Passage 7
If you've ever started a sentence with,"If I were you...."or found yourself scratching your head at a colleague's agony over a decision when the answer is crystal-clear,there's a scientific reason behind it.Our own decision-making abilities can become depleted over the course of the day causing indecision or poor choices,but choosing on behalf of someone else is an enjoyable task that doesn't suffer the same pitfalls.
The problem is"decision fatigue,"a psychological phenomenon that takes a toll on the quality of your choices after a long day of decision making,says Evan Polman,a leading psychologist.
Physicians who have been on the job for several hours,for example,are more likely to prescribe antibiotics to patients when it's unwise to do so."Presumably it's because it's simple and easy to write a prescription and consider a patient case closed rather than investigate further,"Polman says.
But decision fatigue goes away when you are making the decision for someone else.When people imagine themselves as advisers and imagine their own choices as belonging to someone else,they feel less tired and rely less on decision shortcuts to make those choices."By taking upon the role of adviser rather than decision maker,one does not suffer the consequences of decision fatigue,"he says."It's as if there's something fun and liberating about making someone else's choice."
Getting input from others not only offers a fresh perspective and thought process;it often also includes riskier choices.While this sounds undesirable,it can be quite good,says Polman."When people experience decision fatigue-when they are tired of making choices-they have a tendency to choose to go with the status quo（现状）,"he says."But the status quo can be problematic,since a change in the course of action can sometimes be important and lead to a positive outcome."
In order to achieve a successful outcome or reward,some level of risk is almost always essential."People who are susceptible to decision fatigue will likely choose to do nothing over something,"he says,"That's not to say that risk is always good,but it is related to taking action9whereas decision fatigue assuredly leads to inaction and the possible chagrin（懊恼）of a decision maker who might otherwise prefera new course but is unfortunately hindered."
Just because you can make good choices for others doesn't mean you'll do the same for yourself,Polman cautions."Research has found that women negotiate higher salaries for others than they do for themselves,"he says,adding that people slip in and out of decision roles.
What does the example about the physicians illustrate （ ）
根据题干关键词example和physicians定位至第三段，Physicians who have been on the job for several hours,for example,are more likely to prescribe antibiotics to patients when it's unwise to do so.例如，那些连续工作了几个小时的医生更倾向于给病人开抗生素，尽管这样做很多时候并不明智。这里以医生作为例子，证明了决策疲劳可能会阻碍人们作出明智的决定。故本题正确答案选C。
Two years ago,Rupert Murdoch’s daughter,Elisabeth,spoke of the“unsettling dearth of integrity across so many of our institutions”.Integrity had collapsed,she argued,because of a collective acceptance that the only"sorting mechanism"in society should be profit and the market.But"it's us,human beings,we the people who create the society we want,not profit".
Driving her point home,she continued:“It’s increasingly apparent that the absence of purpose,of a moral language within government,media or business could become one of the most dangerous goals for capitalism and freedom.”This same absence of moral purpose was wounding companies such as News International,she thought,making it more likely that it would lose its way as it had with widespread illegal telephone hacking.
As the hacking trial concludes-finding guilty one ex-editor of the News of the World,Andy Coulson,for conspiring to hack phones,and finding his predecessor,Rebekah Brooks,innocent of the same charge-the wider issue of dearth of integrity still stands.Journalists are known to have hacked the phones of up to 5,500 people.This is hacking on an industrial scale,as was acknowledged by Glenn Mulcaire,the man hired by the News of the World in 2001 to be the point person for phone hacking.Others await trial.This saga still unfolds.
In many respects,the dearth of moral purpose frames not only the fact of such widespread phone hacking but the terms on which the trial took place.One of the astonishing revelations was how little Rebekah Brooks knew of what went on in her newsroom,how little she thought to ask and the fact that she never inquired how the stories arrived.The core of her successful defense was that she knew nothing.
In today’s world,it has become normal that well-paid executives should not be accountable for what happens in the organizations that they run.Perhaps we should not be so surprised.For a generation,the collective doctrine has been that the sorting mechanism of society should be profit.The words that have mattered are efficiency,flexibility,shareholder value,business-friendly,wealth generation,sales,impact and,in newspapers,circulation.Words degraded to the margin have been justice,fairness,tolerance,proportionality and accountability.
The purpose of editing the News of the World was not to promote reader understanding,to be fair in what was written or to betray any common humanity.It was to ruin lives in the quest for circulation and impact.Ms.Brooks may or may not have had suspicions about how her journalists got their stories,but she asked no questions,gave no instructions-nor received traceable,recorded answers.
