributes to the false image of economists in disaccord.While disagreements in other sciences are as strong as or even stronger than in economics, these disagreements are less visible to the public eye. Theoretical physicists have disagreed about the physical nature of the universe since the foundations of physics, but this scientific controversy is understood by only a few theoretical physicists.It does not require much disagreement to bring dispute to the public’s attention. Everyone is interested in economic questions: Will inflation accelerate? Will I lose my job? Why is the price of gasoline rising so fast? Why are home mortgages so hard to come by? Economists do disagree, particularly on some big macroeconomic issues. But often what the public perceives as disagreements over positive economics are really disagreements over what ought to be. In general, there is more agreement than disagreement among economists.35. According to the passage, the commentator mentions Mr. Keynes as noted for his ____.36. The author believes that disagreement between economists is all of following EXCEPT ____.37. According to the passage, which of the following statements describes disagreements between theoretical physicists?

Passage 1Questions 31 to 34 are based on the following passage.Do you see the glass as half full rather than half empty? Do you keep your eye upon the doughnut, not upon the hole? Suddenly these clichés are scientific questions, as researchers scrutinize the power of positive thinking.A fast-growing body of research—104 studies so far, involving some 15, 000 people—is proving that optimism can help you to be happier, healthier and more successful. Pessimism leads, by contrast, to hopelessness, sickness and failure, and is linked to depression, loneliness and painful shyness. According to psychologist Craig A. Anderson of Rice University in Houston, teaching people to think more positively would be like inoculating them against these mental ills.“Your abilities count,” explains psychologist Michael F. Scheier of Carnegie Mellon University in Pittsburgh, “but the belief that you can succeed affects whether or not you will.” In part, that’s because optimists and pessimists deal with the same challenges and disappointments in very different ways.Take, for example, your job. In a major study, psychologist Martin E. P. Seligman of the University of Pennsylvania and colleague Peter Schulman surveyed sales representatives at the Metropolitan Life Insurance Co. They found that the positive-thinkers among longtime representatives sold 37-percent more insurance than did the negative-thinkers. Of newly hired representatives, optimists sold 20-percent more.Impressed, the company hired 100 people who had failed the standard industry test but had scored high on optimism. These people, who might never have been hired, sold 10 percent more insurance than did the average representative.How did they do it? The secret to an optimist’s success, according to Seligman, is in his “explanatory style”. When things go wrong the pessimist tends to blame himself. “I’m no good at this,” he says, “I always fail.” The optimist looks for loopholes. He blames the weather, the phone connection, even the other person. When things go right, the optimist takes credit while the pessimist sees success as a fluke.A sense of control, according to Craig Anderson, is the litmus test for success. The optimist feels in control of his own life. If things are going badly, he acts quickly, looking for solutions, forming a new plan of action, and reaching out for advice. The pessimist feels like fate’s plaything and moves slowly. He doesn’t seek advice, since he assumes nothing can be done.Optimists may think they are better than the facts would justify—and sometimes that’s what keeps them alive. Dr. Sandra Levy of the Pittsburgh Cancer Institute studied women with advanced breast cancer. For the women who were generally optimistic, there was a longer disease-free interval, the best predictor of survival. In a pilot study of women in the early stages of breast cancer, Dr. Levy found the disease recurred sooner among the pessimists.Optimism won’t cure the incurable, but it may prevent illness. In a long term study, researchers examined the health histories of a group of Harvard graduates, all of whom were in the top half of their class and in fine physical condition. Yet some were positive thinkers, and some negative. Twenty years later, there were more middle-age diseases—hypertension, diabetes, heart ailments—among the pessimists than the optimists. Many studies suggest that the pessimist’s feeling of helplessness undermines the body’s natural defenses—the immune system and the pessimist doesn’t take good care of himself.Most people are a mix of optimism and pessimism, but are inclined in one direction or the other. It is a pattern of thinking learned “at your mother’s knee”, says Seligman. It grows out of thousands of cautions or encouragements, negative statements or positive ones. As they grow, children experience small triumphs. Parents can help turn these successes into a sense of control, and that breeds optimism.Pessimism is a hard habit to break—but it can be done. In a series of landmark studies, Dr. Carol Dweck of the University of Illinois has been working with children in the early grades of school. As she helps floundering students to change the explanations for their failures—from “I must be dumb” to “I didn’t study hard enough”—their academic performance improves.Pittsburgh’s Dr. Levy wondered if turning patients into optimists would lengthen their lives. In a pilot study, two groups of colon-cancer patients were given the same medical treatment, but some were also given psychological help to encourage optimism. Results showed that this worked. Now a major study is planned to determine whether this psychological change can alter the course of the disease.Here’s how to change from a pessimist to an optimist, says Steve Hollon, a psychologist at Vanderbilt University:1. Pay careful attention to your thoughts when bad things happen. Write down the first thing that comes to mind, unedited and uncensored2. Now try an experiment. Do something that’s contrary to any negative reactions.3. Keep track of what happens. Were your first thoughts right or wrong? “If your thoughts are holding you back, change them,” says Hollon. “It’s trial and error, no guarantees, but give yourself a chance.”Positive thinking leads to positive action, and reaction. What you expect from the world, the evidence suggests, is what you’re likely to get.31. An optimist ____.32. According to Seligman, the secret to an optimist’s success can be found in “his explanatory style”, by which he means that the optimist ____.33. It can be inferred from the article that the author thinks that ____.34. Which of the following is true according to the passage?

For many people today, reading is no longer relaxation. To keep up their work they must read letters, reports, trade publications, interoffice communications, not to mention newspapers and magazine: a never-ending flood of words. In _11_ a job or advancing in one, the ability to read and comprehend _12_ can mean the difference between success and failure. Yet the unfortunate fact is that most of us are _13_ readers. Most of us develop poor reading _14_ at an early age, and never get over them. The main deficiency _15_ in the actual stuff of language itself—words. Taken individually, words have _16_ meaning until they are strung to gather into phrase, sentences and paragraphs. _17_, however, the untrained reader does not read groups of words. He laboriously reads one word at a time, often regressing to _18_ words or passages. Regression, the tendency to look back over _19_ you have just read, is a common bad habit in reading. Another habit which _20_ down the speed of reading is vocalization—sounding each word either orally or mentally as _21_ reads.To overcome these bad habits, some reading clinics use a device called an _22_, which moves a bar (or curtain) down the page at a predetermined speed. The bar is set at a slightly faster rate _23_ the reader finds comfortable, in order to “stretch” him. The accelerator forces the reader to read fast, _24_ word-by-word reading, regression and subvocalization, practically impossible. At first _25_ is sacrificed for speed. But when you learn to read ideas and concepts, you will not only read faster, _26_ your comprehension will improve. Many people have found _27_ reading skill drastically improved after some training. _28_ Charlie Au, a business manager, for instance, his reading rate was a reasonably good 172 words a minute _29_ the training, now it is an excellent 1,378 words a minute. He is delighted that how he can _30_ a lot more reading material in a short period of time.

It became obvious when the boy floundered through the recitation in class today that he had not taken the trouble to do his homework. ____

2 / 22