【Native Speaker每日综合训练—28系列】【28-15】科技

捉妖

Official Weibo:http://weibo.com/u/3476904471

大家好，今天的speed提醒我们恋爱要注意身体的反应~
这让捉妖想起一个同学把相亲的哥哥拒了，理由是“下不了口”.
PS：这周又到了期末狂补作业周，有多少坑，可以重埋，有多少人，值得等待~~~~

Part I：Speaker

We Are More Likely To Lie In the Afternoon
If you want to catch someone in a lie, you'll raise your odds in the afternoons, as most people are more likely to cheat or lie then as opposed to the morning. Christie Nicholson reports
[Rephrase 1]

[Dialog, 1:27]


Transcript hided

As the day wears on, we tend to get weary. Now a study finds that as a result we may be more likely to cheat or lie in the afternoon than in the morning. But only if we’re usually ethical to begin with.

Scientists showed volunteers patterns of dots on a computer and asked them to tell which side of the screen contained more dots, the right or left. Here's the kicker: the researchers gave the subjects a higher reward if they selected the right side, even if it was incorrect. And with this incentive, subjects were more likely to cheat in the afternoon than in the morning.

In another experiment the scientists showed the subjects fragments of words, and asked them to complete the word. For example, they might see the last three letters, R, A, L, of a five-letter word. And surprisingly in the morning the participants tended come up with the word "moral" whereas in the afternoon the word of choice was “coral.”

The researchers also found that people who tend to cheat regularly were just as likely to do so in the morning as in the afternoon. It was the more ethical folks who suffered lapses as the day wore on. So the early bird gets the worm…and the truth.

—Christie Nicholson

Source: Scientific American
http://www.scientificamerican.com/podcast/episode.cfm?id=we-are-more-likely-to-lie-in-the-af-13-11-30

捉妖

Part II：Speed

Newlyweds' gut feelings predict marital happiness
Four-year study shows that split-second reactions foretell future satisfaction.
by Regina Nuzzo 28 November 2013

[Time 2]
The gut may know better than the head whether a marriage will be smooth sailing or will hit the rocks after the honeymoon fades, according to research published today in Science.

Researchers have long known that new love can be blind, and that those in the midst of it can harbour positive illusions about their sweetheart and their future. Studies show that new couples rate their partner particularly generously, forgetting his or her bad qualities, and generally view their relationship as more likely to succeed than average2. But newlyweds are also under a lot of conscious pressure to be happy — or, at least, to think they are.

Now a four-year study of 135 young couples has found that split-second, 'visceral' reactions about their partner are important, too. The results show that these automatic attitudes, which aren’t nearly as rosy as the more deliberate ones, can predict eventual changes in people’s marital happiness, perhaps even more so than the details that people consciously admit.

The researchers, led by psychologist James McNulty of Florida State University in Tallahassee, tapped into these implicit attitudes by seeing how fast newlyweds could correctly classify positively and negatively themed words after being primed by a photo of their spouse for a fraction of a second. If seeing a blink-of-the-eye flash of a partner’s face conjures up immediate, positive gut-level associations, for example, the participant will be quicker to report that 'awesome' is a positive word and slower to report that 'awful' is a negative one. Researchers used the difference between these two reaction times as a measurement of a participant’s automatic reaction.
[266 words]

[Time 3]

Satisfaction slide

After measuring these initial gut reactions, the team checked in with the couples every six months for four years and found, perhaps predictably, that marital satisfaction tended to slide for everyone as the 'honeymoon' phase wore off. But participants who had more negative gut-level attitudes about their partner soon after the wedding saw their happiness drop faster than those who had more positive automatic reactions, and the more positive group experienced less of an eventual drop-off in happiness. Although by Nature's calculation the split-second attitudes explained only about 2% of the differences in people’s happiness, the effect was enough to be statistically significant, holding equally for men and women, even when controlling for other factors such as physical attractiveness, self-esteem and people’s automatic reactions to attractive strangers.

Conversely, newlyweds’ explicit attitudes towards their marriage did not correlate with their implicit attitudes, and did not significantly predict how much their happiness would change. “If we have negative gut-level reactions to our partners, we might not be willing to admit that to ourselves and certainly not to other people,” McNulty says. “This procedure allowed us to tap into more immediate responses.”

