雅思阅读解析C11T2P3: Neuroaesthetics（8月1日雅思阅读考试真题答案）

今天雅思无忧小编为大家带来了雅思阅读解析C11T2P3: Neuroaesthetics（8月1日雅思阅读考试真题答案），希望能帮助到大家，一起来看看吧！

本文目录一览：

• 1、雅思阅读解析C11T2P3: Neuroaesthetics
• 2、2020年8月1日雅思阅读考试真题答案
• 3、9分达人雅思阅读第04套-P3：Designed to Last: Could BetterDesign Cure Our Throwaway Culture?

雅思阅读解析C11T2P3: Neuroaesthetics

解析雅思阅读C11T2P3: Neuroaesthetics

多项选择题解答如下：

问题27：第二段提及形状匹配测试，旨在说明“我们确实有跟随群体的倾向。在被要求做出选择时，人们如果看到他人也这么做，通常会选择一个明显错误的答案。”答案是C。

问题28：安吉丽娜·霍韦尔-多兰的研究表明，人们倾向于选择知名艺术家的作品，即使他们认为这些作品是由动物或儿童创作的。看来，观众能感觉到画作中的艺术家视角，即使他们无法解释原因。答案是D。

问题29：涉及罗伯特·佩珀尔的作品研究结果表明，人们倾向于：

第四段指出“似乎大脑将这些图像视为谜题，解码意义越困难，认识那一刻就越有回报。”答案是B。

问题30：第五段描述的实验关于蒙德里安的画作暗示人们：

眼动研究证实了他的作品精心构成，简单旋转作品会显著改变我们的观看方式。答案是A。

总结完成题答案如下：

问题31：神经美学学科旨在为艺术研究引入科学客观性。例如，脑部神经学研究显示印象派画作对我们的影响。答案是C。

问题32：利物浦大学的亚历克斯·福思蒂认为，许多艺术家给作品提供了最吸引人脑部的精确程度。答案是B。

问题33：她还观察到吸引人的作品通常包含在自然界中频繁出现的重复模式。

答案是H。

YES/NO/NOT GIVEN答案如下：

问题34：福思蒂的发现并未反驳关于‘分形’在艺术中的功能的传统观点。答案是NOT GIVEN。

问题35：有关镜像神经元与艺术鉴赏之间的某些关联需要进一步验证。答案是YES。

问题36：人们在绘画上的品味完全取决于当时的艺术潮流。答案是NO。

问题37：科学家应该寻求定义指导人们对艺术作品反应的精确规则。答案是NO。

问题38：艺术鉴赏始终应考虑到艺术家所在的文化背景。答案是YES。

问题39：在科学领域比艺术领域更容易找到意义。答案是NOT GIVEN。

最合适的副标题是：A

2020年8月1日雅思阅读考试真题答案

8月1号进行了八月初的第一场雅思的考试，相信大家对真题以及答案会非常的感兴趣、今天就由的我为大家介绍2020年8月1日雅思阅读考试真题答案。

一、考题解析

P1 土地沙漠化

P2 澳大利亚的鹦鹉

P3 多重任务

二、名师点评

1.8月份首场考试的难度总体中等，有出现比较多的配对题，没有出现Heading题，其余主要以常规的填空，判断和选择题为主。文章的话题和题型搭配也是在剑桥真题中都有迹可循，所以备考重心依然还是剑桥官方真题。

2. 整体分析：涉及环境类（P1）、动物类（P2）、社科类（P3）。

本次考试的P2和P3均为旧题。P2是动物类的话题，题型组合为：段落细节配对+单选+summary填空，难度中等。题型上也延续19年的出题特点，出现配对题，考察定位速度和准确度。P3也出现了段落细节配对，主要是段落细节配对+单选+判断。三种题型难度中等，但是文章理解起来略有难度。

3. 部分答案及参考文章：

Passage 1：土地沙漠化

题型及答案待确认

Passage 2：澳大利亚的鹦鹉

题型：段落细节配对+单选+Summary填空

技巧分析：由于段落细节配对是完全乱序出题，在定位时需要先做后面的单选题及填空题，最大化利用已读信息来确定答案，尽量避免重复阅读，以保证充分的做题时间。

文章内容及题目参考：

A 概况，关于一个大的生物种类

B 一些物种消失的原因，题干关键词：an example of one bird species extinct

C 一种鹦鹉不能自己存活，以捕食另一种鸟为生，吃该鸟类的蛋。题干关键词：two species competed at the expense of oneanother

D 吸引鹦鹉的原因以及鹦鹉嘴的特点。题干关键词：*ysis of reasons as Australian landscapeattract parrots

E 植物是如何适应鹦鹉。题干关键词：plants attract birds which make the animal adaptto the environment