Which of the following is suggested in the last paragraph?（ ）
Two years ago,Rupert Murdoch’s daughter,Elisabeth,spoke of the“unsettling dearth of integrity across so many of our institutions”.Integrity had collapsed,she argued,because of a collective acceptance that the only"sorting mechanism"in society should be profit and the market.But"it's us,human beings,we the people who create the society we want,not profit".
Driving her point home,she continued:“It’s increasingly apparent that the absence of purpose,of a moral language within government,media or business could become one of the most dangerous goals for capitalism and freedom.”This same absence of moral purpose was wounding companies such as News International,she thought,making it more likely that it would lose its way as it had with widespread illegal telephone hacking.
As the hacking trial concludes-finding guilty one ex-editor of the News of the World,Andy Coulson,for conspiring to hack phones,and finding his predecessor,Rebekah Brooks,innocent of the same charge-the wider issue of dearth of integrity still stands.Journalists are known to have hacked the phones of up to 5,500 people.This is hacking on an industrial scale,as was acknowledged by Glenn Mulcaire,the man hired by the News of the World in 2001 to be the point person for phone hacking.Others await trial.This saga still unfolds.
In many respects,the dearth of moral purpose frames not only the fact of such widespread phone hacking but the terms on which the trial took place.One of the astonishing revelations was how little Rebekah Brooks knew of what went on in her newsroom,how little she thought to ask and the fact that she never inquired how the stories arrived.The core of her successful defense was that she knew nothing.
In today’s world,it has become normal that well-paid executives should not be accountable for what happens in the organizations that they run.Perhaps we should not be so surprised.For a generation,the collective doctrine has been that the sorting mechanism of society should be profit.The words that have mattered are efficiency,flexibility,shareholder value,business-friendly,wealth generation,sales,impact and,in newspapers,circulation.Words degraded to the margin have been justice,fairness,tolerance,proportionality and accountability.
The purpose of editing the News of the World was not to promote reader understanding,to be fair in what was written or to betray any common humanity.It was to ruin lives in the quest for circulation and impact.Ms.Brooks may or may not have had suspicions about how her journalists got their stories,but she asked no questions,gave no instructions-nor received traceable,recorded answers.
The author holds that the current collective doctrine shows（ ）.
Two years ago,Rupert Murdoch’s daughter,Elisabeth,spoke of the“unsettling dearth of integrity across so many of our institutions”.Integrity had collapsed,she argued,because of a collective acceptance that the only"sorting mechanism"in society should be profit and the market.But"it's us,human beings,we the people who create the society we want,not profit".
Driving her point home,she continued:“It’s increasingly apparent that the absence of purpose,of a moral language within government,media or business could become one of the most dangerous goals for capitalism and freedom.”This same absence of moral purpose was wounding companies such as News International,she thought,making it more likely that it would lose its way as it had with widespread illegal telephone hacking.
As the hacking trial concludes-finding guilty one ex-editor of the News of the World,Andy Coulson,for conspiring to hack phones,and finding his predecessor,Rebekah Brooks,innocent of the same charge-the wider issue of dearth of integrity still stands.Journalists are known to have hacked the phones of up to 5,500 people.This is hacking on an industrial scale,as was acknowledged by Glenn Mulcaire,the man hired by the News of the World in 2001 to be the point person for phone hacking.Others await trial.This saga still unfolds.
In many respects,the dearth of moral purpose frames not only the fact of such widespread phone hacking but the terms on which the trial took place.One of the astonishing revelations was how little Rebekah Brooks knew of what went on in her newsroom,how little she thought to ask and the fact that she never inquired how the stories arrived.The core of her successful defense was that she knew nothing.
In today’s world,it has become normal that well-paid executives should not be accountable for what happens in the organizations that they run.Perhaps we should not be so surprised.For a generation,the collective doctrine has been that the sorting mechanism of society should be profit.The words that have mattered are efficiency,flexibility,shareholder value,business-friendly,wealth generation,sales,impact and,in newspapers,circulation.Words degraded to the margin have been justice,fairness,tolerance,proportionality and accountability.
The purpose of editing the News of the World was not to promote reader understanding,to be fair in what was written or to betray any common humanity.It was to ruin lives in the quest for circulation and impact.Ms.Brooks may or may not have had suspicions about how her journalists got their stories,but she asked no questions,gave no instructions-nor received traceable,recorded answers.