“The findings are certainly plausible and intriguing,” says psychologist Garth Fletcher at Victoria University of Wellington. “But they need to be placed in the context of other research.” Although the study failed to find a significant effect for explicit attitudes, he says, much previous research has shown that explicit attitudes and perceptions of the partner and the relationship can strongly predict how long a marriage will last.

Moreover, cause-and-effect mechanisms in the study are not entirely clear: some research suggests that automatic attitudes could be what's causing the marriage to falter or thrive, rather than the other way around, says social psychologist Bertram Gawronski of the University of Western Ontario in Canada. When we are confronted with a partner’s inscrutable facial expression, for example, a positive gut-level reaction will probably lead us to interpret it as a smile rather than a grimace, and by responding in a similarly cheerful manner we elicit positive behaviour, thus creating a self-fulfilling prophecy, he says.
[351 words]

[Time 4]

Underlying qualities

If it turns out that gut-level reactions do change people’s behaviour, there is potential for a therapeutic application, McNulty says. Research has shown, for example, that it is possible to reduce implicit racist attitudes in white participants through repeated exposure to strategically paired positive words and images of black people3. “If this does have an active causal role, and if we can strengthen these positive associations that people might have with their partner, then it might help people see the positive side of the relationship and engage in more constructive behaviour. It’s a direction for future research.”

Future extensions might also support the pop-psychology canard to “just trust your gut” when it comes to marriage, McNulty says. Research has shown, for instance, that when people are instructed, “tell the truth” but at the same time “don’t think so hard”, they end up making more accurate self-assessments than they would otherwise4. This seems to be because these automatic attitudes emerge as semi-conscious gut feelings, McNulty says. “It’s information we can access, but we frequently choose not to.”
[176 words]

Source: Nature
http://www.nature.com/news/newlyweds-gut-feelings-predict-marital-happiness-1.14261

The memory benefits of distraction
by Bethany Brookshire 5:05pm, November 26, 2013

Taking attention away from the task at hand helps some patients with memory problems remember

[Time5]
Most people take it as a given that distraction is bad for — oh, hey, a squirrel!

Where was I?

… Right. Most people take it as a given that distraction is bad for memory. And most of the time, it is. But under certain conditions, the right kind of distraction might actually help you remember.

Nathan Cashdollar of University College London and colleagues were looking at the effects of distraction on memory in memory-impaired patients. They were specifically looking at distractions that were totally off-topic from a particular task, and how those distractions affected memory performance. Their results were published November 27 in the Journal of Neuroscience.

The researchers worked with a small group of people with severe epilepsy who had lesions in the hippocampus, and therefore had memory problems. They compared them to groups of people with epilepsy without lesions, young healthy people, and older healthy people that were matched to the epilepsy group. Each of the participants went through a memory task called “delayed match-to-sample.” For this task, participants are given a set of samples or pictures, usually things like nature scenes. Then there’s a delay, from one second at the beginning of the test on up to nearly a minute. Then participants are shown another nature scene. Is it one they have seen before? Yes or no?

The task starts out simply, with only one nature scene to match, but soon becomes harder, with up to five pictures to remember, and a five-second delay. People with memory impairments did a lot worse when they had more items to remember (called high cognitive load), falling off very steeply in their performance. Normal controls did better, still remaining fairly accurate, but making mistakes once in a while.

Then the scientists introduced a distractor. During the delay between the samples and the potential match, participants saw a different image, a neutral face. The controls showed no change in their accuracy. But the group with memory problems, rather than being the worse for the distraction, turned out for the better. In fact, they improved so much that there were no longer different from healthy controls.

The healthy controls didn’t show differences in performance with a distractor when they had more items to remember. But maybe the task wasn’t hard enough. The scientists showed that even healthy controls will have worse performance if you give them five items to remember and an even longer delay of 45 seconds. Again, when the participants got the distracting face, their performance improved.
[417 words]

[Time6]
How could this work? The scientists decided to look at theta rhythms in the brain. Theta rhythms are a type of oscillation, waves of voltage changes, representing many neurons acting together. The brain waves follow certain frequencies. Thetas, for example, are on a frequency of 4 to 7 hertz. Theta rhythms have been associated with learning and memory and can be detected when someone is “rehearsing” a memory, trying to remember something for later.

