刷题刷出新高度,偷偷领先!偷偷领先!偷偷领先! 关注我们,悄悄成为最优秀的自己!

单选题

From James Moriarty to Ernst Stavro Blofeld, the idea of the evil genius has been a staple of storytelling. But is it true? Or, to put the matter less starkly, is there a connection between creativity and dishonesty in real people who are not bent on world domination, as well as in fictional supervillains? Writing in Psychological Science. Francesca Gino of Harvard University and Scott Wiltermuth of the University of Southern California suggest that there is—and that cheating actually increases creativity.

Dr Gino and Dr Wiltermuth tested the honesty of 153 volunteers with a task that involved adding up numbers for a cash reward, which was presented in a way that seemed to them to allow them to cheat undetected (though the researchers knew when they did). This was sandwiched between two tests for creativity, one of which was to work out how to fix a candle to a cardboard wall with a box of drawing pins, and the other a word-association test. This combination showed not only that creative people cheat more, but also that cheating seems to encourage creativity—for those who cheated in the adding-up test were even better at word association than their candle-test results predicted.

That result was confirmed by a second set of experiments, in which some people were given many opportunities to cheat and others few. The crucial predictor of creativity, the researchers confirmed, was the actual amount of cheating, not any propensity to cheat.

A third experiment tested the idea that this is because both creativity and dishonesty require, as it were, a flexible attitude to rules. In this experiment volunteers were asked about their attitude to bossy signs, such as “no cycling” and “no diving” notices, after being allowed to cheat (again, in a way transparent to the experimenters) on a coin-tossing test. Cheats, it turned out, were less constrained to obey such signs.

It is, it goes without saying, a long way from such acts of petty defiance to building a lair inside an extinct volcano and threatening Washington from it—or even to non-fictional acts of serious crime. But some sort of link exists, so this research does indeed suggest that Arthur Conan Doyle and Ian Fleming were on to something.

Which of the following describes the sequence of Dr Gino and Dr Wiltermuth's research?

A

candle test, adding-up test, word assoviation test.

B

candle test,word association test, adding-up test.

C

adding-up test, candle test, word association test.

D

adding-up test, word association test, candle test.

使用微信搜索喵呜刷题,轻松应对考试!

答案:

A

解析:

【喵呜刷题小喵解析】根据原文描述,Dr Gino和Dr Wiltermuth的研究顺序是:先测试志愿者的诚实度,这个测试涉及到让他们把数字加起来以获得现金奖励,看似可以不被发现地作弊(尽管研究人员知道他们是否作弊)。这个测试被夹杂在两个创造力测试之间,一个是用一盒大头针把蜡烛粘在纸板上,另一个是词汇联想测试。这一系列的测试不仅表明有创造力的人更经常作弊,而且还表明作弊似乎鼓励创造力——那些在加法测试中作弊的人,在词汇联想测试中的表现甚至超过了蜡烛测试所预测的结果。因此,正确的顺序应该是“蜡烛测试,加法测试,词汇联想测试”,即选项A。
创作类型:
原创

本文链接:Which of the following describes the sequence of D

版权声明:本站点所有文章除特别声明外,均采用 CC BY-NC-SA 4.0 许可协议。转载请注明文章出处。

让学习像火箭一样快速,微信扫码,获取考试解析、体验刷题服务,开启你的学习加速器!

分享考题
share