Scientists have found that although we are prone to snap overreactions, if we take a moment and think about how we are likely to react, we can reduce or even eliminate the negative effects of our quick, hard-wired responses.

　　Snap decisions can be important defense mechanisms; if we are judging whether someone is dangerous, our brains and bodies are hard-wired to react very quickly, within milliseconds. But we need more time to assess other factors. To accurately tell whether someone is sociable, studies show, we need at least a minute, preferably five. It takes a while to judge complex aspects of personality, like neuroticism or open-mindedness.

　　But snap decisions in reaction to rapid stimuli aren’t exclusive to the interpersonal realm. Psychologists at the University of Toronto found that viewing a fast-food logo for just a few milliseconds primes us to read 20 percent faster, even though reading has little to do with eating. We unconsciously associate fast food with speed and impatience and carry those impulses into whatever else we’re doing, Subjects exposed to fast-food flashes also tend to think a musical piece lasts too long.

　　Yet we can reverse such influences. If we know we will overreact to consumer products or housing options when we see a happy face (one reason good sales representatives and real estate agents are always smiling), we can take a moment before buying. If we know female job screeners are more likely to reject attractive female applicants, we can help screeners understand their biases-or hire outside screeners.

　　John Gottman, the marriage expert, explains that we quickly “thin slice” information reliably only after we ground such snap reactions in “thick sliced” long-term study. When Dr. Gottman really wants to assess whether a couple will stay together, he invites them to his island retreat for a muck longer evaluation; two days, not two seconds.

　　Our ability to mute our hard-wired reactions by pausing is what differentiates us from animals: doge can think about the future only intermittently or for a few minutes. But historically we have spent about 12 percent of our days contemplating the longer term. Although technology might change the way we react, it hasn’t changed our nature. We still have the imaginative capacity to rise above temptation and reverse the high-speed trend.

　　31. The time needed in making decisions may____.

　　[A] vary according to the urgency of the situation

　　[B] prove the complexity of our brain reaction

　　[C] depend on the importance of the assessment

　　[D] predetermine the accuracy of our judgment

　　32. Our reaction to a fast-food logo shows that snao decisions____.

　　[A] can be associative

　　[B] are not unconscious

　　[C] can be dangerous

　　[D] are not impulsive

　　33. Toreverse the negative influences of snap decisions,we should____.

　　[A] trust our first impression

　　[B] do as people usually do

　　[C] think before we act

　　[D] ask for expert advice

　　34. John Gottman says that reliable snap reaction are based on____.

　　[A] critical assessment

　　[B]‘‘thin sliced ’’study

　　[C] sensible explanation

　　[D] adequate information

　　35. The author’s attitude toward reversing the high-speed trend is____.

　　[A] tolerant

　　[B] uncertain

　　[C] optimistic

　　[D] doubtful

　　31.【答案】 [D] predetermine the accuracy of our judgment

　　【解析】細節(jié)題。題干問的是“作決定過程中所需的時間或許可以_____”。文章第一段提到“如果我們在做出反應之前花點兒時間來思考，那么將會減少甚至消除我們快速反應所帶來的負面影響”，也就是說我們做決定所花的時間決定了我們判斷的準確性。此外，此選項中的“accuracy” 為“accurately ”的同詞異形，故此項為正確答案。選項A表達“依形勢緊急性而定”錯在無中生有﹔選項B“証明大腦反映的復雜性”，也是無中生有﹔選項C “取決于評估的重要性”，也與原文不符合，故排除。

　　32.【答案】[A] can be associative

　　【解析】細節(jié)題。題干問的是“我們對于快餐商標的反應速度表明決定是_____樣的”,由題干的關(guān)鍵詞“fast-food logo”我們可以定位到第三段。第三段開頭說，讓人做出倉促決定的刺激因素不僅限于人際關(guān)系范圍內(nèi)。緊接著一句說人們對快餐商標的反應速度比一般閱讀速度快。下一句闡述了原因：因為人們無意識地(unconsciously)將“快餐”與“速度”和“心急”聯(lián)系在一起，并將這些沖動付諸行動。A說決定是有聯(lián)系性的正確，因為人們將“快餐”與“速度”，“心急”聯(lián)系在了一起。B說決定是無意識的，與原文意思相反;C說決定是危險的，原文未提及;D說決定是不沖動的，與原文意思相悖排除。

　　33.【答案】[C] think before we act

　　【解析】細節(jié)題。先看題干說“為了逆轉(zhuǎn)倉促決定所帶來的影響，我們應該_____”。 根據(jù)題干定位到第四段。第四段通過兩個例子說明我們應該怎樣克服負面影響，第一個例子表示“如果我們會對消費產(chǎn)品或者房產(chǎn)選擇做出“過度反應”，我們可以在購買之前先思考一會兒”，由此可說明我們應該在行動之前先思考來消除負面影響，因此選擇答案C。其他選項均不符合題意。

　　34.【答案】[D] adequate information

　　【解析】細節(jié)題。題干問的是“John Gottman認為可靠的快速反映是基于_____的�！庇深}干John Gottman 定位到全文倒數(shù)第二段。其中第一句：John Gottman, ...explains that we quickly “thin slice”information reliably only after we ground such snap reactions in ”thick sliced”long-term study. 婚姻專家約翰.古德曼解釋說，我們快速反應的信息的可靠性是建立在這樣的快速反應的行為是以長期的研究為基礎而做出的快速反應行為。其中g(shù)round是題干中base on 的同意置換，long-term study長期的研究與D選項adequate information相互呼應。由此可判斷出[D] adequate information(足夠的信息)是本題正解。35.【答案】[C] optimistic

　　35. 【解析】態(tài)度題。根據(jù)35題題干reversing the high-speed trend是全文的最后一句，所以解此題可先定位到全文的最后一段。最后一段最后兩句：Although technology might change the way we react, it hasn’t changed our nature. We still have the imaginative capacity to rise above temptation and reverse the high-speed trend.譯為 “盡管技術(shù)可能改變我們反應的方式，但是它并沒有改變我們的本性。我們?nèi)匀挥心芰θタ朔�誘惑并扭轉(zhuǎn)這種高速度的趨勢�！� 由此我們可以看出作者的態(tài)度是非常確定的，因此[C] optimistic(樂觀的)是正解。