In control participants who weren’t doing a difficult task, theta rhythms decreased during the delay between the trial and the test sample. However, in the group of patients with memory impairments — for whom the task was very difficult and who had to “rehearse” more — their theta rhythms increased during the delay period. When presented with a distraction, however, the memory-impaired patients had their theta rhythms broken up by the distraction. They could no longer “rehearse” the memory. This break in rehearsal was associated with increased memory performance.

So distracting yourself from “rehearsing” may help you remember when you have a lot on your mind. It also makes us question why this is the case. Is the increase in theta bands really an increase in “rehearsing?” What neuronal activity does it reflect? Why are those theta bands unhelpful in people under high memory pressure? Shouldn’t extra “rehearsing” help your performance? Why doesn’t it? In addition, this is only one type of memory task, and only one type of distractor. It would be interesting to see if the results translate to other memory tasks and other types of distraction, a sound or a conversation, for example. But it does highlight one situation where distraction — check out this exploding whale! — might help memory, instead of making it worse.
[289 words]

Source:Science News
https://www.sciencenews.org/blog/scicurious/memory-benefits-distraction

捉妖

Part III： Obstacle

A mounting body of research shows that the circumstances and chronic stresses of poverty interrupt the development of the brain.

How Growing Up in Poverty May Affect a Child’s Developing Brain
Posted By: Joseph Stromberg — Biology,Psychology,The Human Body
[Paraphrase 7]
Once upon a time, scientists thought that the human brain was a rigid, predictable organ, not tremendously different from the lungs or liver. Based on a person’s genetics, it developed in a predetermined way, endowing an individual with a particular level of learning capabilities, problem-solving abilities and baseline intelligence.

Now, though, as part of emerging research into brain plasticity, neuroscientists are recognizing that the brain is a responsive, constantly evolving organ that can change at both the cellular and large-scale levels due to environmental influences and experiences. Much of this research is hopeful: It’s shown how in people with impaired vision, for instance, areas of the brain normally devoted to processing sights can be repurposed to analyze sound.

Over the past few months, though, a series of studies have emphasized that the brain can change for worse, as well as for the better. A child’s brain, not surprisingly, is especially vulnerable to such effects—and this research has shown that growing up in difficult circumstances dictated by poverty can wreak damage to a child’s cognitive skills that last a lifetime.

An October study by researchers from the University of Michigan, for instance, used fMRI (functional magnetic resonance imaging)—which detects blood flow in various areas of the brain as a reflection of brain activity—to study the regulation of emotions in young adults who were part of a long-term study on poverty. They compared a participant’s family income at age 9 (based on survey data collected at the time) with his or her current neural activity in different brain regions, and found that those who grew up in poverty showed increased activity in the amygdala (believed to be involved in anxiety, fear and emotional disorders) and decreased activity in the prefrontal cortex (which limits the influence of the amygdala, putting long-term decision making over impulse) when the participants were shown emotionally-upsetting images.

It’s impossible to know for sure, but the researchers suspect that a range of chronic stresses that can accompany growing up in poverty—things like crowding, noise, violence, family turmoil or separation—impact the development of the brain in childhood and adolescence, potentially explaining this correlation.

Another October study, meanwhile, took a more basic approach, examining the relationship between nurturing during childhood and the growth of brain tissue in children between the ages of six and 12. In it, Washington University in St. Louis researchers found that among the 145 children studied, those whose parents had poor nurturing skills had slowed growth in white matter, grey matter and the volumes of several different areas of the brain involved with learning skills and coping with stress. Based on the differing growth rates between children who resembled each other in terms of other key factors, it seemed as though the experience of growing up with adults with less nurturing skills effectively set back their mental development a year or two. And impoverished parents, they found, were more likely to have poor nurturing skills.

