1 . That artificial food dyes (染料) are unhealthy is not news. Some are known to cause hyperactivity (多动症) in some children, affecting their ability to learn. But regulatory agencies (监管机构) around the world don’t necessarily agree on which food dyes are a problem, or why. That may soon change. A 2021 peer-reviewed report by California’s Office of Environmental Health Hazard Assessment concluded that artificial food dyes “cause or worsen neurobehavioral (神经行为的) problems in some children” and that the current levels that are regarded safe for consumption by the federal government are too high.
California is now considering requiring warning labels on food products and dietary supplements containing the seven most commonly used artificial dyes. The warning label requirement would put California on par with the European Union, which since 2010 has required food products containing certain artificial food dyes to carry warning labels about their negative effect on activity and attention in children.
Artificial dyes are used in foods for one reason: to make products look prettier. Bright colors make candies appealing, especially to kids. But dyes are also in chocolate cake mixes, salad dressings and other products that don’t seem to cry out for a color boost.
In Europe, it was the 2010 label lawmaking that triggered (引发) companies’ decisions to reformulate. “If you’re a company, you do not want to put a warning label on your product.” says Lefferts, an environmental health consultant. Warning labels are why European Starburst Fruit Chews are now colored with natural products, not the artificial dyes that brighten their North American counterparts (同类商品).
Given that artificial food dyes are used far more than needed, we need to be more cautious. After all, we don’t dye fresh fruits and vegetables, but we do dye candy and sprinkles, points out Joe Schwarcz, a chemistry professor at McGill University in Montreal. “The foods in which you find food dyes are foods that are poor in nutrition,” he says. “If you limit foods that contain food dyes, you automatically make your diet better.”
1. What can we learn about artificial food dyes from paragraph 1?| A．A 2021 report confirmed their negative effects. |
| B．The fact that they are harmful is newly revealed. |
| C．Regulatory agencies consider them a serious problem. |
| D．The Federal government thinks their current standard too high. |
| A．In opposition to. | B．In line with. | C．Ahead of. | D．Behind. |
| A．Food companies will stop coloring their products. |
| B．More fresh fruits and vegetables will appear in the market. |
| C．Food companies may replace artificial dyes with natural products. |
| D．It will be hard to find packaged foods without warning labels of dyes. |
| A．Approving. | B．Neutral. | C．Tolerant. | D．Concerned. |
2 . Humans are born to compete with one another. People compare how many “likes” they have on social media. Billionaires envy multibillionaires. The legendary NASCAR champion Dale Earnhardt once stated, “Second place is just the first loser.”
Although the competitive spirit may be as natural as breathing air, it does not always lead to human prosperity (繁荣，成功). On the contrary, left unmanaged, it can create misery for ourselves and others. Fortunately, there is a formula to solve this problem without unrealistically suggesting that we entirely dispense with our competitive urge: Instead of always going for gold, shoot for the bronze.
To expand on the wisdom of Earnhardt, although second place may be the first loser, third place can be the real winner — at least when it comes to happiness and longevity (长寿). Recent research suggested that the bronze winners appeared consistently happier on average than the silver medalists. Regarding the life span of all three medalist categories, it was found that the athlete whose best performance was silver lived to 72. Gold medalists beat this by a solid four years, living to 76. But first prize in longevity went to the bronze medalists, who lived to 78.
The study had a handy explanation for this distinction: “Dissatisfactory competition outcomes may badly affect health.” In other words, silver medalists see themselves as the first loser because they only look up to the top step, whereas the bronze winners compare themselves favorably with all the others who never made it onto the podium (领奖台) at all.
One of the problems with most competitions against others is that it tends to lower one’s inner motivation, and thus enjoyment. Decades ago, researchers showed this by asking people to solve puzzles and then measuring the interest they reported. They found the puzzles less rewarding when competing against others rather than against the clock. Simply having a time limit means competing against themselves—which is often more fun. The principle at work here is that trying to improve your own past performance provides a sense not of “winning” but of progress. And the only person to whom you will have to compare yourself is you.
