People tend to be more impressed by evidence that seems to confirm some relationship. Thus many are convinced that their dreams are prophetic because a few have come true; they fail to notice the many that have not. Consider also the belief that "the phone always rings when I'm in the shower. " If it does ring while you are in the shower, the event will stand out and be remembered. If it doesn't ring, that nonevent probably won't even be remembered. People want to see order, pattern and meaning in the world. Consider, for example, the common belief that things like personal misfortunes, plane crashes, and deaths "happen in threes. " Such beliefs stem from the tendency of people to allow the third event to define the time period. I if three plane crashes occur in a month, then the period of time that counts as their "happening together" is one month; if three crashes occur in a year, the period of time is stretched. Flexible end strengthens such beliefs. We also tend to believe what we want to believe. A majority of people think they are more intelligent, more fair-minded and more skilled behind the wheel of an automobile than the average person. Part of the reason we view ourselves so favorably is that we use standards that work to our advantage. As economist Thomas Schelling explains, "Everybody ranks himself high in qualities. " He values: careful drives give weight to care, skilled drivers give weight to skill, and those who are polite give weight to courtesy. " This way everyone ranks high on his own scale. Perhaps the most important mental habit we can learn is to be cautions in drawing conclusions. The "evidence" of everyday life is sometimes misleading. By "things like... 'happen in threes'" in Para. 2, the author indicates that people believe . A) unfortunate events usually happen together. B) personal misfortunes tend to happen every now and then. C) misfortunes will occur three times in one's whole life. D) misfortunes will never occur more than three times to a person in his lifetime.
A
Food picked up just a few seconds after being dropped is less likely to contain bacteria than if it is left for longer periods of time, according to the findings of research carried out at Aston University's School of Life and Health Sciences. The findings suggest there may be some scientific basis to the "5 second rule" --- the belief about it being fine to eat food that has only had contact with the floor for five seconds or less. Although people have long followed the 5 second rule, until now it was unclear whether it actually helped. The study, undertaken by final year Biology students and led by Anthony Hilton, Professor of Microbiology at Aston University, monitored the transfer of the common bacteria from a variety of indoor flooring types (carpet, cement floor etc.) to toast, pasta, a biscuit and a sticky sweet when contact was made from 3 to 30 seconds. The results showed that: Time is a significant factor in the transfer of bacteria from a floor surface to a piece of food; and the type of flooring the food has been dropped on has an effect, with bacteria least likely to transfer from carpeted surfaces and most likely to transfer from cement flooring surfaces to moist foods making contact for more than 5 seconds. Professor Hilton said: "Consuming food dropped on the floor still carries an infection risk as it very much depends on which bacteria are present on the floor at the time." The Aston team also carried out a survey of the number of people who employ the 5 second rule. The survey showed that: 87% of people surveyed said they would eat food dropped on the floor, or already have done so. 55% of those who would eat or have eaten food dropped on the floor are women. 81% of the women who would eat food from the floor would follow the 5 second rule. Professor Hilton added, "Our study showed that a surprisingly large majority of people are happy to consume dropped food, with women the most likely to do so. But they are also more likely to follow the 5 second rule." The passage is developed probably by _ . A) time B) space C) contrast D) example
C
Q: Because I am extremely vulnerable to both slick advertising and peer pressure, I've been thinking about getting an iPad. But here's the problem: I'm cheap, and the iPad's not. If I'm going to fork over at least $499 for a new device, I want to try it out and make sure it's not just a larger, shinier version of my iPhone. But if I went to my local Apple Store, I'd get to spend only a few minutes testing out the machine. I wanted more time than that, so I rented one for $15 a day from a guy on SnapGoods. The Internet start-up in Brooklyn runs on simple reasoning: there are people who want to borrow stuff - camping equipment, food processors, robot vacuums, etc. - and there are people who have stuff they want to lend. SnapGoods helps these two groups connect over the Web. SnapGoods is one of many sites that have sprung up to facilitate offline sharing. Some sites have a narrow, obvious focus (like SwapBabyGoods.com) while others are more obscure (Neighborhood Fruit helps people share what's growing in their yards or find fruit trees on public land). But regardless of whether the sharing is free or involves a fee, these transactions often come with a stick-it-to-the-man attitude. "Borrow these things from your neighbors," reads one earnest request on neighborrow.com, "The owner-ship has SAILED!" All of these sites are encouraging something academics call collaborative consumption - in other words, peer-to-peer sharing or renting. Renting something you don't need to use very often makes a lot more sense than buying it and letting it collect dust in your garage. There's a green aspect as well, since sharing helps cut down on overall use of resources. But one of collaborative consumption's most surprising benefits turns out to be social. In an era when families are scattered around the country and we may not know the people down the street from us, sharing things - even with strangers we've just met online - allows us to make meaningful connections. "This isn't just about saving the environment or saving a dollar,"... What is Ron Williams' attitude towards collaborative consumption? A) Favorable B) Critical C) Indifferent D) Not known
A: A
The small number of newborn babies, which has been caused by high prices and the changing social situation of women, is one of the most serious problems in Asia. When people talk about it, you can hear a word invented in Japan. which means Double Income Kids . In many major Asian cities like Seoul, Singapore, and Tokyo, the cost of a ****** is extremely high. A young couple who want to buy their own house may have to pay about $3000,000 (though prices have fallen). For a flat with one bedrooms, one dining-room, a kitchen, and a bathroom, the couple will pay about $900 a month. What's more, if they want to have a child, the child's education is very expensive. For example, most kindergarten charges are at least $5.000 a year. In such a situation, it's difficult to afford children. The number of married women who want to continue working because they enjoy their jobs. However, if they want to have children, they immediately have serious problems. Though most companies allow women to leave their jobs for a short time to have a baby, they expect women with babies to give up their jobs. In short, if they want to bring up children properly, both parents have to work, but it is hard for mothers to work. Indeed, women who want to contimue working have to choose between having children or keeping their jobs. In a word, Asian governments must take steps to improve the present situation as soon as possible. According to the passage, which of the following is true? A) It is easy for a couple to afford a child in Asia. B) The prices of in Asia are quite low now. C) Fewer and fewer married women wan to have a job. D) The word "DINKS" appeared in an Asian country.
D