Sure, attempting to objectively evaluate the parenting styles of the adults in this study might be a bit heavy-handed, but the study identified chronic stresses experienced by the children as a key element as well: Children who grew up in poverty but had fewer stressful life events (as part of a larger program, they’d gone through annual assessments from the age of three onward) demonstrated smaller reductions in neural development.

Others have even looked into very specific behavioral effects of poverty. A recent Northwestern University study found a link that children with lower socioeconomic status tended to have less efficient auditory processing abilities—that is, the area of their brains responsible for processing sound showed more response to distracting noise and less activity as a result of a speaker’s voice than control participants. This might be an effect, the researchers say, of the known correlation between low income and the amount of noise exposure in urban populations.

Of course, most of these are limited by the very nature of a longitudinal study in that they’re correlations, rather than causations—ethics aside, it’s impossible to actively alter a person’s childhood circumstances in a controlled manner and then check the results, so researchers are forced to observe what happens in the real world and draw conclusions. Additionally, in most of these cases, it’s unknown whether the effects are temporary or permanent—whether children exposed to poverty are permanently left behind their peers, or whether they’re able to catch up if given the chance.

But the fact that correlations between poverty and altered mental function when stressed has been repeatedly observed across a range of study designs, circumstances and research groups makes it likely that these effects aren’t aberrations. Additionally, even if they are temporary effects that can be resolved by changing a child’s environment, there’s other recent research that dishearteningly reveals a neurological mechanism that helps to perpetuate poverty, by making it difficult for parent to make choices that change these circumstances.

An August study in Science found that being preoccupied with the all-consuming concerns of poverty—struggling to pay medical bills, for instance—taxes the brain, leaving less extra bandwidth to solve complex cognitive problems and harming long-term decision making ability. In a pair of study groups (shoppers in a New Jersey mall and sugar cane farmers in rural India), simply getting the participants thinking about economic problems (asking them what they’d do if they had to pay $1500 to repair their car, for instance) caused them to perform more poorly on tests that measure IQ and impulse control than otherwise.

The bandwidth problem they identified is temporary, not permanent, but it does explain how making the difficult decisions that might allow someone to get ahead are harder for a person immersed in poverty. It also highlights yet another stressor for parents seeking to ensure that their children escape poverty—they might be inadvertently contributing to an environment that keeps their children from rising above their circumstances.
[989 words]

Source:Smithsonian
http://blogs.smithsonianmag.com/science/2013/11/how-growing-up-in-poverty-may-affect-a-childs-developing-brain/

sherlock1992

thx, 妖妖~
Speaker:
people are more likely to lie in the afternoon compared with in the morning.

Speeding:
T2-1'51''
T3-2'21''
T4-1'32''
T5-3'08''
T6-1'55''

Obstacle-6'54''
Brain is an evolving organ rather than a permament one. B can develop different result in different environments. Impoverished family may lead to slow-developing-brain children:
>chronic stresses experienced by children.
>poor nurturing skills.
>noise exposure.
Because of the limitation of experimental conditions, we can only conclude that poor environments and slow-brain-developing are correlations rather than causations.
+this correlation is not aberration but may bring tough recovering.
the bandwidth theory provide a way to explain this phenomena.

铁板吗啡

Speaker:

People tend tocheat more in the afternoon.

Experiments:two groups of people were asked which side of the screen has more dogs? The selectionof the right one will get higher rewards whether it is true or not.

没听出来的词：

As the daywears on, we tend to get weary.

Ethical
Incentive
  Ethical folks

Time 2 2’37
Time 3 2’34
Time 4 0’57

Ø TS: New research found that gutfeeling toward partners in new marriage couples can indicate their marriagesituations later on.

Whether a marriage will be smooth sailing orwill hit the rocks after the honeymoon fades.

Ø Detail Research description:

Positive/negativeintuitive feelings toward partners have indicated the marriage later on.
The results show that these automatic attitudes canpredict eventual changes in people’s marital happiness.
Ø  Detail introduction of the experiment

New marriage couples were observed their response to thepicture of their partners.

Immediate short glance is deemed as positive reaction and the long glance is deemed asnegative

Blink eye flash  

重要的反面： conversely, newlyweds’ explicit attitudestowards their marriage did not significantly predict their marriage happiness./how much their happiness would change.

