Part A: Reading Comprehension

Text 3

Scientists have found that although we are prone to snap overreactions, if we take a moment and think about how we are likely to react, we can reduce or even eliminate the negative effects of our quick, hard-wired responses.

Snap decisions can be important defense mechanisms; if we are judging whether someone is dangerous, our brains and bodies are hard-wired to react very quickly, within milliseconds. But we need more time to assess other factors. To accurately tell whether someone is sociable, studies show, we need at least a minute, preferably five. It takes a while to judge complex aspects of personality, like neuroticism or open-mindedness.

But snap decisions in reaction to rapid stimuli aren’t exclusive to the interpersonal realm. Psychologists at the University of Toronto found that viewing a fast-food logo for just a few milliseconds primes us to read 20 percent faster, even though reading has little to do with eating. We unconsciously associate fast food with speed and impatience and carry those impulses into whatever else we’re doing. Subjects exposed to fast-food flashes also tend to think a musical piece lasts too long.

Yet we can reverse such influences. If we know we will overreact to consumer products or housing options when we see a happy face (one reason good sales representatives and real estate agents are always smiling), we can take a moment before buying. If we know female job screeners are more likely to reject attractive female applicants, we can help screeners understand their biases—or hire outside screeners.

John Gottman, the marriage expert, explains that we quickly “thin slice” information reliably only after we ground such snap reactions in “thick sliced” long-term study. When Dr. Gottman really wants to assess whether a couple will stay together, he invites them to his island retreat for a much longer evaluation: two days, not two seconds.

Our ability to mute our hard-wired reactions by pausing is what differentiates us from animals: dogs can think about the future only intermittently or for a few minutes. But historically we have spent about 12 percent of our days contemplating the longer term. Although technology might change the way we react, it hasn’t changed our nature. We still have the imaginative capacity to rise above temptation and reverse the high-speed trend.

31. The time needed in making decisions may

[A]

predetermine the accuracy of our judgment. 

[B]

prove the complexity of our brain reaction. 

[C]

depend on the importance of the assessment. 

[D]

vary according to the urgency of the situation. 

32. Our reaction to a fast-food logo shows that snap decisions

[A]

can be associative. 

[B]

are not unconscious. 

[C]

can be dangerous. 

[D]

are not impulsive. 

33. To reverse the negative influences of snap decisions, we should

[A]

trust our first impression. 

[B]

think before we act. 

[C]

do as people usually do. 

[D]

ask for expert advice. 

34. John Gottman says that reliable snap reactions are based on

[A]

critical assessment. 

[B]

“thin sliced” study. 

[C]

adequate information. 

[D]

sensible explanation. 

35. The author’s attitude toward reversing the high-speed trend is

[A]

tolerant. 

[B]

optimistic. 

[C]

uncertain. 

[D]

doubtful. 

答案解析 (Answers & Explanations)

31. [D] vary according to the urgency of the situation.
解析：第二段指出，如果我们是在判断某人是否“危险”（紧急情况），我们需要在几毫秒内（within milliseconds）做出快速决定。但要准确判断某人是否“好交际”（非紧急情况），至少需要一分钟，最好是五分钟。这说明做决定所需的时间会“根据情况的紧迫性而变化（vary according to the urgency of the situation）”，选D。

32. [A] can be associative.
解析：第三段提到，看到快餐标志会让我们阅读速度变快。原因是我们无意识地“将快餐与速度和急躁联系起来（associate fast food with speed and impatience）”，并把这种冲动带入其他活动中。这说明我们由快餐标志做出的快速决定（反应）具有“联想性（associative）”，选A。选项B、D与原文的意思相反（原文明确说这是一种 unconsciously 的 impulse）。

33. [B] think before we act.
解析：第一段首句即为全文主旨：“虽然我们容易做出快速的过度反应，但如果我们**花点时间想一想**（if we take a moment and think about...），我们就能减少甚至消除负面影响。” 第四段举例时再次强调“we can take a moment before buying”。这直接对应选项B“三思而后行（think before we act）”。

34. [C] adequate information.
解析：第五段中 John Gottman 解释道：只有在我们把快速的反应（thin slice）**建立在“厚片”的长期研究之上**（after we ground such snap reactions in “thick sliced” long-term study）时，这种快速提取信息才是可靠的（reliably）。这里的“thick sliced long-term study”意味着需要进行长时间的考察，收集大量的数据，即“充足的信息（adequate information）”，选C。

35. [B] optimistic.
解析：文章最后一段作者总结道：尽管技术可能改变我们的反应方式，但它并没有改变我们的本性。“我们仍然拥有超越诱惑和逆转高速趋势的想象力（We still have the imaginative capacity to rise above temptation and reverse the high-speed trend.）” 这里的 “still have the capacity” 表现出作者对人类能够克服本能、逆转这种高速趋势充满了信心，即态度是“乐观的（optimistic）”，选B。

核心长难句精解 (High-Light)

1. 条件状语从句与宾语从句的嵌套：
"Scientists have found that although we are prone to snap overreactions, if we take a moment and think about how we are likely to react, we can reduce or even eliminate the negative effects of our quick, hard-wired responses."
【解析】本句是全文的主旨句。that 引导 found 的宾语从句；在宾语从句内部，包含了一个由 although 引导的让步状语从句和一个由 if 引导的条件状语从句。而在条件句中，how 又引导了一个宾语从句作 about 的宾语。逻辑层层递进：尽管有本能反应 -> 但只要我们花时间思考 -> 就能消除负面影响。

2. 动名词复合结构与介词短语的运用：
"We unconsciously associate fast food with speed and impatience and carry those impulses into whatever else we’re doing."
【解析】associate A with B 意为“将A与B联系起来”。句末的 whatever 引导了一个宾语从句，作介词 into 的宾语。这句话精准地解释了跨领域的“心理联想（associative）”现象（即解答第32题的关键）。

3. 表语从句与动名词作主语：
"Our ability to mute our hard-wired reactions by pausing is what differentiates us from animals..."
【解析】句子的主语是 Our ability...。其中 by pausing 作方式状语修饰动词不定式 to mute。系动词 is 后跟 what 引导的表语从句。differentiate A from B 意为“使 A 区别于 B”。作者借此拔高了主旨：人类之所以为人，就在于能够通过“暂停思考（pausing）”来抑制本能反应。