1 . How many times have you found yourself in conversations with friends, family members or loved ones and discovered that you had completely tuned out to what they were saying? How much of our attention are we truly giving to the people who are supposed to be important to us?

According to research cited by Wright State University, while most people believe they are good listeners who don’t need to improve their listening skills, the average person only listens at about 25 percent efficiency.

So why aren’t we better listeners? As a society, we may be growing more narcissistic (自我陶醉的). A 2007 study found a rise in self-centeredness and narcissism among college students. If we, as a culture, are becoming more self-centered, how can we, as individuals, work to become more caring and compassionate communicators?

We can begin by changing our attitudes toward conversations. As Stephen R. Covey wrote in The 7 Habits of Highly Effective People: Powerful Lessons in Personal Change, “Most people do not listen with the intent to understand but to reply.” A dialogue is an opportunity to learn, to see things from a new perspective, to open your eyes to new information and possibilities. Yet, too often we engage in conversation as if it’s a debate. We speak to hear our own voices — our own pre-existing opinions. In doing so, we tend to space out when spoken to. We wait, perhaps even patiently or politely, for the other person to finish, so we can say something we feel is of value.

Playwright Wilson Mizner said, “A good listener is not only popular everywhere, but after a while, he knows something.” Listening doesn’t just expand our knowledge on an intellectual level; it enables us to have a more personal, in-depth understanding of our closest friends. Relationships are truly enriched by an equal back-and-forth exchange in communication. When these dynamics become more one-sided, we tend to lose interest and create distance in our friendships, with less trust established, less honesty exchanged.

Thankfully, we can all improve our listening skills. Maybe we aren’t as good a listener as we believe. Do we tend to focus too much on ourselves — both in positive and negative ways? Do we get distracted by an inner coach, rather than living in the moment and really engaging in what’s being said? As we learn to quiet that inner voice in our minds, we can start to open ourselves up to others, becoming better listeners, thinkers, lovers and friends.

1. What is the author’s purpose in showing the social phenomena in Paragraph 1?

A．To show most people are confident about their listening skills.

B．To express his concerns about people’s lack of attention when talking.

C．To introduce the fact that people have low efficiency of listening in life.

D．To provide some information about how people behave in conversation.

2. Why does the author cite the research data from the year 2007?

A．To prove college students have become more self-cenfered and narcissistic over time.

B．To show the belief in people’s listening skills is outdated and needs to be updated.

C．To provide an example of how society’s narcissism affects personal relationships.

D．To support the argument that society is becoming more self-centered and narcissistic.

3. Based on the views of Stephen R. Covey and Wilson Mizner, which of the following statements is true?

A．People should listen to learn and see things from a new perspective.

B．A good listener is popular but does not necessarily know everything.

C．Most people listen with the intention to understand, not to reply.

D．We should speak to hear our own voices and pre-existing opinions.

4. What does the underline phrase “space out” in Paragraph 4mean?

A．Become focused.	B．Feel confused.
C．Be absent-minded.	D．Remain anxious.

5. Which of the following titles best captures the main idea?

A．The Decline of Listening in Modern Society

B．Improving Listening Skills for Better Relationships

C．The Impact of Narcissism on Social Communication

D．Why We Should Listen More and Speak Less

2 . All of us have taken an instant dislike to someone, and then felt guilty about being too judgmental. But now it seems we should place more trust in our first impressions. Most people can correctly judge a total stranger following a short meeting, according to scientists.

And in general, the more confident the people are, the more likely they are to be correct in their assumptions. Jeremy Biesanz, who led a team of researchers from the University of British Columbia, said: “Many important decisions are made after very brief encounters — which employee to hire, which person to date, which student to accept”. Although our first impressions are generally accurate, it is necessary for us to recognize where they may be not good enough.

The researchers arranged for two groups of more than 100 people to meet in a meeting. Much like speed-dating, the volunteers spoke to everyone in their group for three minutes each. At the end of each three-minute chat, they were asked to rate each other’s personalities, and how well they thought their impressions “would coincide with someone who knows this person very well”.

To find out what the person was “really” like, the scientists had his friends and family fill out his personality reports. Generally speaking, the more confident the volunteers felt in accurately rating another’s personality, the closer their ratings were to those of the other person’s friends and family, the researchers said.

