- UID
- 985970
- 在线时间
- 小时
- 注册时间
- 2014-3-3
- 最后登录
- 1970-1-1
- 主题
- 帖子
- 性别
- 保密
|
本人CR新兵,只看过CR曼哈顿的Fov,打算过一遍OG之后再看Bible,但在一开始OG13 CR第12题就遇到了思维瓶颈,求NN帮助:
12.Which of the following most logically completes the passage?
Most bicycle helmets provide good protection for the top and back ofthe head, but little or no protection for the
temple regions on the sides ofthe head. Astudy of head injuries resulting from bicycle accidents showed that a
large proportion were caused by blows to the temple area. Therefore, if bicycle helmets protected this area, the
risk of serious head injury in bicycle accidents would be greatly reduced, especially since_____________
(A) amongthe bicyclists included in the study's sample of head injuries, only a very small proportion had been
wearing a helmet at the time of their accident
(B) even those bicyclists who regularly wear helmets have a poor understanding of the degree and kind of
protection that helmets afford
(C) a helmet that included protection for the temples would have to be somewhat larger and heavier than
current helmets
(D) the bone in the temple area is relatively thin and impacts in that area are thus very likely to cause brain
injury
(E) bicyclists generally land on their arm or shoulder when they fall to the side, which reduces the likelihood of
severe impacts on the side of the head
OG答案:D
我选了A。我的思维一上来就陷入需要证明太阳穴是否应该被保护(即受伤的到底是头侧面多?还是头前后面多?也即原题中需要保护太阳穴这一结论是否有Flaw),才会想到研究中没有提到研究样本是否戴头盔,即是否真实情况是头前后的受伤更多,但只是因为研究样本有头盔保护,而使研究结果出现侧面受伤多呢?如果研究样本没有戴头盔,才能证明的确是太阳穴受伤多,需要保护。因此我误选了A。
求解:
1.原题是否只是问太阳穴被保护了之后,受伤几率是否大幅下降(即会不会没保护太阳穴,受伤也不会增加呢?),而太阳穴受伤多这件事情已经是确定无疑的了?
2.什么情况下A会是正确答案呢?是否是问从这个研究中推出应该保护太阳穴这个逻辑的Flaw时,才选A?
|
|