2 . Justice is something we all desire, and the hope is that our legal system can be fair. In the past, people often saw injustices taking place that went unpunished. Some of these people got fed up, took matters into their own hands, and became vigilantes (治安员). They played the role of judges, jury and executioners (执行者). Today, the same thing is happening on a much larger scale, and it is known as Internet vigilantism.

Internet vigilantism works by first identifying a person who has committed a crime or done something that is considered uncivil.

Our modern age that is filled with digital cameras has made injustice easy to record, and the Internet has made it easy to distribute the evidence instantly. This method has been successful in many cases for tracking down people who have committed crimes. It also has been very helpful in keeping those with power in check. Keeping power in check is the upside of distributing evidence only if justice is reached through proper channels.

However, there are two sides to Internet vigilantism. When Internet citizens gang up on people for minor crimes or small faults, those who are the focus of the gangs can have their lives ruined. The vigilantes gather information on the Internet and use it to publicly shame the person. The accused person thus loses all his or her rights to privacy and everything about him or her is brought out into the open. Internet vigilantism violates basic human rights to privacy and can cause serious damage to people or their reputations.

Another problem is that it also has a negative effect on the friends and family members of the person being shamed. Innocent people with the same name as the accused can also get caught in the cross fire. Worst of all, the person being targeted rarely gets a chance to defend himself or herself.

We need to ask ourselves how far we will go to punish someone and how much privacy they deserve. When it comes to Internet vigilantism, remember that it is very easy to post an opinion or video anonymously (匿名地) online and give a one-sided or partial account of the truth. Like so many other aspects of life, we must resist passing judgment before fully understanding a situation.

1. What is the function of Paragraph 1?

A．To explain what is justice.	B．To introduce the legal system.
C．To lead into the topic.	D．To compare some phenomena.

2. Internet vigilantism can help to _________.

A．accuse the person who loses privacy

B．identify a person who broke the law

C．protect the privacy and reputation of the accused person

D．protect people with the same name as the accused person

3. What is the author’s attitude towards Internet vigilantism?

A．Optimistic.

B．Approval.

C．Subjective.

D．Objective.

4. What would be the best title for this passage?

A．“Justice” on the Internet	B．How Much Privacy They Deserve
C．Criminals Tracked Down	D．Internet Vigilantism Works Well

6 . It was something rather irregular at an otherwise regular board of appeals meeting in Maine. A resident wanted a permission for not observing the no-chicken rule. But this wasn’t just any resident. It was C-Jay Martin, 25, who is blind and has epilepsy (癫痫) and autism. Chickens are what brought C-Jay joy despite his challenges. “Having something to share with other people was important to him,” said his mother, Amy Martin.

But Bangor is not OK with chickens. In fact, city rules clearly prohibit residents from keeping “fowl, goats, sheep, cattle or swine of any kind” and the municipal government urges the residents to obey the rules strictly. So, would the staid New England city of 31,000 make an exception for C-Jay and his emotional support hens?

It was with high hopes that Martin headed to the otherwise ordinary municipal meeting earlier this month. She told the appeals board she got the chickens in April after researching the Fair Housing Act, which prohibits discrimination in housing by landlords or municipalities, and finding it might allow her son an accommodation.

She was joined by neighbors and community members who showed up to support C-Jay and his chickens. One noted C-Jay regularly assumes the responsibility of feeding the chickens, despite his disabilities. Another said their cooing and soft noises are clearly a comfort to C-Jay. Others said Martin and C-Jay keep the chickens’ area in their yard very clean.

But there were some complaints. Some raised concerns about whether the presence of the chickens could attract rodents (齿类动物), and didn’t want an exception for C-Jay to open the door for others to keep banned animals.

City officials, seeming to side with C-Jay and his flock, assured attendees that no increased rodent activity would not be tolerated and any livestock permission would only apply to C-Jay Martin at his house.

In the end, it reached a consensus: the appeals board ruled that C-Jay had a need for the chickens. He would be allowed to keep them, although limits on the number were set, and noisy roosters prohibited.

Martin said her son is relieved and that his beloved chickens will stay. “When he’s sitting outside listening to an audiobook, or just hanging out in the backyard with the sun shining, he always knows where they are because he can hear them,” she said. “He’s never really alone.”

1. What was something “irregular” happening at a board of appeals meeting in Maine?

A．Residents there were prohibited from raising animals of some animals at home.

B．A special resident there wanted to keep chickens despite a no-chicken rule.

