Article: How can you tell if someone's lying? The answer is, they're probably not. Traditional economics says that people are rational beings who will lie if it's to their advantage. A recent university study has shown that, actually, we're pretty honest --especially when we're at home. Researchers in Germany phoned people at home and asked them to toss a coin. There was a strong financial incentive to fake the result: if the coin landed tails-up, the participants would receive money or a gift ticket, while if the coin landed heads-up, they would get nothing. Because they were on the phone, they knew there was no risk of getting caught if they lied. And yet people told the truth.Over hundreds of tosses, a coin will land tails-up roughly 50% of the time. In this study 0ver half the people asked (55.6%) said that the coin landed heads-up, which meant they would receive nothing. Previous studies had found that people were more dishonest. In those laboratory studies, 75% of people reported a winning coin and claimed a reward. So the research team thinks it's being in our own homes which makes us play fair, although it's not yet clear why. In fact both types of study show people are surprisingly reliable. Even in the laboratory, 25% of people turned down a reward by telling the truth. The researchers say this is because honesty is highly valued in human society.We care about our reputation and our sense of ourselves as respectable people. So lying has a psychological cost and it seems this cost is more important than the financialbenefits of lying . Question: When do people lie according to troditional economics? Yes or no, is the answer "When it's to their advantage ."?
Yes

Article: Concepts from science and nature are filled with our language's common phrases , idioms and spoken expressions. The unbelieving expression "Well, I'll be a monkey's uncle" has its origin in bitter disbelief over Darwin's writings on evolution. These colourful expressions bring spice to our language. Yet certain well-used phrases from science are just plain wrong! Some are obvious, yet we use them anyhow. For example, a person who acutely shakes her head and says " A watched pot never boils" while you are waiting second after tiring second for test results to arrive or job offers to come in knows that if she sat down and watched a pot containing water on a stove over high heat for long enough, the water will eventually boil. However, a few phrases have less obvious scientific inaccuracies. Here are a few for you to consider. Once in a blue moon: This poetic phrase refers to something that occurs extremely rarely. A blue moon is the term commonly used for a second full moon that occasionally appears in a single month of our solar-based calendars. The problem with the phrase, however, is that blue moons are not so rare. They happen every few years at least, and can even happen within months of each other when the 29.5-day lunar cycle puts the full moon at the beginning of any month but February. The usage of "blue moon" as the second full moon in a month dates back to a 1937 Marine Farmer's Almanac . But before that, blue moons meant something slightly different. Typically, 12 full moons occur from winter solstice to the next winter solstice, but occasionally a fourth full moon in a season could be observed . In such a case, one of the four full moons in that season was known as "blue" Where there's smoke, there's fire: The phrase means that if something looks wrong, it likely is wrong. But let's step back. Do you always have to have fire if you see smoke? Answering that first requires defining 'fire" , Merriam--Webster's first definition of fire is " the phenomenon of combustion manifested in light, flame and... Question: According to the passage, the blue moon _ . Yes or no, is the answer "presents itself quite frequently sometimes"?
No

Q: Article: Maricel Apatan, 22, stands in the kitchen of the Edsa Shangi-La Hotel in Manila, preparing to decorate a cheesecake. It would seem to be a routine task for a cake chef, but Maricel is no ordinary chef -- she has no hands. Maricel has come a long way since the day in September 2000 when she and her uncle were attacked near their farm. Fortunately, both of them survived, but the 11-year-old girl lost her hands. In 2004, she entered a Manila training centre for people with disabilities. She learned how to write and do housework and, more importantly, came to terms with her disability. After graduation from high school, she took a two-year Hotel and Restaurant course and _ even though she was the only disabled student in the course. After she moved back to Manila to continue her studies, the media started reporting on this determined young woman. She didn't shy away from the attention. "I wanted others living with disabilities to believe it's possible to live a normal life," Maricel says. After managers at the Edsa Shangri-La Hotel saw Maricel on television, they hired her as part of the hotel's Care for People project. She has also accomplished her goal of inspiring others. One of them is Ronelyn Calumpiano, a 21-year-old with cerebral palsy . She saw Maricel on television and was moved by her confidence. Ronelyn will soon start classes and is already planning a career in IT. Maricel's three younger sisters have moved to Manila. She pays for the rent of their small apartment, while their parents look after their family farm in Mindanao. "It is difficult to make ends meet but I don't lose hope. I believe anything is possible if you dream, work hard and pray." Question: Which of the following is NOT true about Maricel? Yes or no, is the answer "She survived while her uncle did not."?
A: No

*Question*
Article: Before my first summer vacation at college, my roommate Ted asked to me to work with him on his father's farm in Argentina. The idea of spending two months in Argentine was exciting. Then I began having second thoughts. I had never been far from New England, and I had been homesick my first few weeks at college. What would it be like in a strange country? What about the language? The more I thought about it, the more the idea worried me. In the end I turned down the invitation. As soon as Ted asked somebody else to go, I began kicking myself. I had turned down something I wanted to do because I was scared, and had ended up feeling depressed. That unhappy summer taught me a valuable lesson out of which I developed a rule for myself: do what makes you anxious; don't do what makes you depressed. At the end of my senior year, I began to think about becoming a writer. But my professor was urging me to aim at teaching. I hesitated. The idea of trying to live by writing was a lot scarier than spending a summer in Argentina. Back and forth I went, making my decision, unmaking it. Suddenly I realized that every time I gave up the idea of writing, that downhearted feeling went through me. Giving up on what I really wanted to do depressed me. Right then I learned another lesson. To avoid that kind of depression meant having to bear a certain amount of worry and concern. When I first began writing articles, I was frequently required to interview big names. Before each interview I would get butterflies in the stomach and my hands would shake. One person I particularly admired was the great composer Duke Ellington. On the stage and on television, he seemed the very model of confidence. Then I learned Ellington still got stage fright. If the highly honored Ellington, who had appeared on the bandstand some 10,000 times over 30years, had anxiety attacks, who was I to think I could avoid them? I went on doing those frightening interviews. Then I realized to my astonishment that I was even looking forward to the interviews.... Question: We can infer from the passage that the author _ . Yes or no, is the answer "was inspired by Duke Ellington's stage fright"?
**Answer**
Yes