1 . There is a famous study called “the marshmallow (棉花糖) test”, conducted by Stanford University professor Walter Mischel. The experiment measured how well children could delay immediate gratification (满足) to receive greater rewards in the future an — ability that predicts success later in life.
For a long time, people assumed that the ability to delay gratification had to do with the child’s personality and was, therefore, unchangeable. But more recent research suggests that social factors—like the reliability of the adults around them — influence how long they can resist temptation (诱惑). Now, findings from a new study add to that science, suggesting that children can delay gratification longer when they are working together toward a common goal.
In the study, researchers repeated a version of the marshmallow experiment with 207 five- to six-year-old children from two very different cultures —Western, Germany and a farming community in Kenya. Kids were first introduced to another child and given a task to do together. Then, they were put in a room by themselves, presented with a cookie on a plate, and told they could eat it now or wait until the researcher returned and receive two cookies. (The researchers used cookies instead of marshmallows because cookies were more attractive treats to these kids.) Some kids received the standard instructions. But others were told that they would get a second cookie only if they and the kid they’d met (who was in another room) were able to resist eating the first one. That meant if both cooperated, they’d both win.
Results showed that both German and Kikuyu kids who were cooperating were able to delay gratification longer than those who weren’t cooperating. Apparently, working toward a common goal was more effective than going it alone.
“Delaying gratification is not just about material benefits,” says Sebastian Grueneisen, coauthor of the study. “Addressing various social issues often necessitates giving up short-term gains for long-term advantages.”
1. What was the traditional belief about kids’ ability to delay gratification?| A．It is dependent on rewards. | B．It is relevant to intelligence. |
| C．It is linked to social factors. | D．It is a fixed personality trait. |
| A．It is an extended version of Mischel’s experiment. | B．It took age differences into consideration. |
| C．It was carried out on a local basis. | D．It reveals the secret of success. |
| A．Self-control. | B．Reliable adults. | C．Cooperation. | D．Cultural differences. |
| A．Instant rewards bring short-term benefits. | B．Delaying gratification holds social value. |
| C．Cooperation is motivated by self-satisfaction. | D．Social development outweighs personal benefits. |
2 . Feeling like what you do is worthwhile is arguably a significant key to a happy life. But what this means is different for each person. These strategies can help you find your purpose so you can begin living a more meaningful life.
Donate time, money, or talent
Listen to feedback (反馈)
It can be hard to recognize the things you feel passionate about sometimes. After all, the things you love to do may have become so ingrained (固化) in your life that you don’t realize how important they are.
Start conversations with new people
It’s easy to surf social media while you’re alone on the subway. Resist that urge.
Are you regularly sharing articles about climate change? Are there pictures of you engaging in a particular activity over and over, such as gardening or performing? Consider the conversations you enjoy holding with people the most when you’re meeting face to face. Do you like talking about history? Or do you prefer sharing the latest money-saving tips you discovered?
| A．Explore your interests |
| B．Otherwise, it may drag you down |
| C．Spread sunshine to people through your smile |
| D．Instead, take the time to talk to the people around you |
| E．You can develop helpful habits in your search for purpose |
| F．The things you enjoy sharing may reveal your purpose in life |
| G．Fortunately, other people might be able to give you some insights |
3 . Initial conversations can have a huge impact on how relationships develop over time. People are often stuck in the impressions they think they might have made the minute they finish speaking with someone for the first time: “Did they like me or were they just being polite?” “Were they deep in thought or deeply bored?”
To find out whether these worries are necessary, we have conducted nearly 10 years of research. In our studies, participants in the UK talked with someone they had never met before. Afterward, they were asked how much they liked their conversation partner and how much they believed that their conversation partner liked them. This allowed us to compare how much people believed they were liked to how much they were actually liked.
Time and time again, we found that people left their conversations with negative feelings about the impression they made. That is, people systematically underestimate how much their conversation partners like them and enjoy their company — a false belief we call the “liking gap”.
This bias (偏见) may seem like something that would occur only in initial interactions, but its effects extend far beyond a first impression. Surprisingly, the liking gap can constantly affect a variety of relationships, including interactions with coworkers, long after the initial conversations have taken place. Having a larger liking gap is associated with being less willing to ask workmates for help, less willing to provide workmates with open and honest feedback, and less willing to work on another project together.
There are numerous strategies to minimize your biased feelings. One place to start is shifting your focus of attention. Try to direct your attention to your conversation partner, be genuinely curious about them, ask them more questions, and really listen to their answers. The more you’re zeroed in on the other person, and the less you’re focused on yourself, the better your conversation will be and the less your mind will turn to all the things you think you didn’t do well.