C．Physically disadvantaged groups there were under huge discrimination.

D．Disabled children didn’t want to share their animals with other people.

2. What’s the meaning of the underlined word “staid” in paragraph 2?

A．United.

B．Civilized.

C．Rigid.

D．Remote.

3. Which of the following is correct concerning C-Jay and his flock?

A．It is legal to raise the flocks in the whole community.

B．C-Jay with disabilities was unable to care for the chickens

C．C-Jay obtained emotional support from his own flocks.

D．Banned animals are more likely to be tended in Maine.

4. Which section of a newspaper is the passage probably taken from?

A．Healthcare.

B．Society.

C．Amusement.

D．Politics.

7 . Some pals and I were in the midst of a pinball competition at a bar the other night when the machine kept breaking down. We called over a very busy employee who’s responsible for helping keep the place running. He put everything aside to fix our problematic pinball machine twice.    1    A couple of the guys immediately objected, saying the employee was just doing the job he was paid to do. I insisted and got the group to agree to the plan, although somewhat reluctantly.   

My pinball wizard didn’t stretch out his hand, but how many times have we run across those payment screens that suggest a 20% tip for being handed a sandwich we ordered?    2    There is data to back up the trend: 66% of American adults have a negative view of tipping, and 32% say they’re sick of those payment-screen hints, according to a recent Bankrate survey.   

    3    I admit there are times I suspect the tipping thing has gone too far - say, when I’m at a self-checkout line and there’s still request to leave something extra. But I’m generally willing to err on the side of caution: If someone is expecting a tip, I’ll assume they have financial reasons to do so.     4    

Plus, tipping is good karma (因果报应). It’s always worth it to tip in unexpected situations- ones that don’t necessarily involve a hint on a payment screen.       5    He was so grateful for the $10 tip that later that night, he rewarded our group with well more than $10 in free tokens (代金券) for future play.   

So next time, there must be no arguments with my friends when times come to tip.

A．This leads to what’s been called "tipping fatigue (疲劳)”

B．So, why am I willing to go against the trend and say yes?

C．I suggested we tip him $10 and split the tip among all of us.

D．There’s an argument that we should ban tipping altogether.

E．Guess what happened next with my pinball-machine fixer at the bar?

F．One dollar or two won’t make or break me, but it can possibly help with their rent.

G．Should they earn far below the minimum wage, employers must make up the difference.

8 . The rise of social media has revolutionized human connectivity, but its overuse can make people feel increasingly unhappy and isolated.     1    

One significant problem with frequent social media use is comparing ourselves to others. Many individuals experience “Facebook envy”.     2     Gradually, it may result in self-doubt. To boost self-confidence, it is essential to reduce time on others’profiles, and focus on self-reflection.

Social media can also make it hard to form real friendships. Constant online interaction may make us feel lonely and left out when we see others having fun online. Stina Sanders, a former model, explained “When I see my friend’s photos of a party I didn’t go to, it can make me feel quite lonely and anxious”.     3    

Quality sleep is essential for mental health, but excessive phone use before bedtime can severely disturb it. The anxiety and envy induced by social media content can keep our brains alert, making it challenging to fall asleep.     4     Avoiding the phone for at least 40 minutes to an hour before bed can improve sleep.

“     5     However, it can also change the way we recall our life. If we direct all of our attention trying to take the perfect photo, less will be available to enjoy other aspects of the experience in real time,” said Dr. Bono. To decrease these effects, practicing self-discipline and limiting phone use can help us to stay focused and clear-minded.

If you feel like social media is beginning to affect you, why not consider allocating less social media time? The slight change can do you a lot of good.

A．Regular use of Facebook can keep good relationships.

B．Social media offers a convenient way to record memories.

C．This can lead to feelings of dissatisfaction with themselves.

D．Plus, the blue light that is given off by screens affects our sleep.

E．Therefore, it’s important to develop genuine offline relationships.

F．Social media can lead to serious physical and mental health issues.

G．The reliance on it can negatively impact people’s mental health in the long run.

9 . If you’ve got more than one kid, you’re showing favoritism, whether you know it or not.

“Parents may favor one child over another, for a lot of reasons. The child may have an easy temperament (性情) or might behave particularly well or may look like you,” says Susan Newman, a psychologist. “But regardless of the reason, every child must be made to feel loved and special, in order to fully develop.” Newman warns that favoring one child over their siblings (兄弟姐妹) publicly can have a significantly negative effect.