1. What does the underlined words “dispense with” in paragraph 2 probably mean?| A．Stick to. | B．Depend on. | C．Get rid of. | D．Take charge of. |
| A．Treat competitions as all or nothing. |
| B．Aim to outperform others in competitions. |
| C．Check out others’ victories on social media. |
| D．Compare themselves with those less fortunate. |
| A．Always Going for Gold | B．The Victory of Coming in Third |
| C．Finding Satisfaction in Comparison | D．Second Place is Just the First Loser |
3 . In the eyes of many environmentalists, the world appears to be getting worse. They believe, the natural resources are running out and the air and water are becoming ever more polluted. But if we check the facts, things look different. Energy has become more abundant, not less so. Fewer people are starving. What seems to cause this gap between perception and reality?
One factor is the prejudice in scientific research. Scientific funding goes mainly to areas with many problems. That may be wise policy, but it will also create an impression that there are more potential problems than actually exist.
Secondly, environmental groups seek attention from the mass media. They also need to get continuous financial support. Understandably, perhaps, they sometimes exaggerate (夸大) their arguments. In 1997, for example, the World Wide Fund for Nature issued a statement titled: “Two thirds of the world’s forests lost forever”. The truth turns out to be near 20%.
The media can add to confusion too. People tend to be more curious about bad news than good. Newspapers and broadcasters are there to provide what the public wants. That, however, can lead to significant misinterpretations. For example, when a natural disaster happens, the media usually highlights the negative parts, giving more attention to the disaster’s details and what happens afterward. This flood of bad news can make people think that such events are more frequent or serious than they actually are. Consequently, people may develop a sense of insecurity, despite statistically low probabilities of similar events happening to them.
Another factor is people’s poor perception. People worry that vaccines can cause severe side effects or long-term health problems. Despite extensive scientific evidence demonstrating their safety and effectiveness, some individuals remain hesitant due to unfounded fears.
It is crucial that we look at the facts if we want to make the best possible decisions for the future. It may be costly to be overly optimistic – but more costly still to be too pessimistic.
1. What aspect of scientific research does the writer worry about in paragraph 2?| A．The need to produce results. | B．The selection of research areas. |
| C．The lack of financial support. | D．The desire to solve research problem. |
| A．To show how influential the mass media can be. |
| B．To show how effective environmental groups can be. |
| C．To show how the mass media can help groups raise funds. |
| D．To show how environmental groups overstate their claims. |
| A．educate readers | B．mislead readers |
| C．meet readers’ expectations | D．encourage readers’ feedback |
| A．Making decisions based on reality. | B．Balancing optimism and pessimism. |
| C．Being optimistic to avoid costly mistakes. | D．Addressing the environmental crisis gradually. |
4 . For most of history, people lived in small groups of up to 150 people. Then villages and small towns developed, offering safety and support through the sharing of resources. As time passed, urban living brought additional advantages such as better jobs, schools and healthcare. Larger towns also gave people more chances to meet and interact. This is important.
Today, over half of the world’s population currently lives in towns and cities. But this has resulted in a strange paradox (悖论). Although social opportunities are one reason people choose to live in large cities, research suggests that city life can be lonely.
The development of virtual communities can be traced back to the 1860s. Back then, telegraph operators exchanged messages and gradually formed friendships over long distances.
These days, there are thousands of virtual communities and that number keeps growing. Many people believe they will become more important.
| A．This trend, however, is not likely to continue. |
| B．As Aristotle said, the nature of humans is to be social. |
| C．That may explain why virtual communities are so popular. |
| D．The first popular online communities developed in the 1980s. |
| E．Before cell phones existed, radio was an easy way to communicate. |
| F．Nevertheless, others worry about problems with these communities. |
| G．This is among the earliest examples of virtual community interactions. |
5 . “Sating from now on, to be healthy, I will NOT eat any snacks besides granola bars (燕麦棒),” is what I told myself yesterday, and yet here I am today chewing a Chocopie. I’m aware that I’m breaking my own promise to myself. Instead of eating this, I should be working out or something. But the thing is, chocolate is too good at this moment for me to refuse it!