1. Why did the author carry out 10 years of research?| A．To dismiss national concerns. | B．To check out a potential bias. |
| C．To enhance human communication. | D．To develop harmonious relationships. |
| A．Fewer chances of new projects. | B．Underestimation of their ability. |
| C．Bad relationships with people around. | D．Low willingness to interact with others. |
| A．Restate opinions. | B．Deliver warnings. | C．Give suggestions. | D．Make a summary. |
| A．Liking Gap May Influence Work Performances |
| B．First Impressions Rely On Initial Conversations |
| C．People Probably Like You More Than You Think |
| D．How People Like You Matters Less Than You Assume |
4 . 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. |
| 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. |
| 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. |
| A．Become focused. | B．Feel confused. |
| C．Be absent-minded. | D．Remain anxious. |
| 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 |
5 . Many people changed residences and are eager to get familiar with their new neighbors. Here’s a quick refresher on making the most of neighborhood relationships.
Begin at the beginning. Building good neighborly relationships starts when you or someone else moves into the area. If a new neighbor moves in, be proactive (主动的) and welcome them to the neighborhood.
Be inclusive. If you are hosting a large party, consider extending invitations to your neighbors. During the holiday season, remember the people next door with a card, a homemade goodie, or an offer of assistance. Give without expectations.
Allow people to be human.
Accept it. If you have tried your best to resolve a conflict without success, let it go. Sadly, some people won’t like you whatever you do. And you aren’t going to enjoy some people.
| A．Maintain your space |
| B．Be the first to stop by and say hello |
| C．It’s easier to accept it and move on |
| D．Everyone has a bad day now and then |
| E．Take steps to ensure it won’t happen again |
| F．Let others know you are thinking of them |
| G．Some neighbors are more easygoing than others |
6 . The recent criticisms of Taylor Swift for her silence on the war in Gaza highlight a peculiar issue: the unrealistic expectations we place on celebrities to be know-alls. It’s a topic worth looking into.
While many are quick to urge figures like Taylor Swift to lend their voice s to critical global conversations, a concerning pattern emerges on the flip side: celebrities navigating the dark waters of complex debates with limited knowledge. Take, for instance, Billie Eilish’s fashion choice at the Oscars — a red hand pin. This wasn’t just any accessory (配饰); it’s rooted in the upset history of the 2000 cruel treatments of two Israelis. It begs the question: Was Eilish aware of the weighty story this symbol carries? This moment serves as a reminder of the nuanced (微妙的， 细节的) balance celebrities must strike between being supportive and the profound responsibility of using apublic platform.
The celebrity culture in the United States, where public figures are elevated to almost god-like status, plays a significant role in this phenomenon. They are seen as perfect, their opinions holy. This is not only unfair to the celebrities themselves, who are, after all, only human, but it also takes away from the voices of actual experts on these subjects. When we prioritize a celebrity’s opinion over those with lived experience or specialized knowledge, we do a disservice to the complexity of these issues.
As a society, we must reevaluate our obsession with celebrity culture and recognize the limitations of looking to entertainers for guidance on complex issues. This doesn’t mean celebrities can’t or shouldn’t speak out on matters that affect them personally or on which they’re well-informed. It’s entirely appropriate for Taylor Swift to publicly support political candidates in her home country. The action stems from personal values and people’s engagement, which are different from commenting on international conflicts without a deep understanding of the nuances involved.
In advocating for this nuanced approach, we’re not suggesting celebrities should remain silent on all matters of public concern. Instead, we’re calling for a shift in how we, as the public, perceive and react to their involvement in social and political issues. By adjusting our expectations, we can foster a healthier, more informed public discussion that prioritizes substance over the temptation of star power.
Ultimately, the goal should be to create a more empathetic, informed society that values expertise and genuine activism over celebrity support. By encouraging public figures to use their platforms responsibly and directing our attention to where they can make a real difference, we take a step toward a more nuanced understanding of global issues. This isn’t just about relieving celebrities of undue burdens; it’s about empowering all of us to seek out and elevate the voices that matter most.