“The unfavored child can feel defeated, and unmotivated, as a result of working hard to get parental support, with no success,” says Yelena Gidenko, a licensed counselor. “He orshe may also suffer from depression and become angry, bitter, or jealous,” she adds Children feeling this way may act out, in an effort to get their parent’s attention, making matters worse. They may also behave inappropriately, becoming the black sheep, which they believe their parents already see. “Unfavored children may have a hard time accepting who they are, since they do not feel accepted by their parents,” adds Gidenko.

Favoritism is not exactly a boon for the favored child, either. Kids who feel that they are their parent’s favorite sometimes translate that into a go pass for their behavior in future relationships. “Favored children may feel a sense of entitlement, and that rules do not apply to them,” says Gidenko. This can negatively affect the way they act in school, at work, and in their friendships.

It may seem absurd, but the opposite can also occur. Favored children may experience anxiety and insecurity, resulting from their favorite child status. “Children are observant. They know when they are getting praise for things they have not earned, such as being your favorite. For this reason, they know, and fear, that these things might be taken away fromthem at any time, for any reason,” says Gidenko

Newman urges parents to remember that it’s not possible to treat children equally because they are all different. What parents can, and should do is talk to their kids about how, and why, they treat them the way they do. “According to research, parents don’t talkabout this. They don’t say why one child gets more time than another. If they do, they are preserving their bond with each child,” says Newman

1. What can we learn about unfavored children?

A．They want to please their parents

B．They care little about their siblings.

C．They tend to lack a sense of identity

D．They hope to be the black sheep of the family.

2. What does the underlined word “boon” in paragraph 4 mean?

A．Blessing.

B．Challenge.

C．Honor.

D．Burden.

3. What does Newman suggest parents do in the last paragraph?

A．Treat their children equally

B．Explain themselves to their children

C．Strengthen their bond with their children

D．Remove the differences between their children

4. What is the text mainly about?

A．The solutions to parental favoritism

B．The consequences of parental favoritism

C．An analysis of why parents play favorites

D．A contrast between favored and unfavored children

10 . In 1970s, a psychologist named J. P. Guilford conducted a famous study of creativity known as the nine-dot puzzle (九点谜题). He challenged research subjects to connect all nine dots using just four straight lines without lifting their pencils from the page. All the participants limited the possible solutions to those within the imaginary square. Only 20 percent managed to break out of the confinement (束缚) and continue their lines in the white space surrounding the dots.

The fact that 80 percent of the participants were effectively blinded by the boundaries of the square led Guilford to jump to the sweeping conclusion that creativity requires you to go outside the box. The idea went viral. Overnight, it seemed that creativity experts everywhere were teaching managers how to think outside the box. The concept enjoyed such strong popularity that no one bothered to check the facts. No one, that is, before two different research teams-Clarke Burnham with Kenneth Davis, and Joseph Alba with Robert Weisberg-ran another experiment.

Both teams followed the same way of dividing participants into two groups. The first group was given the same instructions as the participants in Guilford’s experiment. The second group was told that the solution required the lines to be drawn outside the imaginary box. Guess what? Only 25 percent solved the puzzle. In statistical terms, this 5 percent improvement is insignificant as this could be called sampling error.

Let’s look a little more closely at the surprising result. Solving this problem requires people to literally think outside the box. Yet participants’ performance was not improved even when they were given specific instructions to do so. That is, direct and clear instructions to think outside the box did not help. That this advice is useless should effectively have killed off the much widely spread — and therefore, much more dangerous — metaphor (比喻) that out-of-the-box thinking boosts creativity. After all, with one simple yet brilliant experiment, researchers had proven that the conceptual link between thinking outside the box and creativity was a misunderstanding.

1. What did the nine-dot puzzle study focus on?

A．Visual perception.

B．Thinking patterns.

C．Practical experience.

D．Theoretical knowledge.

2. Why did the two research teams run the follow-up experiment?

A．To test the catchy concept.

B．To contradict the initial idea.

C．To collect supporting evidence

D．To identify the underlying logic.

3. Which of the following best describes the follow-up experiment?

A．Groundless.

B．Inspiring.

C．Fruitless.

D．Revealing.

4. Which is the best title for the passage?

A．Puzzle Solving: A Key To Creativity

B．Thinking Outside the Box: A Misguided Idea

C．Nine-Dot Puzzle: A Magic Test

D．Creative Thinking: We Fell For The Trap