As I type this, I’m experiencing what’s called instant gratification — the desire to experience pleasure or fulfillment without delaying it for a future benefit. Essentially, when you want it, you get it.
Instant gratification is also the exact opposite of what we’re taught to do-delayed gratification: deciding to put off satisfying our current want to gain something better in the future. We’ve all encountered instant gratification before. Should I sleep in or wake up early to work out? When I get home, should I rest and watch TV first or get started on my homework?
All humans have the tendency to seek pleasure and avoid pain, which is a basic but fundamental concept known as the pleasure principle. Originally coined by Sigmund Freud, it clearly states that all humans are driven, to some extent, by pleasure.
Constantly seeking quick pleasure may bring subsequent troubles. However pleasant not doing your homework may seem pleasant right now, it only results in pleasure plagued by guilt and last-minute panicking late at night. An inability to resist instant gratification may result in underachieving in the long term and failure to meet certain goals.
Instant gratification, however, is not necessarily a bad thing. You don’t always have to say no to things you want at that moment, and it’s good to treat yourself when you need it. In other words, times where you “treat yourself” are only valuable in combination with delayed gratification. While my Chocopie may taste good now, it’ll taste even better if I only eat it after I’ve worked out or done something healthy.
1. How does the author introduce the topic?| A．By making a contrast. | B．By giving a definition. |
| C．By citing a personal case. | D．By listing detailed problems. |
| A．Purchasing items regardless of budgets. | B．Exercising regularly for long-term health. |
| C．Limiting time on social media platforms. | D．Finishing homework before watching TV. |
| A．Reminded. | B．Highlighted. | C．Introduced. | D．Bothered. |
| A．Delayed gratification is pointless. |
| B．Instant gratification should be prioritized. |
| C．Enjoying the moment brings in endless pleasure. |
| D．Instant treats paired with delayed gratification are sweeter. |
6 . Park, a 30yearold Korean housewife, recently took a personality test to figure out who she is. “Just like many other people, I don’t exactly know who I am.” she told The Korea Times. “Sometimes I am curious what makes me feel good or bad. I’ve taken several different types of tests to know myself better and the MBTI is one that I tried recently.” In Korea, the MBTI personality test has become the newest trend, particularly among the millennial (千禧一代).
MBTI, which stands for MyersBriggs Type Indicator, is a personality test. People answer a questionnaire based on a personality theory. A Hankook survey taken last December found that over half of Koreans have taken the MBTI test. Nine out of every 10 people aged between 19 and 28 responded they took the test. Meanwhile, for those who had never been involved in the test, three quarters showed strong interest, indicating the personality type test has become a phenomenon for younger generations.
The MBTI craze among the younger generation, who are struggling with an uncertain future, reflects their desire for acceptance and comfort in knowing there are likeminded people out there. “The country has limited resources and geography, while its people feature a certain devotion and goaloriented (目标导向型的) characteristic.” said Lee Myungjin, a professor of sociology at Korea University. Consequently, they have grown eager on various personality indicators that provide them comfort.
As MBTI has gone viral among younger Koreans, businesses have begun to promote products using the personality test. But such MBTIbased marketing strategies have annoyed some younger people who don’t rely on the results of the test. However, experts agree that the popularity of the test also brings some positive implications. “I believe we’re in a transition period,” Kim Jaehyoung, a head researcher of the Korea MBTI institute said. “This trend could develop a social acceptance for psychological aid in the future.”
1. Why is the Korean housewife mentioned in Paragraph 1?| A．To give an example. | B．To provide the background. |
| C．To make a contrast. | D．To introduce the woman. |
| A．75% of them have taken the MBTI test while the rest have not. |
| B．They can secure a more definite future with the help of the test. |
| C．The trend reflects their inner desire to seek a sense of belonging. |
| D．The test serves as a handy approach for them to know more people. |
| A．The new trend brings about more harm than good. |
| B．Young Koreans should focus on their businesses. |
| C．Experts need to put efforts in adapting the test. |
| D．The test opens a window for mental guidance. |
| A．A social phenomenon. | B．A disturbing crisis. |
| C．A young generation | D．A commercial test. |
7 . Is art boring? It’s not, really. I don’t think so, at least. But there’s a problem with how we look at art, how we approach it.