The author believes that Rebekah Brook’s defense（ ）.
Two years ago,Rupert Murdoch’s daughter,Elisabeth,spoke of the“unsettling dearth of integrity across so many of our institutions”.Integrity had collapsed,she argued,because of a collective acceptance that the only"sorting mechanism"in society should be profit and the market.But"it's us,human beings,we the people who create the society we want,not profit".
Driving her point home,she continued:“It’s increasingly apparent that the absence of purpose,of a moral language within government,media or business could become one of the most dangerous goals for capitalism and freedom.”This same absence of moral purpose was wounding companies such as News International,she thought,making it more likely that it would lose its way as it had with widespread illegal telephone hacking.
As the hacking trial concludes-finding guilty one ex-editor of the News of the World,Andy Coulson,for conspiring to hack phones,and finding his predecessor,Rebekah Brooks,innocent of the same charge-the wider issue of dearth of integrity still stands.Journalists are known to have hacked the phones of up to 5,500 people.This is hacking on an industrial scale,as was acknowledged by Glenn Mulcaire,the man hired by the News of the World in 2001 to be the point person for phone hacking.Others await trial.This saga still unfolds.
In many respects,the dearth of moral purpose frames not only the fact of such widespread phone hacking but the terms on which the trial took place.One of the astonishing revelations was how little Rebekah Brooks knew of what went on in her newsroom,how little she thought to ask and the fact that she never inquired how the stories arrived.The core of her successful defense was that she knew nothing.
In today’s world,it has become normal that well-paid executives should not be accountable for what happens in the organizations that they run.Perhaps we should not be so surprised.For a generation,the collective doctrine has been that the sorting mechanism of society should be profit.The words that have mattered are efficiency,flexibility,shareholder value,business-friendly,wealth generation,sales,impact and,in newspapers,circulation.Words degraded to the margin have been justice,fairness,tolerance,proportionality and accountability.
The purpose of editing the News of the World was not to promote reader understanding,to be fair in what was written or to betray any common humanity.It was to ruin lives in the quest for circulation and impact.Ms.Brooks may or may not have had suspicions about how her journalists got their stories,but she asked no questions,gave no instructions-nor received traceable,recorded answers.
It can be inferred from Paragraph 3 that（ ）.
Two years ago,Rupert Murdoch’s daughter,Elisabeth,spoke of the“unsettling dearth of integrity across so many of our institutions”.Integrity had collapsed,she argued,because of a collective acceptance that the only"sorting mechanism"in society should be profit and the market.But"it's us,human beings,we the people who create the society we want,not profit".
Driving her point home,she continued:“It’s increasingly apparent that the absence of purpose,of a moral language within government,media or business could become one of the most dangerous goals for capitalism and freedom.”This same absence of moral purpose was wounding companies such as News International,she thought,making it more likely that it would lose its way as it had with widespread illegal telephone hacking.
As the hacking trial concludes-finding guilty one ex-editor of the News of the World,Andy Coulson,for conspiring to hack phones,and finding his predecessor,Rebekah Brooks,innocent of the same charge-the wider issue of dearth of integrity still stands.Journalists are known to have hacked the phones of up to 5,500 people.This is hacking on an industrial scale,as was acknowledged by Glenn Mulcaire,the man hired by the News of the World in 2001 to be the point person for phone hacking.Others await trial.This saga still unfolds.
In many respects,the dearth of moral purpose frames not only the fact of such widespread phone hacking but the terms on which the trial took place.One of the astonishing revelations was how little Rebekah Brooks knew of what went on in her newsroom,how little she thought to ask and the fact that she never inquired how the stories arrived.The core of her successful defense was that she knew nothing.
In today’s world,it has become normal that well-paid executives should not be accountable for what happens in the organizations that they run.Perhaps we should not be so surprised.For a generation,the collective doctrine has been that the sorting mechanism of society should be profit.The words that have mattered are efficiency,flexibility,shareholder value,business-friendly,wealth generation,sales,impact and,in newspapers,circulation.Words degraded to the margin have been justice,fairness,tolerance,proportionality and accountability.
The purpose of editing the News of the World was not to promote reader understanding,to be fair in what was written or to betray any common humanity.It was to ruin lives in the quest for circulation and impact.Ms.Brooks may or may not have had suspicions about how her journalists got their stories,but she asked no questions,gave no instructions-nor received traceable,recorded answers.
According to the first two paragraphs,Elisabeth was upset by（ ）.