F 南半球对英语的影响

G 两种鹦鹉从环境改变中获益并存活下来。题干关键词：two species of parrots benefit fromm theenvironment change

H 外来物种及本地鹦鹉

I 鸟类栖息地被破坏以及人类采取的措施

J 作者对于鹦鹉问题的态度

单选题：

why parrots in the whole world are lineal descendants of

选项关键词：continent split from Africa

the writer thinks parrots species beak is for

选项关键词：adjust to their suitable diet

which one is not mentioned

选项关键词：should be frequently maintained

填空题：分布在文章的前两段

one-sixth

16th century

mapmaker

John Gould

Passage 3：多重任务

题型：段落细节配对+单选+判断

参考答案及文章

28 F

29I

30C

31B

32G

33C

34B

35A

36YES

37YES

38NO

39NOT GIVEN

40NO

Passage3： multitasking

Multitasking Debate—Can you do them at the same time？

Talking on the phone while driving isn＇t the only situationwhere we＇re worse at multitasking than we might like to think we are. Newstudies have identified a bottleneck in our brains that some say means we arefundamentally incapable of true multitasking. If experimental findings reflectreal-world performance， people who think they are multitasking are probablyjust underperforming in all-or at best， all but one -of their parallelpursuits. Practice might improve your performance， but you will never be asgood as when focusing on one task at a time.

The problem， according to René Marois， a psychologist atVanderbilt University in Nashville， Tennessee， is that there＇s a sticking pointin the brain. To demonstrate this， Marois devised an experiment to locate nteers watch a screen and when a particular image appears， a red circle，say， they have to press a key with their index finger. Different colouredcircles require presses from different fingers. Typical response time is about half a second， and thevolunteers quickly reach their peak performance. Then they learn to listen todifferent recordings and respond by making a specific sound. For instance， whenthey hear a bird chirp， they have to say ＂ba＂； an electronic soundshould elicit a ＂ko＂， and so on. Again， no problem. A normal personcan do that in about half a second， with almost no effort. The trouble comeswhen Marois shows the volunteers an image， then almost immediately plays them asound. Now they＇re flummoxed. ＂If you show an image and play a sound atthe same time， one task is postponed，＂ he says. In fact，if the second taskis introduced within the half-second or so it takes to process and react to thefirst， it will simply be delayed until the first one is done. The largestdual-task delays occur when the two tasks are presented simultaneously； delaysprogressively shorten as the interval between presenting the tasks lengthens（See Diagram）.

There are at least three points where we seem to getstuck， says Marois. The first is in simply identifying what we＇re looking  can take a few tenths of a second， during which time we are not able tosee and recognise a second item. This limitation is known as the＂attentional blink＂： experiments have shown that if you＇re watchingout for a particular event and a second one shows up unexpectedly any timewithin this crucial window of concentration， it may register in your visualcortex but you will be unable to act upon it. Interestingly， if you don＇texpect the first event， you have no trouble responding to the second. Whatexactly causes the attentional blink is still a matter for debate.

A second limitation is in our short-term visual ＇s estimated that we can keep track of about four items at a time， fewer ifthey are complex. This capacity shortage is thought to explain， in part， our astonishinginability to detect even huge changes in scenes that are otherwise identical，so-called ＂change blindness＂. Show people pairs of near-identicalphotos -say， aircraft engines in one picture have disappeared in the other -andthey will fail to spot the differences （if you don＇t believe it， check out theclips at /~rensink/flicker/download）. Here again， though， thereis disagreement about what the essential limiting factor really is. Does itcome down to a dearth of storage capacity， or is it about how much attention aviewer is paying？

A third limitation is that choosing a response to astimulus -braking when you see a child in the road， for instance，or replyingwhen your mother tells you over the phone that she＇s thinking of leaving yourdad -also takes brainpower. Selecting a response to one of these things willdelay by some tenths of a second your ability to respond to the other. This iscalled the ＂response selection bottleneck＂ theory， first proposed in1952.

Last December， Marois and his colleagues published apaper arguing that this bottleneck is in fact created in two different areas ofthe brain： one in the posterior lateral prefrontal cortex and another in thesuperior medial frontal cortex （Neuron， vol 52， p 1109）. They found this byscanning people＇s brains with functional MRI while the subjects struggled tochoose among eight possible responses to each of two closely timed tasks. Theydiscovered that these brain areas are not tied to any particular sense but aregenerally involved in selecting responses， and they seemed to queue theseresponses when presented with multiple tasks concurrently.