However, the participants with the highest accuracy were those who rated themselves moderately(适度)accurate — those highly confident of their judgment were less successful. The scientists concluded that, although we know people are different from each other, a good judge of character knows that in many ways people are mostly alike. For example, almost everyone would prefer being kind to being unfriendly.

Therefore, while first impressions can be generally accurate, they are not conclusive in working out whether somebody really is “better” than someone else.

1. The volunteers joined a meeting which was ______.

A．interesting

B．complex

C．serious

D．brief

2. The underlined phrase “coincide with” in Para. 3 can be replaced by ______.

A．agree with

B．appeal to

C．get along with

D．set an example to

3. What are the conditions for being a good judge?
①Being talkative                                 ②Good social relationships
③A proper degree of confidence             ④Knowing that people are mostly alike

A．①②

B．②③

C．③④

D．④①

4. In the author’s opinion, ______.

A．many important decisions are made with the help of strangers

B．people tend to have better impressions on friends than on strangers

C．we shouldn’t depend on first impressions completely to judge others

D．accurate judgments on others can help us make as many friends as possible

5. What topic is the passage mainly concerned with?

A．We should not doubt our ability to judge others.

B．Our first impressions on a stranger are usually accurate.

C．Confidence determines whether people can succeed or not.

D．It’s an important task to make a good judgment about strangers.

4 . When we hurt someone, we may be unwilling to acknowledge our fault and make an apology because it makes us feel guilty, conflicts with our beliefs about being a good person, or means accepting that we’re imperfect human beings. We may want to excuse our behavior and blame the other person, minimizing our role in hurting him or her.

Researchers carried out a study to find out how we can be better at apologizing. In the study, researchers asked 120 college students to recall a time when they’d hurt someone else and the conflict remained unresolved. Then, participants were randomly assigned to either a 15-minute guided mindfulness exercise focusing on their breath and having people think in the present moment or a guided mind-wandering exercise, where they were encouraged to let their minds wander.

Afterward, they were asked to report how much they felt like apologizing to the person versus not apologizing or offering excuses for their behavior. Then, they were asked to write a note to the person, without instructions to apologize or not. In analyzing the notes, the researchers found that participants who had practiced mindfulness were more likely to write statements like “I’m sorry” or “I apologize” in their notes than those who had mind-wandered.

“One way in which we can foster apologies is by having people think in the present moment,” lead author Sana Rizvi says. “We can teach individuals to be mindful of their present states, and it can be done in about 15 minutes.”

Why might this be the case? Rizvi isn’t sure, as there has been very little research on how being more mindful might affect us when we hurt others. Prior research has found that being more mindful helps victims of wrong doing to be more forgiving, and it seems to improve relationships generally.

Mindfulness makes us feel less defensive and, therefore, helps us consider the importance of the other person in the conflict more. It’s encouraging that teaching simple mindfulness techniques (like focused breathing) could increase apologies, especially in places that are often filled with interpersonal conflicts, like workplaces or other occasions. It could help improve interpersonal interactions and repair relationships helping people move more easily from a place of conflict to understanding and forgiveness.

1. What does the author want to convey in Paragraph 1?

A．It is difficult for us to apologize.	B．It is hard to put ideas into action.
C．It is normal for us to make mistakes.	D．It is useless to regret what we have done.

2. What can we know about the participants in the study?

A．They were bad at handling conflicts.

B．They were encouraged to discuss their trouble.

C．They did something hurtful to others in the past.

D．They received mindfulness training before the study.

3. What conclusion did the researchers draw from the study?

A．Mind-wandering tended to increase conflicts.

B．Mindfulness could help people apologize more.

C．College students are more likely to behave responsibly.

D．College students seem to have better emotional control.

4. What does the author think of practicing mindfulness in workplaces?

A．It is challenging to carry out.	B．It takes time to prove its effect.
C．It solves conflicts once and for all	D．It helps achieve better relationships.

5. What does the text mainly talk about?

A．Necessity of apology.	B．Benefits of mindfulness.
C．Apology and mindfulness.	D．Understanding and mindfulness.

5 . In conversations with strangers, people commonly tend to think they should speak less than half the conversation time to be likable. But we’ve discovered this idea is wrong. Our data shows that people tend to think they should speak about 45% of the time to be likable in a one-on-one conversation with someone new. However, it appears speaking up a bit more is actually a better strategy.

