1 . In Dad’s Army, a British sitcom(情景喜剧) about a home-defense Force, Sergeant (中士) Wilson would often   cast doubt on his commander’s various orders with the phrase “Do you think that’s wise, sir?” His doubt, although   often ignored, was usually _________.

Many employees must be tempted to imitate Sgt. Wilson when they see their bosses headed down the wrong track. But caution often leads workers to keep silent for fear of appearing foolish and offensive and _________ being at high risk of losing their jobs.

A culture of silence can be dangerous, argues a new book The Fearless Organization, by Amy Edmondson, a professor at Harvard Business School. Some of her cases are from the _________ industry, where staff felt too powerless to make any changes due to their ranks. One was its deadliest accident: a crash between two Boeing-747s in the Canary Islands occurred in 1977 when a co-pilot felt unable to _________ his captain into changing the decision to take off. Another case was that of the Columbia space shuttle in 2003; an engineer who may have diagnosed damage to the shuttle’s wing before the flight felt unable to speak as he was “too _________” at NASA.

In a corporate culture based on _________ and obedience, it may appear that targets are being achieved. But in the long run the effect is likely to be counterproductive (适得其反的). Studies show that fear _________ learning. And when faced with a problem, scared workers find ways of _________ it or getting around it with inefficient practices.

The solution is to create an atmosphere of “psychological safety” whereby workers can speak their minds. It does not mean that workers, or their ideas, are _________ criticism, or that they should complain continuously. In a sense, this method is the __________ of Toyota’s “lean manufacturing” process, which allows any worker who spots a problem to stop the production line.

Pixar, the production firm, created what it called a “Braintrust” to give __________ to film directors. The rules were that advice should be constructive and about the idea, not the person, and that filmmakers should not be __________ in response.

And psychological safety is not about whistleblowing (检举). Indeed, if an employee feels the need to act as a whistleblower by speaking to external __________, it suggests employers have not created an environment within the firm where criticism can be __________. Nor is such a culture only about safety or avoiding mistakes. As mundane (单调的) tasks are automated, and workers rely on computers for data analysis, the added value of humans will stem from their __________. But as Ms. Edmondson’s book demonstrates, it is hard to be either constructive or creative if you are not confident about speaking out.

1.

A．justifiable

B．pointless

C．inevitable

D．ridiculous

2.

A．on the whole

B．in conclusion

C．as a result

D．on the contrary

3.

A．airline

B．manufacturing

C．service

D．advertising

4.

A．weigh

B．reason

C．applaud

D．channel

5.

A．offensive

B．ambitious

C．aggressive

D．humble

6.

A．imitation

B．fear

C．efficiency

D．competition

7.

A．motivates

B．facilitates

C．maintains

D．prevents

8.

A．spoiling

B．polishing

C．masking

D．exploiting

9.

A．subject to

B．immune from

C．concerned with

D．dependent on

10.

A．equivalent

B．object

C．argument

D．criticism

11.

A．priority

B．motivation

C．access

D．feedback

12.

A．optimistic

B．objective

C．defensive

D．passive

13.

A．authorities

B．elements

C．networks

D．whistleblowers

14.

A．rejected

B．eliminated

C．voiced

D．questioned

15.

A．competitiveness

B．inventiveness

C．carefulness

D．selflessness

3 . In our information-driven society, shaping our worldview through the media is similar to forming an opinion about someone solely based on a picture of their foot. While the media might not deliberately deceive us, it often fails to provide a comprehensive view of reality.

Consequently, the question arises: Where, then, shall we get our information from if not from the media? Who can we trust? How about experts- people who devote their working lives to understanding their chosen slice of the world? However, even experts can fall prey to the allure of oversimplification, leading to the “single perspective instinct” that hampers (阻碍) our ability to grasp the intricacies (错综复杂) of the world.

Simple ideas can be appealing because they offer a sense of understanding and certainty. And it is easy to take off down a slippery slope, from one attention-grabbing simple idea to a feeling that this idea beautifully explains, or is the beautiful solution for, lots of other things. The world becomes simple that way.

Yet, when we embrace a singular cause or solution for all problems, we risk oversimplifying complex issues. For instance, championing the concept of equality may lead us to view all problems through the lens of inequality and see resource distribution as the sole panacea. However, such rigidity prevents us from seeing the multidimensional nature of challenges and hinders true comprehension of reality. This “single perspective instinct” ultimately clouds our judgment and restricts our capacity to tackle complex issues effectively. Being always in favor of or always against any particular idea makes you blind to information that doesn’t fit your perspective. This is usually a bad approach if you would like to understand reality.