Museums are formal and strangely dry. There’s no embrace. Barriers prevent us from leaving the path set by the curator (馆长). Glass traps the paintings permanently in their frames – an invisible barrier that prevents us from ever getting close to the art, from touching it, feeling it. Guides and guards are constantly observing us, stopping us from taking photos, or using selfie sticks, or talking too loud. Museums have too many rules. And they’ve made our art boring.
We should be able to see art, to sometimes touch it. How can we feel any connection to the world? Art is a way to connect to the world, and yet so much of our art (and it is our art, not theirs, not yours — but ours) is unreachable.
Why can’t we laugh in museums? Why can’t we take silly selfies in front of art, our tongues sticking out, our hands in the air? Art is not boring and yet, we as a society, have made it so. We’ve trapped incredible artists behind glass boxes, with random rules governing noise levels, lights, flashes, sounds, photos, selfies, pens & pencils.
I love art. I think it has this incredible power to change our world. It can move us — as individuals, or as a collective society. Art is so often a window to something else. And yet we’ve allowed museums and galleries and collectors to prevent us from ever opening those windows.
Don’t get me wrong. I enjoy art museums. There are many fantastic ones around the world. And without so many wonderful curators and collectors, we wouldn’t be able to enjoy much of the art that is created -the masterpieces and the newer, more contemporary (and sometimes crazy) art. But at the same time, we’ ve allowed museums too much control.
They’ve taken our art. They’ve controlled our world. And our world, our art — it’s not meant to be controlled. It’s meant to be experienced — however that may be. It’s an individual, personal choice. Let’s take back our art, our museums. And take some selfies.
1. According to the writer, how may visitors to museums feel?| A．Interested. | B．Unwelcome. | C．Excited. | D．Ashamed. |
| A．The writer believes that art should never be kept in museums. |
| B．The writer is losing his love of art due to museums’ policies. |
| C．The writer believes museums are taking away the power of art. |
| D．The writer believes that art should be replaced by something else. |
| A．Help me. | B．Control me. | C．Misunderstand me. | D．Frighten me. |
| A．All of us can create art. | B．Museums are of little use. |
| C．Admission to museums should be free. | D．Museums should give visitors more freedom. |
8 . We’ve all been there: in a lift, in line at the bank or on an airplane, surrounded by people who are, like us, deeply focused on their smartphones or, worse, struggling with the uncomfortable silence.
What’s the problem? It’s possible that along with the rapid development of society, we all focus on our phone and desktop, and therefore it results in our compromised conversational intelligence. However, it’s more likely that none of us start a conversation because it’s awkward and challenging, or we think it’s annoying and unnecessary. But the next time you find yourself among strangers, consider that small talk is worth the trouble. Experts say it’s an invaluable social practice that results in big benefits.
Dismissing small talk as unimportant is easy, but we can’t forget that deep relationships wouldn’t even exist if it weren’t for small conversation. “Small talk is the grease (润滑剂) for social communication,” says Bernardo Carducci, director of the Shyness Research Institute at Indiana University Southeast. “Almost every great love story and each big business deal begins with small talk,” he explains. “The key to successful small talk is learning how to connect with others, not just communicate with them.”
In a 2014 study, Elizabeth Dunn, associate professor of psychology at UBC, invited people on their way into a coffee shop. One group was asked to seek out an interaction with its waiter; the other, to speak only when necessary. The results showed that those who chatted with their server reported significantly higher positive feelings and a better coffee shop experience. “It’s not that talking to the waiter is better than talking to your husband,” says Dunn. “But interactions with peripheral (边缘的) members of our social network matter for our well-being also.”
