In this task, you're given an article and an answer. Your task is to generate the fill-in-the-blank question for this answer based on the given article. The blanks are always at the end of the question, and can be filled with more than one word or phrase.

Q: Article: A four-year-old girl sees three biscuits divided between a stuffed crocodile and a teddy bear.The crocodile gets two; the bear one."Is that fair?" asks the experimenter.The girl judges that it is not."How about now?" asks the experimenter, breaking the bear's single biscuit in half.The girl cheers up: "Oh yes, now it's fair.They both have two." Strangely, children feel very strongly about fairness, even when they hardly understand it. Adults care about fairness too --- but how much? One way to find out is by using the ultimatum game, created by economist Werner Guth.Jack is given a pile of money and proposes how it should be divided with Jill.Jill can accept Jack's "ultimatum", otherwise the deal is off, and neither gets anything. Suppose Jack and Jill don't care about fairness, just about accumulating cash.Then Jack can offer Jill as little as he likes and Jill will still accept.After all, a little money is more than no money.But imagine, instead, that Jack and Jill both care only about fairness and that the fairest outcome is equality.Then Jack would offer Jill half the money; and Jill wouldn't accept otherwise. What happens when we ask people to play this game for real? It turns out that people value fairness a lot.Anyone offered less than 20-30% of the money is likely to reject it.Receiving an unfair offers makes us feel sick.Happily, most offers are pretty equitable; indeed, by far the most common is a 50-50 split. But children, and adults, also care about a very different sort of (un)fairness, namely cheating.Think how many games of snakes and ladders have ended in arguments when one child "accidentally" miscounts her moves and another child objects.But this sense of fairness isn't about equality of outcome: games inevitably have winners and losers.Here, fairness is about playing by the rules. Both fairness-as-equality and fairness-as-no-cheating matter.Which is more important: equality or no-cheating? I think the answer is neither.The national lottery , like other lotteries, certainly doesn't make the world more equal: a few people get rich and most people get nothing.Nevertheless, we hope, it is fair --- but what does this mean? The fairness-as-no-cheating viewpoint has a ready answer: a lottery is fair if it is conducted according to the "rules".But which rules? None of us has the slightest idea, I suspect.Suppose that buried in the small print at lottery HQ is a rule that forbids people with a particular surname (let's say, Moriarty).So a Ms Moriarty could buy a ticket each week for years without any chance of success. How would she react if she found out? Surely with anger: how dare the organisers let her play, week after week, without mentioning that she couldn't possibly win! She'd reasonably feel unfairly treated because _ . To protest against unfairness, then, is to make an accusation of bad faith.From this viewpoint, an equal split between the crocodile and the bear seems fair because (normally, at least), it is the only split they would both agree to.But were the girl to learn that the crocodile doesn't like biscuits or that the bear isn't hungry, I suspect she'd think it perfectly fair for one toy to take the whole.Inequality of biscuits (or anything else) isn't necessarily unfair, if both parties are happy.And the unfairness of cheating comes from the same source: we'd never accept that someone else can unilaterally violate agreements that we have all signed up to. So perhaps the four-year-old's intuitions about fairness is the beginnings of an understanding of negotiation.With a sense of fairness, people will have to make us acceptable offers (or we'll reject their ultimatums) and stick by the (reasonable) rules, or we'll be on the warpath.So a sense of fairness is crucial to effective negotiation; and negotiation, over toys, treats etc, is part of life.
Answer: Jill has no choice but to accept any amount of money

A: It can be inferred that in the ultimatum game, _ .
****
Q: Article: What is politeness? This sounds like a simple question. In daily life, we often make judgments about what is polite and what is not polite. For example, to offer your seat to the elderly on a bus is considered polite behavior, and to interrupt when someone is talking is considered impolite; to greet someone the first time you meet him in the morning is polite and to stand up to reach for the dish you want at a dinner table is impolite. So politeness can first of all be regarded as a phenomenon, an observable social phenomenon. What I would like to propose is that as an observable social phenomenon, politeness is something superficial, but to account for what is understood at the surface, we should dig into the depth where different cultural values are rooted. When being complimented , an English-speaking person would readily accept the compliment by saying something like "Thank you" to show his appreciation of the praise, but a Chinese speaker would try to deny the truth of the compliment. They both think they are behaving properly. Yet neither of them would think the other is being polite. The English speaker is being polite to the extent that by accepting and showing appreciation of the compliment, and he avoids hurting the positive face of the person who makes it; the Chinese speaker is showing modesty by _ himself, ignoring the fact of the compliment paid to him. As has been mentioned, self-denigration has been at the core of the Chinese understanding of politeness for over two thousand years. The Chinese, in order to show modesty, will go to such lengths as to underrate what he himself has achieved and deny the truth of a complimentary remark.
Answer: the root of different thoughts

A: In the author's opinion, the nature of politeness lies in _ .
****
Q: Article: Do you suffer from cybersickness? The rise of mobile phones has been blamed for a number of social ills, but your smart phone may also be making you physically sick as well. Scientists have identified a condition called "cybersickness", which they say is the digital version of motion sickness. The phenomenon, which affects up to 80 percent of the population who own smart phones or tablets, leads to feelings of sickness and unsteadiness. It is caused by seeing fast motion on a screen, which covers anything from a car chase in a film to scrolling through web pages on your phone. The more realistic the visual content appears to you, the higher your chances of getting cybersickness are . The condition was identified in a piece in the New York Times in which British and US experts said that it needed solving. Motion sickness leaves sufferers feeling ill because they feel movement in your muscles and your inner ear but do not see it. The mismatch in digital sickness is the opposite--you see movement on the screen but do not feel it. The effect is the same and the symptoms include a headache, wanting to throw up, confusion and the need to sit down. Often cybersickness shows itself in a subtle way and sufferers put it down to stress or eyestrain. Steven Rauch, a professor of otolaryngology at Harvard Medical School, said: "Your sense of balance is different from other senses in that it has lots of inputs. When those inputs don't agree, that's when you feel dizziness and sickness. " Some studies that have been carried out into cybersickness found that women are more _ than men, the New York Times reported. Those who have Type A' personalities--meaning they are confident and determined--are more likely to suffer from cybersickness as well. Among those who have reported experiencing the condition have been video gamers who spend hours playing fast paced games. Engineers at Oculus VR, the virtual headset manufacturer, have admitted that digital motion sickness is one of their biggest problems.
Answer: is caused by seeing fast moving objects around

A:
From the text, we know that cybersickness _ .
****