1. Why is “a red hand pin” mentioned in Para.2?| A．To make fun of Billie’s limited knowledge on debating. |
| B．To show Billie’s unawareness of irresponsible advocacy. |
| C．To speak ill of Billie’s poor taste for fashion at the Oscars. |
| D．To criticize Billie for his abuse of the public platform. |
| A．Billie’s unreasonable selection of a red hand pin at the Oscars. |
| B．Celebrities’ irresponsible opinions on critical global conversations. |
| C．Public’s great desire for celebrities to comment on key global issues. |
| D．Taylor Swift’s golden silence about the crucial international concern. |
| A．experts tend to increase the complexity of the issues |
| B．celebrities’ voices are as important as those of experts |
| C．celebrities should air views on matters at home and abroad |
| D．we should reassess the social and political roles of celebrities |
| A．Expect the Unexpected | B．Public Platforms, Powered Places |
| C．The Downside of Celebrity Advocacy | D．The Essence of Celebrity Responsibility |
7 . 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 |
| A．agree with | B．appeal to | C．get along with | D．set an example to |
①Being talkative ②Good social relationships
③A proper degree of confidence ④Knowing that people are mostly alike
| A．①② | B．②③ | C．③④ | D．④① |
| 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 |
| 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. |
8 . Will your happiness differ if you are doing a kind action without any expectation of rewards or with an expectation of rewards? A study by University of Sussex, headed by Dr. Daniel CampbellMeikeljohn, tried to answer that question. He and his partners analyzed over 1, 000 brain scans from other studies related to reactions to making a decision based on kindness. They split the studies based on who was making a decision for altruistic (无私的) reasons and who was making a decision due to the expectation of an obvious reward. The results were interesting.
In both instances, the reward center of the brain lit up on the MRI scans (磁共振成像扫描). Yet, for those who made their decision without any rewards, other areas of the brain lit up as well. Specifically, it lit up the subgenual anterior cingulate cortex (前扣带皮层区域), which scientists believe plays a role in emotional regulation. Also, it might aid in maintaining excitement related to an event that creates a positive emotional state.
In one study about the subgenual anterior cingulate cortex, it is believed that this brain region could be related to depression if it isn’t developed properly or is dysfunctional. The fact that this part of the brain lights up during acts of generosity and caring without expectation of rewards shows that the altruistic individuals are getting more sustainable pleasure than those motivated by rewards. It also could aid in explaining how it helps depressive individuals feel happier after doing a kind deed.
We live in a society, and no man is a lonely island. We all need each other. For those who genuinely desire to help others regardless of repayment, maintaining a balance of helping others and yourself is very important. It is healthy and necessary to be kind to yourself, as well as to others.
1. Why did the author think the results interesting?| A．There are no differences as to the litup area of the brain. |
| B．The reward center of the brain lit up in one case alone. |
| C．The subgenual anterior cingulate cortex makes no difference. |
| D．The reward center of the brain lit up in both cases. |
| A．It might help keep calm. | B．It may make a difference to controlling emotion. |
| C．It can create positive emotion. | D．It has nothing to do with depression. |
| A．Help others regardless of yourself. | B．Treat others and yourself with kindness. |
| C．For the sake of yourself, lend a hand. | D．Practise kindness at all costs. |
9 . Picking up after your dog is interesting, but it must be done. Most dog owners understand the importance of picking up their dogs’ waste, so it can be especially frustrating to see dog owners that obviously refuse to perform this duty.
Ask them directly. Talking to another dog owner about picking up their dogs’ waste can be uncomfortable. However, asking the owner directly to pick up after their dog will often work to fix the problem.
Use a friendly tone. Although you are probably fed up and mad at a dog owner that isn’t cleaning up after their dog, approach them in a friendly manner. Yelling at them may make them defensive and angry.
Give them a reason. It’s possible this person doesn’t realize how their neglect in picking up after their dog is negatively affecting those around them.
| A．Be honest |
| B．Raise some dogs |
| C．If you want to help them to sweep their waste |
| D．And they will likely do more harm than good, too |
| E．When you ask them to pick up their dogs’ waste |
| F．There are many reasons people don’t pick up after their dogs |
| G．Figuring out how to convince these owners to change their ways can be difficult |
10 . Your manager stops you and says she needs to have a word about your performance in the recent project. She begins by praising you for the good work you’ve done on the project, and you wonder if this is the praise that starts off the typical “feedback sandwich”.
However, when feedback becomes such a routine, employees can start to perceive positive feedback as simply a form of sugarcoating the negatives, thus decreasing its value. Instead, positive feedback should not simply be seen as something to cushion the negative.
Cultivate a “growth mindset”. Many of us tend to focus our praise on the end result and seeming inborn talents. For example,
Create a culture of offering positive feedback. Make giving positive feedback part of your team culture. Don’t just wait for special moments to give feedback. Offer informal positive feedback when making small talk.
| A．you have a real talent for organizing events. |
| B．You know how the feedback sandwich goes. |
| C．Attempt to inject some positivity into negative feedback. |
| D．you really put a lot of effort into making this event a success. |
| E．Don’t always follow positive feedback with negative feedback. |
| F．Feedback doesn’t have to only come from the higher ranks either. |
| G．It should also be delivered so as to reinforce and encourage good performance. |