In our research, we randomly assigned people to speak for 30%, 40%, 50%, 60% of the time in a conversation with someone new. We found that the more they spoke, the more they were liked by their new partners. This was only one study with 116 participants, but the outcome is supported by other researchers’ findings. For example, a previous study randomly assigned one in a pair to take on the role of “speaker” and the other to take on the role of “listener. ” After engaging in 12-minute interactions, listeners liked speakers more than speakers liked listeners because listeners felt more similar to speakers than speakers did to listeners. This outcome suggests the reason people prefer those who speak up: Learning more about a new partner can make you feel like you have more in common with him or her.

Further, we assigned people to speak for up to 70% and even 90% of the time. The result shows it is not an ideal strategy. Our research does not suggest people hold down a conversational partner but rather that they feel comfortable speaking up more than they usually might.

Research like ours can help people gain a ‘more reasonable understanding of social interactions with new people and become more confident about how to make a good first impression. It has the obvious benefit of allowing us to carefully control speaking time. However, it does not reflect more natural conversations. Future research should figure out whether our findings generalize to more natural interactions.

1. What is the common belief concerning conversations with strangers?

A．Speaking a little less is preferred.

B．Speaking half the time is the best.

C．Listeners are more likable than speakers.

D．Listeners fail to control the conversations.

2. How was the research carried out?

A．By analyzing speaking habits.

B．By making comparisons.

C．By listing examples.

D．By collecting data.

3. What is the disadvantage of the research?

A．The conversation time is limited.

B．Further study is hard to continue.

C．The findings are less widely appliable.

D．Interactions with strangers are missing.

4. In which situation can the research finding be applied?

A．Attending a family gathering.

B．Partying with your friends.

C．Meeting a new teacher.

D．Making a public speech.

7 . Like many people, in terms of socializing, I prioritize making time for my closest friends and family. When it comes to reaching out to people I don’t know as well I often find myself reluctant to engage. This could be a big mistake, though, according to a new study. Having different types of social interactions seems to be central to our happiness — something many of us may think little of.

In a series of surveys, researchers looked at how having a socially diverse network related to people’s well-being. In one survey, 578 Americans reported on what activities they had been engaged in, with whom and for how long over the past 24 hours, while also saying how happy with life they were. The researchers found that people with more diverse social networks were happier and more satisfied with life than those with less diverse networks — regardless of how much time they had spent socializing overall.

“The more you can broaden your social circle and reach out to people you talk to less frequently — like an acquaintance, a friend, a coworker, or even a stranger — the more it could have positive benefits for your well-being,” said the lead researcher Hanne Collins of Harvard Business School.

To further test this idea, she and her colleagues looked at large data sets from the American Time Use Survey and the World Health Organization’s Study on Global Aging and Adult Health. In both cases, they found that when people had a broader range of social interactions, they experienced greater happiness and well-being.

Then Collins and her colleagues did another analysis, using data from a mobile app that 21,644 French-speaking people used to report on their daily social activities and happiness. There, they found that when someone experienced greater-than-average social diversity one week, they were happier that week and the week after.

Why is that? It could be that being with different people contributes to different kinds of emotions, which may be a driving force in our happiness, says Collins. Alternatively, it could be that having a more diverse network allows you to get various social supports when you need it. Whatever the case, Collins hopes her research will inspire people to expand their social networks when they can.

1. What does the author use as an introduction to the passage?

A．A personal communication skill.

B．A social trend against one’s will.

C．A common social phenomenon.

D．A culture many people neglect.

2. What do we know about the study?

A．Its results were different from culture to culture.

B．Different results were obtained from the researchers’ three surveys.

C．The researchers collected large amounts of data from different platforms.

D．It focused on the impact of a more diverse social network on life satisfaction.

3. What can we learn from the 3rd and 4th paragraph?

A．Any stranger or co-worker can bring you happiness.

B．Broad social circle contributes to more happiness.

C．Happiness depends only on social interactions.

D．Close relationship influences happiness badly.

4. How may social diversity improve one’s well-being according to Collins?

A．By providing motivation for life.

B．By leading to one’s balanced life.

C．By arousing one’s positive emotions.

D．By making him / her sensitive to happiness.

5. What will be most probably talked about after the last paragraph?

A．Collins’s social life.

B．Collins’s conclusions.

C．Collins’s new research.

D．Collins’s specific suggestions.