Instead, constantly test your favorite ideas for weaknesses. Be humble about the extent of your expertise. Be curious about new information that doesn’t fit, and information from other fields. And rather than talking only to people who agree with you, or collecting examples that fit your ideas, consult people who contradict you, disagree with you, and put forward different ideas as a great resource for understanding the world. If this means you don’t have time to form so may opinions, so what?

Wouldn’t you rather have few opinions that are right than many that are wrong?

1. What does the underlined word “allure” in Para.2 probably mean?

A．Temptation.

B．Tradition.

C．Convenience.

D．Consequence.

2. Why are simple ideas appealing according to the passage?

A．They meet people’s demand for high efficiency.

B．They generate a sense of complete understanding.

C．They are raised and supported by multiple experts.

D．They reflect the opinions of like-minded individuals.

3. What will the author probably agree with?

A．Simplifying matters releases energy for human brains.

B．Constant tests on our ideas help make up for our weakness.

C．A well-founded opinion counts more than many shallow ones.

D．People who disagree with us often have comprehensive views.

4. Which of the following can be the best title of the passage?

A．Embracing Disagreement: Refusing Overcomplexity

B．Simplifying Information: Enhancing Comprehension

C．Understanding Differences: Establishing Relationships

D．Navigating Complexity: Challenging Oversimplification

4 . Why isn’t science better? Look at career incentives.

There are often substantial gaps between the idealized and actual versions of those people whose work involves providing a social good. Government officials are supposed to work for their constituents. Journalists are supposed to provide unbiased reporting and penetrating analysis. And scientists are supposed to relentlessly probe the fabric of reality with the most rigorous and skeptical of methods.

All too often, however, what should be just isn’t so. In a number of scientific fields, published findings turn out not to replicate (复制), or to have smaller effects than, what was initially claimed. Plenty of science does replicate — meaning the experiments turn out the same way when you repeat them — but the amount that doesn’t is too much for comfort.

But there are also ways in which scientists increase their chances of getting it wrong. Running studies with small samples, mining data for correlations and forming hypotheses to fit an experiment’s results after the fact are just some of the ways to increase the number of false discoveries.

It’s not like we don’t know how to do better. Scientists who study scientific methods have known about feasible remedies for decades. Unfortunately, their advice often falls on deaf ears. Why? Why aren’t scientific methods better than they are? In a word: incentives. But perhaps not in the way you think.

In the 1970s, psychologists and economists began to point out the danger in relying on quantitative measures for social decision-making. For example, when public schools are evaluated by students’ performance on standardized tests, teachers respond by teaching “to the test”. In turn, the test serves largely as of how well the school can prepare students for the test.

We can see this principle—often summarized as “when a measure becomes a target, it ceases to be a good measure”—playing out in the realm of research. Science is a competitive enterprise. There are far more credentialed (授以证书的) scholars and researchers than there are university professorships or comparably prestigious research positions. Once someone acquires a research position, there is additional competition for tenure (终身教授) grant funding, and support and placement for graduate students. Due to this competition for resources, scientists must be evaluated and compared. How do you tell if someone is a good scientist?

An oft-used metric (标准，度量) is the number of publications one has in peer-reviewed journals, as well as the status of those journals. Metrics like these make it straightforward to compare researchers whose work may otherwise be quite different. Unfortunately, this also makes these numbers susceptible to exploitation.

If scientists are motivated to publish often and in high-impact journals, we might expect them to actively try to game the system (钻空子). And certainly, some do—as seen in recent high-profile cases of scientific fraud (欺诈). If malicious (恶意的) fraud is the prime concern, then perhaps the solution is simply heightened alertness.

However, most scientists are, I believe, genuinely interested in learning about the world, and honest. The problem with incentives is that they can shape cultural norms without any intention on the part of individuals.

1. Which of the following is TRUE according to the passage?

A．Scientists are expected to persistently devoted to exploration of reality.

B．The research findings fail to achieve the expected effect.

C．Hypotheses are modified to highlight the experiments’ results.

D．The amount of science that does replicate is comforting.

2. What does deaf ears in the fourth paragraph probably refer to?

A．The public.	B．The incentive initiators.
C．The peer researchers.	D．The high-impact journal editors.

3. Which of the following does the author probably agree with?

A．Good scientists excel in seeking resources and securing research positions.

B．Competition for resources pushes researchers to publish in a more productive way.

C．All the credentialed scholars and researchers will take up university professorships.

D．The number of publication reveals how scientists are bitterly exploited.

4. According to the author, what might be a remedy for the fundamental problem in scientific research?

A．High-impact journals are encouraged to reform the incentives for publication.

B．The peer-review process is supposed to scale up inspection of scientific fraud.

C．Researchers are motivated to get actively involved in gaming the current system.

D．Career incentives for scientists are expected to consider their personal intention.