Let's face it.Gardening fanatics like nothing better than to have their hands stuck in the soil or to be trimming,pruning,or harvesting the fruits of their labors.But for once,here is an obsession which benefits the whole community by beautifying the environment and producing cooler,more fragrant,and cleaner air.To recognize that fact,the Tampa City Council has decided to award generous prizes to the most beautiful displays this spring.
RULES OF ENTRY
1.Sorry,but only residents of the City of Tampa are eligible.
2.Judges will be selected by the Tampa City Council on April 25,and no personal information about any judges will be provided by the council.Judges may not be contacted by any entrant.
3.The appointed judges have total discretion,and no correspondence will be entered into regarding judges'decisions.
4.As the main point of this contest is the beautification of Tampa,we require that all gardens entered in the competition be easily visible from the street.
5.Contestants are invited to enter one or more categories.First,second,and third place prizes will be awarded in each category:（See the application form for categories）.Judges may,where they see fit,change entries from one category to another.
6.Contestants should permit a council photographer to enter and take photographs for display at the final awards ceremony and exhibition on August 3.These photographs will remain council property.
7.Judges will assess each garden according to the following criteria:
（i）Overall design
（ii）Plant health
（iii）Color
（iv）Contribution to the streetscape
（v）Eco-friendliness
（See the application form for details.）
8.No entries will be accepted after 5:00 p.m.on Friday,May 12.
9.All gardens entered should be ready for judging by June l.Contestants will be given 24-hours'notice of the judges'intention to visit.
10.This competition is not open to council employees or their relatives,or employees of any agency contracted by the council,or judges or their relatives.
11.Please send your entries to:Tampa Garden Competition
Tampa City Council
1 Constitution Place
Tampa
The Tampa 2006 Beautiful Gardens Competition
When will the judging begin?
Let's face it.Gardening fanatics like nothing better than to have their hands stuck in the soil or to be trimming,pruning,or harvesting the fruits of their labors.But for once,here is an obsession which benefits the whole community by beautifying the environment and producing cooler,more fragrant,and cleaner air.To recognize that fact,the Tampa City Council has decided to award generous prizes to the most beautiful displays this spring.
RULES OF ENTRY
1.Sorry,but only residents of the City of Tampa are eligible.
2.Judges will be selected by the Tampa City Council on April 25,and no personal information about any judges will be provided by the council.Judges may not be contacted by any entrant.
3.The appointed judges have total discretion,and no correspondence will be entered into regarding judges'decisions.
4.As the main point of this contest is the beautification of Tampa,we require that all gardens entered in the competition be easily visible from the street.
5.Contestants are invited to enter one or more categories.First,second,and third place prizes will be awarded in each category:（See the application form for categories）.Judges may,where they see fit,change entries from one category to another.
6.Contestants should permit a council photographer to enter and take photographs for display at the final awards ceremony and exhibition on August 3.These photographs will remain council property.
7.Judges will assess each garden according to the following criteria:
（i）Overall design
（ii）Plant health
（iii）Color
（iv）Contribution to the streetscape
（v）Eco-friendliness
（See the application form for details.）
8.No entries will be accepted after 5:00 p.m.on Friday,May 12.
9.All gardens entered should be ready for judging by June l.Contestants will be given 24-hours'notice of the judges'intention to visit.
10.This competition is not open to council employees or their relatives,or employees of any agency contracted by the council,or judges or their relatives.
11.Please send your entries to:Tampa Garden Competition
Tampa City Council
1 Constitution Place
Tampa
The Tampa 2006 Beautiful Gardens Competition
Which of the following will NOT be evaluated by the judges?
Let's face it.Gardening fanatics like nothing better than to have their hands stuck in the soil or to be trimming,pruning,or harvesting the fruits of their labors.But for once,here is an obsession which benefits the whole community by beautifying the environment and producing cooler,more fragrant,and cleaner air.To recognize that fact,the Tampa City Council has decided to award generous prizes to the most beautiful displays this spring.
RULES OF ENTRY
1.Sorry,but only residents of the City of Tampa are eligible.
2.Judges will be selected by the Tampa City Council on April 25,and no personal information about any judges will be provided by the council.Judges may not be contacted by any entrant.
3.The appointed judges have total discretion,and no correspondence will be entered into regarding judges'decisions.
4.As the main point of this contest is the beautification of Tampa,we require that all gardens entered in the competition be easily visible from the street.
5.Contestants are invited to enter one or more categories.First,second,and third place prizes will be awarded in each category:（See the application form for categories）.Judges may,where they see fit,change entries from one category to another.