Bottleneck？ What bottleneck？

But David Meyer， a psychologist at the University ofMichigan， Ann Arbor， doesn＇t buy the bottleneck idea. He thinks dual-taskinterference is just evidence of a strategy used by the brain to prioritisemultiple activities. Meyer is known as something of an optimist by his  has written papers with titles like ＂Virtually perfect time-sharing indual-task performance： Uncorking the central cognitive bottleneck＂（Psychological Science， vol 12， p101）. His experiments have shown that withenough practice -at least 2000 tries -some people can execute two taskssimultaneously as competently as if they were doing them one after the  suggests that there is a central cognitive processor that coordinates allthis and， what＇s more， he thinks it uses discretion： sometimes it chooses todelay one task while completing another.

Even with practice， not all people manage to achieve thisharmonious time-share， however. Meyer argues that individual differences comedown to variations in the character of the processor -some brains are just more＂cautious＂， some more ＂daring＂. And despite urban legend，there are no noticeable

differences between men and women. So， according to him，it＇s not a central bottleneck that causes dual-task interference， but rather＂adaptive executive control＂， which ＂schedules task processesappropriately to obey instructions about their relative priorities and serialorder＂.

Marois agrees that practice can sometimes eraseinterference effects. He has found that with just 1 hour of practice each dayfor two weeks， volunteers show a huge improvement at managing both his tasks atonce. Where he disagrees with Meyer is in what the brain is doing to achievethis. Marois speculates that practice might give us the chance to find lesscongested circuits to execute a task -rather like finding trusty back streetsto avoid heavy traffic on main roads -effectively making our response to thetask subconscious. After all， there are plenty of examples of subconsciou*ultitasking that most of us routinely manage： walking and talking， eating andreading， watching TV and folding the laundry.

But while some dual tasks benefit from practice， otherssimply do not. ＂Certain kinds of tasks are really hard to do two atonce，＂ says Pierre Jolicoeur at the University of Montreal， Canada， whoalso studies multitasking. Dual tasks involving a visual stimulus andskeletal-motor response （which he dubs ＂in the eye and out the hand＂）and an auditory stimulus with a verbal response （＂in the ear and out themouth＂） do seem to be amenable to practice， he says. Jolicoeur has foundthat with enough training such tasks can be performed as well together asapart. He speculates that the brain connections that they use may be somehowspecial， because we learn to speak by hearing and learn to move by looking. Butpair visual input with a verbal response， or sound to motor， and there＇s nodramatic improvement. ＂It looks like no amount of practice will allow youto combine these，＂ he says.

For research purposes， these experiments have to be keptsimple. Real-world multitasking poses much greater challenges. Even the upbeatMeyer is sceptical about how a lot of us live our lives. Instant-messaging andtrying to do your homework？ ＂It can＇t be done，＂ he says. Conducting ajob interview while answering emails？ ＂There＇s no way you wind up being asgood.＂ Needless to say， there appear to be no researchers in the area ofmultitasking who believe that you can safely drive a car and carry on a phoneconversation. In fact， last year David Strayer at the University of Utah inSalt Lake City reported that people using cellphones drive no better thandrunks （Human Factors， vol 48， p 381）. In another study， Strayer found thatusing a hands-free kit did not improve a driver＇s response time. He concludedthat what distracts a driver so badly is the very act of talking to someone whoisn＇t present in the car and therefore is unaware of the hazards facing thedriver.

“No researchers believe it＇s safe to drive a car andcarry on a phone conversation”

It probably comes as no surprise that， generallyspeaking， we get worse at multitasking as we age. According to Art Kramer atthe University of Illinois at Urbana-Champaign， who studies how ageing affectsour cognitive abilities， we peak in our 20s. Though the decline is slow throughour 30s and on into our 50s， it is there； and after 55， it becomes moreprecipitous. In one study， he and his colleagues had both young and oldparticipants do a simulated driving task while carrying on a conversation. Hefound that while young drivers tended to miss background changes， older driversfailed to notice things that were highly relevant. Likewise， older subjects hadmore trouble paying attention to the more important parts of a scene than youngdrivers.

It＇s not all bad news for over-55s， though. Kramer alsofound that older people can benefit from practice. Not only did they learn toperform better， brain scans showed that underlying that improvement was achange in the way their brains become active.

Whileit＇s clear that practice can often make a difference， especially as we age， thebasic facts remain sobering. ＂We have this impression of an almightycomplex brain，＂ says Marois， ＂and yet we have very humbling andcrippling limits.＂ For most of our history， we probably never needed to domore than one thing at a time， he says， and so we haven＇t evolved to be ableto. Perhaps we will in future， though. We might yet look back one day on peoplelike Debbie and Alun as ancestors of a new breed of true multitaskers.