Ø  Shortage of the experiments
The results may only exist in the research circumstances.
The results needed to be placed in the contextof the research.
The cause-effect mechanism in this study isnot entirely clear.
Ø  Further research

If the reaction can be changed , then the marriage can be led to positiveside.

Then it might help people see the positiveside of the relationship

词汇：
Gut feelings直觉: the gut may know better than the head  
Visceral reaction
In the midst of it
Harbor: to contain sth, especiallysth hidden or dangerous
Harbour positive illusions
Newlyweds 新婚夫妇
Implicit/explicit  tap into these implicit attitudes
Tap into:挖掘
Wear off 逐渐消逝 wore off: the honeymoon phrase wore off.
The findings are certainly plausibleand intriguing.


Time 5 2’47
Time 6 1’56

Ø  TS: memory distraction could help impair the patients with memoryproblems

memory-impaired patients
Ø  The finding: Distraction could help increase memeory
Ø  Experiments:

Control group  vs.patients with memory problems

Action: They are asked to recognize different pictures withvarious delay times

Results: When the number of pictures increases and thusmemory becomes more difficult, the distraction can help the patients group tomemory.

Ø  The mechanism
The structure of brain to memorize

The sort of materials decreases for control group while itincreases for patients when memorizing. Distraction could interrupt thedecreasing trend.

Obstacle 6’52
看完这篇，深深觉得忧桑

Ø  TS: scientists found the poverty may affect the brain development ofchildren.

was a rigid, predictable organ

Ø  Before，the brain was though as a simple organ as liver

However, theresearch found that the structure and development of brain can be affected inthe growth of children.
Ø  Detail of the research

Scientists tracked the growing process of children withpoverty.

The stress of poverty may affect their brain development.

The nurturing ways of impoverished parents arepooper.

Also, considerations such as payment of the bills couldoccupy the broad widths and thus their IQ score is lower.

疏离无罪

首页~~~感谢妖妖
今天的速度是哪天speaker的延伸，这真不错

Speaker:Experiments shows that people are more likely to cheat in the afternoon.

01:33
A four-year study finds out that people's automatic reaction to their partners plays an important role in their marriage.

01:53
The happiness of marriage will fall quickly after honeymoon if the person who has negative intial gut reaction to his partner.Although split-second attitudes can affect only a little to our happiness,but its effect is enough to be significant.Further research should be made to support the finding.And the mechanism of the study is not clear yet.

01:20
If the gut reaction can really change people's behavior,this theory can have more application in several aspects such as racial problems.We should trust our gut in our marriage.

01:58
An experiment shows that distraction can help memory-imparied patients to be better.

02:09
The mechanism in the performance is that memory-impaired patient may be distracted from rehearsing,and the break increased their performance.But there are still many questions left to be answered.

07:00
Main Idea:The growing-up circumstance can affect children's brain
Brain is a responsive and evolving organ.It can change due to the enviorment,experience and influece.
Grow-up circumstance plays an important role in the development of children's brain.
A study shows taht poverity may damage children's congnitive skill.One resaon is the chronic stress.Another may be the parent's nuturing skill.
Proverty always links to noise.And noise may lead to less efficient auditory process ability.For the limition of the experiment,scientists still do not know these effects can be permanent or temporary.
Another experiment shows that chiildren who grow up in proverty but less stressful environment have better situation.
And one experiment shos taht leaving less extra bandwidth to solve complex cognitive problems and harming long-term decision making ability.

olivia瓜瓜

shouye ~~~~~~~~~~~~
都到了15了，又是补作业的节奏了
越障感觉很有趣的样子，晚点来读。
嘿嘿，先做了speaker 保首页~~~
Speaker：
New studys show that people will cheat or lie more usually in the afternoon than the morning，because of weary.
First study show,  when subject watch the computer screen to see the dots right or left and  the right sidewill be given more reward whatever it is correct or not, the subject in the afternoon will be more easily choose the right than in the morning .
Second study, the compelete the fragment words , for example , the __ ral. In the moring ,the subject more likely to complete with moral, but in the afternoon,more likely to the coral?   ‘
And for the people who cheat or lie regularly， the morning is same as the afternoon.
Therefore，the early birds eat the worm，it's truth.

         plit-second 瞬时发生的

         Illusion 错觉

         Visceral 内脏的，内部的

         Rosy 玫瑰色的，美好的，乐观的

          conjures up 令人想起
Speed:

Time2：1m56s

Study show that the split-second description of their partner may predicate their marital happiness.  