8 . One person’s happiness causes a chain reaction that benefits not only their friends, but their friends’ friends, and their friends’ friends’ friends. The effect lasts for up to one year. The opposite, interestingly, is not the case: Sadness does not spread through social networks as strongly as happiness. Happiness appears to love company more so than misery.

Focusing on 4,739 individuals, Christakis and Fowler, who co-authored this study, observed more than 50,000 social and family ties and analyzed the spread of happiness throughout this group. The researchers found that when an individual becomes happy, a friend living within a mile experiences a 25 percent increased chance of becoming happy. A co-resident spouse (配偶) experiences an 8 percent increased chance, siblings (兄弟姐妹) living within one mile have a 14 percent increased chance, and for next-door neighbors, 34 percent. But the real surprise came with indirect relationships. Again, while an individual becoming happy increases his friend’s chances, a friend of that friend experiences a nearly 10 percent chance of increased happiness, and a friend of that friend has a 5.6 percent increased chance.

The researchers also found that, contrary to what your parents taught you, popularity does lead to happiness. People in the center of their network groups are the most likely people to become happy, and then there are chances that increase to the extent that the people surrounding them also have lots of friends. However, becoming happy does not help migrate a person from the network fringe (外围) to the center. Happiness spreads through the network without changing its structure.

“Imagine a bird’s eye view of a backyard party,” Fowler explains. “You’ll see people in groups at the center, and others on the fringe. The happiest people tend to be the ones in the center. But someone on the fringe who suddenly becomes happy, say through a particular exchange, doesn’t suddenly move into the center of the group. He simply stays where he is—only now he has a far more satisfying sense of well-being.”

Next time, if you’re happy and you know it, thank your friends—and their friends. And while you’re at it, their friends’ friends. But if you’re sad, hold the blame.

1. Who will be more likely to become happy as a man is happy according to the research?

A．His wife.	B．His next-door neighbors.
C．His brothers and sisters.	D．A friend of his friend.

2. Why does Fowler mention a backyard party in Paragraph 4?

A．To explain a rule.	B．To clarify a concept.
C．To describe a fact.	D．To make a prediction.

3. What does the research aim to tell us?

A．Happiness changes social structures.

B．A social network is a double-edged sword.

C．Happiness goes hand in hand with sadness.

D．Happiness spreads through social networks.

4. What do we know from the last two paragraphs?

A．Friends’ friends may bring you happiness.

B．Your friends are to blame for your sadness.

C．Your friends decide whether you are happy.

D．The happiest friends at party are on the fringe.

9 . 阅读短文，用英语回答问题

Putting on weight could be a side-effect of loneliness, research suggests. Women, who feel lonely, are hungrier, and they even find a big meal less satisfying. This could be the body’s way of telling them to seek company, for eating has been a sociable activity throughout human evolution.

The researchers asked 42 women not to eat overnight, and then gave them a large breakfast. The women rated their hunger before and after their meal and blood samples which revealed their levels of ghrelin --- the “hunger hormone (激素)”. As expected, levels of ghrelin fell after eating and then started to rise. However, the rise was much quicker in the lonely women, and they made much more of the hormone. They also said they felt hungrier. They said: “The need for social connection is essential to human nature. As a result, people may feel hungrier when they feel socially disconnected.”

Interestingly, loneliness only makes thin women hungrier. It has no effect on the appetite of those who are corpulent. It isn’t clear why this is, but it is possible that the shame related with being fat makes socializing less valuable for them. Other studies suggest you should choose your company carefully at mealtimes. It has been shown that we tend to mimic (模仿) our dining companion’s eating habits, taking mouthfuls at the same time and eating more when our companion does. The link with appetite could help explain the range of devastating effects loneliness can have on health.

Being cut off from friends and family can raise blood pressure, stress and the risk of depression, as well as weakening the immune system (免疫系统) and a person’s resistance to disease (早老性痴呆). Overall, loneliness is as damaging as smoking or not exercising.

1. How will the lonely people react, according to Paragraph 1? (no more than 5 words)
_____________________________________________________________
2. What does the body want to tell by being hungry? (no more than 7 words)
_____________________________________________________________
3. What is essential to human nature? (no more than 5 words)
_____________________________________________________________
4. What does the underlined word “corpulent” probably mean? (1 word )
_____________________________________________________________
5. What do you tend to do while feeling lonely? (no more than 30 words)
________________________________________________________________