9分达人雅思阅读第04套-P3：Designed to Last: Could BetterDesign Cure Our Throwaway Culture?

在面对西方消费文化中的浪费现象及其对环境的损害时，英国布莱顿大学的资深讲师乔纳森·查普曼成为了"可持续设计师"新群体中的一员。他们关注于减少一次性产品的使用，旨在设计出人们愿意保留而非丢弃的物件。同时，还有一些设计师致力于创造更加高效或耐用的消费品，或设计时考虑到回收利用。

消费耐用品的浪费现象十分惊人，以家庭用电钻为例，尽管购*者可能计划进行大量的DIY活动，但这些工具实际上平均只被使用了十分钟。大多数最终只能在车库的架子上落满灰尘，人们不愿意承认自己浪费了金钱。然而，这种情况的结束是不可避免的：成千上万年后的陆地填埋场。从设计、*、包装、运输到处理，一台电钻所消耗的资源重量是其自身重量的许多倍，这一切都只是为了比普通的昆虫更短的活跃寿命。

要理解我们为什么会变得如此浪费，我们需要关注消费者的内在动力。查普曼指出，人们拥有物品以表达他们的身份，并展示他们所属的群体。然而，在大规模生产的世界里，这种象征性已经失去了大部分力量。在人类历史的大部分时间里，人们与所使用或珍视的物品有着亲密的关系。他们往往自己*这些物品，或者家庭成员会传递它们。对于更专业的物品，人们依赖附近能亲自认识的专家*商。查普曼强调，所有这些因素都赋予了物品一个历史——一个叙述——和一个情感联系，这正是今天大规模生产的商品无法比拟的。

缺乏这些个人联系，消费主义文化将新颖性奉为神明。人们知道他们无法购*幸福，但用闪亮、全新的产品重塑自己的机会似乎是不可抗拒的。当新颖性褪去，他们只是通过购*更多来重燃兴奋。查普曼提出的解决方案是所谓的“情感持久设计”。他认为设计师的挑战是创造我们想要保留的事物。这听起来像是一个艰巨的任务，但实际上可以相当直接。例如，一条旧牛仔裤，直到被穿了和洗了一百次，才有了正确的感觉。就好像它们在讲述穿着者的生命故事。外观可以模仿，但绝不是一样的。

英国萨里大学访问教授沃尔特·斯塔赫将此称为“泰迪熊效应”。不管最喜欢的泰迪熊多么破旧和磨损，我们都不会急忙再*一个新的。作为成年人，我们的泰迪熊将我们与童年联系起来，这保护了它免于过时。斯塔赫认为，这就是可持续设计需要更多产品做到的。信息时代本应使我们的经济变轻并减少对环境的影响，但事实似乎正相反。我们只是在工业时代添加了信息技术，并加快了发达国家的代谢。治愈的方法几乎不是火箭科学：减少浪费，停止如此频繁地移动物品，并更多地利用人。

后抛弃消费主义会是什么样子？它可能只是安装节能灯泡、更高效的洗衣机或选择包装较少的本地生产食品那么简单。一般来说，我们将减少对商品的购*并更多地租赁。为什么拥有那些偶尔使用且很可能不断更新的工具，尤其是那些工具？耐用消费品将越来越多地以处理和废弃计划的方式*。例如，*等电子产品将被设计为可回收的，回收成本将加在零售价格中。遵循查普曼的情感持久设计概念，将从大规模生产转向定制商品和产品，这些产品将由更熟练的手工艺人设计和*，人们将修理而不是更换产品，就像我们祖父母的时代一样。公司将通过服务和修理被选择以持久的产品来取代大规模*带来的利润，这些产品是人们希望持久的。

查普曼承认说服人们购*更少且打算保留的物品将是一项挑战。目前，零售商之间的价格竞争使消费者更便宜地更换而不是修理。设计为耐用且情感上令人满意的商品很可能更贵，那么我们如何说服选择可持续性呢？谢菲尔德哈勒姆大学的蒂姆·库珀指出，许多人已经愿意为质量支付溢价，并且他们也倾向于更加珍惜和关心昂贵的商品。查普曼也是乐观的：“人们愿意更长时间地保留物品。”他说，“问题在于许多行业不知道如何做到这一点。”查普曼相信可持续设计将一直存在。“大型公司决定是否跳上可持续性潮流车轮的时代即将结束。”他说。至于这也是否标志着消费社会末日的开始，还有待观察。

以上就是雅思无忧整理的雅思阅读解析C11T2P3: Neuroaesthetics（8月1日雅思阅读考试真题答案）相关内容，想要了解更多信息，敬请查阅雅思无忧。

雅思培训
免责声明：文章内容来自网络，如有侵权请及时联系删除。