Dunn believes that people who reach out to strangers feel a significantly greater sense of belonging, a bond with others. Carducci believes developing such a sense of belonging starts with small talk. “Small talk is the basis of good manners,” he says.
1. What does the underlined word “compromised” in paragraph 2 mean?| A．Weakened. | B．Enhanced. | C．Secret. | D．Natural. |
| A．Showing good manners. | B．Relating to other people. |
| C．Focusing on a topic. | D．Making business deals. |
| A．It made the coffee taste better. | B．It reduced waiting time in line. |
| C．It improved people’s mood and experience. | D．It helped them bond with the server deeply. |
| A．Elevator manners. | B．The importance of small talk. |
| C．Smartphones and social media. | D．Developing deep relationships. |
9 . A new study shows that female academics are significantly underrepresented in winning academic prizes and having awards named after them. Analysis of nearly 9,000 awardees and 346 scientific prizes and medals published in Nature Human Behaviour has found that men win eight prizes for every one won by a woman if the award is named after a man. These awards represent almost two-thirds of all scientific prizes. Female academics are, however, more likely to win awards that have been named after other notable female scientists, with 47% of those awards going to women and 53% to men.
Dr Katja Gehmlich, Associate Professor in the Institute of Cardiovascular Science at the University of Birmingham and joint lead author of the study, said, “The gender gap between awardees in scientific prizes is sadly a product of a long, systematic issue of poor representation of women in sciences. Despite decades of efforts to rebalance this issue, our study shows that women are still poorly recognized for their scientific contributions, and men are far more likely to win prizes and awards, in particular, if those awards are named after other men.
“It seems particularly shocking to me that awards named after women still see more than half of prizes going to men. We further propose a list of actions to address and overcome these issues but are aware this will be a long process. The Nominate Her movement is one way that the scientific community can begin to address this,” said Dr Gehmlich.
Prof Stefan Krause from the School of Geography, Earth and Environmental Sciences at the University of Birmingham and joint lead author of the study said, “Our data is indicative of much wider issues of gender inequality within sciences. Our current publication is an initial attempt to understand the causes of such striking gender inequality and to promote discussion on the subject within our scientific communities.”
“Research culture has a lot to do to improve the gender prize gap, as well as efforts to address the inequality that sees almost two-thirds of prizes currently named after men. More pathways may also be needed, such as renaming or getting rid of gender names associated with some awards,” added Prof Krause.
1. How are awards named after female scientists distributed between genders?| A．Males are in the majority. |
| B．Females take up a bit more than half. |
| C．They are almost entirely awarded to females. |
| D．They are evenly distributed between males and females. |
| A．Doubtful. | B．Tolerant. |
| C．Uncaring. | D．Disappointed. |
| A．Establishing gender rates for awards. |
| B．Increasing the number of female judges. |
| C．Encouraging more women to enter scientific fields. |
| D．Renaming or removing gender names from awards. |
| A．Achievements of women in science |
| B．The role of men in the scientific world |
| C．Gender inequality in scientific awards |
| D．Future of gender equality in academia |
10 . Wellness for Younger Tastes
Wellness, or yangsheng in Mandarin, is no longer a term exclusive to the middle-aged and elderly. Faced with intense competition in education and their careers, those born in the 1990s and 2000s have already started a journey to safeguard their health. As the pursuit of wellness becomes an essential pastime for many young people, a trend known as “New Chinese-style Wellness” has taken over social media platforms.
Given the long hours facing a computer for work, young people often experience muscle discomfort in their shoulders and neck. Besides using a meridian massage (按摩) device, they may also get regular professional massages at hospitals to ease these issues.
| A．Many young people are riding the trend |
| B．Furthermore, it advocates for light exercise |
| C．There is a reflection of young people’s consumption trends |
| D．Having a balanced and healthy diet has always been important |
| E．“New Chinese-style Wellness” emphasizes the idea of dietary therapy |
| F．Modern young people have a different lifestyle from the older generation |
| G．The demand for health and wellness among modern individuals is significant |