6.Contestants should permit a council photographer to enter and take photographs for display at the final awards ceremony and exhibition on August 3.These photographs will remain council property.
7.Judges will assess each garden according to the following criteria:
（i）Overall design
（ii）Plant health
（iii）Color
（iv）Contribution to the streetscape
（v）Eco-friendliness
（See the application form for details.）
8.No entries will be accepted after 5:00 p.m.on Friday,May 12.
9.All gardens entered should be ready for judging by June l.Contestants will be given 24-hours'notice of the judges'intention to visit.
10.This competition is not open to council employees or their relatives,or employees of any agency contracted by the council,or judges or their relatives.
11.Please send your entries to:Tampa Garden Competition
Tampa City Council
1 Constitution Place
Tampa
The Tampa 2006 Beautiful Gardens Competition
What condition is placed on those who wish to enter the contest?
Let's face it.Gardening fanatics like nothing better than to have their hands stuck in the soil or to be trimming,pruning,or harvesting the fruits of their labors.But for once,here is an obsession which benefits the whole community by beautifying the environment and producing cooler,more fragrant,and cleaner air.To recognize that fact,the Tampa City Council has decided to award generous prizes to the most beautiful displays this spring.
RULES OF ENTRY
1.Sorry,but only residents of the City of Tampa are eligible.
2.Judges will be selected by the Tampa City Council on April 25,and no personal information about any judges will be provided by the council.Judges may not be contacted by any entrant.
3.The appointed judges have total discretion,and no correspondence will be entered into regarding judges'decisions.
4.As the main point of this contest is the beautification of Tampa,we require that all gardens entered in the competition be easily visible from the street.
5.Contestants are invited to enter one or more categories.First,second,and third place prizes will be awarded in each category:（See the application form for categories）.Judges may,where they see fit,change entries from one category to another.
6.Contestants should permit a council photographer to enter and take photographs for display at the final awards ceremony and exhibition on August 3.These photographs will remain council property.
7.Judges will assess each garden according to the following criteria:
（i）Overall design
（ii）Plant health
（iii）Color
（iv）Contribution to the streetscape
（v）Eco-friendliness
（See the application form for details.）
8.No entries will be accepted after 5:00 p.m.on Friday,May 12.
9.All gardens entered should be ready for judging by June l.Contestants will be given 24-hours'notice of the judges'intention to visit.
10.This competition is not open to council employees or their relatives,or employees of any agency contracted by the council,or judges or their relatives.
11.Please send your entries to:Tampa Garden Competition
Tampa City Council
1 Constitution Place
Tampa
The Tampa 2006 Beautiful Gardens Competition
What is the main purpose of this competition?
Let's face it.Gardening fanatics like nothing better than to have their hands stuck in the soil or to be trimming,pruning,or harvesting the fruits of their labors.But for once,here is an obsession which benefits the whole community by beautifying the environment and producing cooler,more fragrant,and cleaner air.To recognize that fact,the Tampa City Council has decided to award generous prizes to the most beautiful displays this spring.
RULES OF ENTRY
1.Sorry,but only residents of the City of Tampa are eligible.
2.Judges will be selected by the Tampa City Council on April 25,and no personal information about any judges will be provided by the council.Judges may not be contacted by any entrant.
3.The appointed judges have total discretion,and no correspondence will be entered into regarding judges'decisions.
4.As the main point of this contest is the beautification of Tampa,we require that all gardens entered in the competition be easily visible from the street.
5.Contestants are invited to enter one or more categories.First,second,and third place prizes will be awarded in each category:（See the application form for categories）.Judges may,where they see fit,change entries from one category to another.
6.Contestants should permit a council photographer to enter and take photographs for display at the final awards ceremony and exhibition on August 3.These photographs will remain council property.
7.Judges will assess each garden according to the following criteria:
（i）Overall design
（ii）Plant health
（iii）Color
（iv）Contribution to the streetscape
（v）Eco-friendliness
（See the application form for details.）
8.No entries will be accepted after 5:00 p.m.on Friday,May 12.
9.All gardens entered should be ready for judging by June l.Contestants will be given 24-hours'notice of the judges'intention to visit.
10.This competition is not open to council employees or their relatives,or employees of any agency contracted by the council,or judges or their relatives.
11.Please send your entries to:Tampa Garden Competition
Tampa City Council
1 Constitution Place
Tampa
The Tampa 2006 Beautiful Gardens Competition
Who is the intended audience of this contest?