Time3: 2m15s

The following study show that who have choose the awful words will drop the happiness faster than who choose the positive words after their honeymoon.

The people who have negative view with their partner often will not explicitly admit this truth，but they will inexplicitly show this.

Other researchers show that this study should put in the context of other research and the the choice may sometime be affected by the expression of the photo.   

Time4：1m10s

We can use this way to mitigate the enmity of the white to black.   

Time5: 2m26s

The patients who have memory problem will improve their memory if a distractor emerge, But those healthy people will not.

Time6: 1m43s  

The delay in the brain of patients who have memory problems will increase the theta , but when the distractor come up, the theta become broken up.

Anyway, the distractor can help the memory ,and is not bad for it.  
想知道对这个东东正常人有用么？

Obstacle:  6m08s

这篇很有GMAT阅读的感觉噢。

In the past，we think that，like the liver，kidney，the brain are genetic and cant be affected by the growing process.

However, now 4 studies show that the circumstance have affects on the growth of the brain.  

Although these studies are not definitely accurate for the growth of brain, another research continue to compare the children who live in the poorer family  and who live in a less poor family in the poverty country, the child who live in the poorer family will more easily to reduce the neural connection.

Actually,when people in a poverty situation, have all kinds of life stress, they have a little ability to do the IQ questions,the develop the reasoning skills.   

Dora7

ye首页。。。
先交给越障，最近老不爱做越障该打！

TIME2：1'45''56
love blind eyes,and new couples can't see their partner's bad qualities
research find that reaction to the partner important to marriage


TIME3：2'17''34
negative gut attitudes make hapiness drop ,though the effcet was small but ststistically significant


TIME4：1'11''09


TIME5：2'26''95
certain condition right kind of distraction can help remember
researchers taken an experiment :healthy person vs people with memory problems found that later performanwell with a distractor

TIME6:1'23''31
how did work?invovle theta rhythms .and memory problems person perform better with the theta rhythms increase
but still mant problems exist
OBSATCLE:7'31''21
recent reasearch claim that grow up in poverty damage the child's cognitive skills
used FMRI into the study and get the conclusion
(unsure)
another study which involve parents and find the chronic stresses as a key factor as well
other studies

吐吐yeah

谢谢捉妖~首页占位啦~

Speaker:Some studies shows that people are more likely to cheat in the afternoon than morning.

掌管 6 00:06:07.70 00:14:42.40
掌管 5 00:01:40.15 00:08:34.70
掌管 4 00:02:22.49 00:06:54.54
掌管 3 00:01:10.84 00:04:32.04
掌管 2 00:02:02.01 00:03:21.20
掌管 1 00:01:19.18 00:01:19.18

Obastacle
main idea:explain how growing up in poverty may affect a child's developing brain
structure:
1.Neuroscientists are recognizing that brain can change at both the cellular and large-scale levels due to environmental influences and experiences
2.A series of studies show that the brain can change for worse.A child’s brain is especially vulnerable.
(1)those who grew up in poverty showed increased activity in the amygdala and decreased activity in the prefrontal cortex
(2)children whose parents had poor nurturing skills had slowed growth
(3)children with lower socioeconomic status tended to have less efficient auditory processing abilities
(4)people with the all-consuming concerns of poverty will leave less extra bandwidth to solve complex cognitive problems and harming long-term decision making ability.

苏错

谢谢捉妖~~~首页排排坐~~o(∩_∩)o

---

12.3

Speaker:

Research --morelikely to cheat in afternoon

The early birdsget the truth~~

Speed:

Time2:1’49research about the importance of visceral reaction

Time3:2’06 resultsof research and the effects

Time4:1’07

Time5:2’29experiment about whether distraction may help remember

Time6:1’36explanations about how this works

Obstacle:7’03