10.7考试出分（V40，Q51） 阅读放狗 感恩之前的数学寂静！

浪逐曲奇

阅读（原谅有点残。。）：第一篇，提到一个叫L（Leo 怎么看待Rae这个作者）的人表达他自己对某个观点的看法，中途作者好像有讲 L忽略了什么东西。主旨大概是呈现不同的观点还是做什么理论修正？这个是第一篇，所以真的不太记得了，抱歉。。

第二篇，讲glubster，大概就相当于水怪吧。
说实话，考试第一遍读第一段时，不知所云。有单词不认识。第一段大概意思相当于一个背景？吧，开头是“In response to the skeptic who may ask why， if 怪物 do exist（？这一条件状语从句不太记得了），we have no evidence【if 和we这中间两句像插入语】， the author of the guide said 。remains。各种水怪出现时所引发的巨象。，& great humps have been recovered.”针对前面双引号的这句话，老头出了题，问它的句子功能，我选了“the classification of it lays the basis for the following scinentists' investigation",不过我不确定我选的对不对，选项大概？意思是remains被恢复，这样第二段的科学家就去遗址做研究了。 然后作者列举了几个曾被发现或认为有水怪的地方的remains遗址：在智利的CB，在？的NB，等等，有所谓水怪曾留下的痕迹。
第一段没读懂不要紧，第二段是重头戏，详细陈述了一个科学家在2004年去CB和？NB做研究，CB那里有比较多DNA样本，于是他们发现所谓水怪好像和sperm whale基因差不多。除了这两个地方以外，其他地方的DNA太残了没法做对比研究，但科学家发现其他地方一些生物上的特点（不记得是什么观察了，大概是对DNA检测的补充手段）和CB这两个地方差不多，科学家推测这几个地方的水怪可能是同一种生物。
第三段，作者肯定了第二段科学家团队的发现，称他们解决了某个困扰已久的问题，但作者提到这个科学家的发现短时间内不会有太大的影响力。志怪作家们可能会坚持把所谓水怪神秘化。在第三段也出了题，一个是主旨题，我选了“作者详细描述了一个科学发现，以discredit某个流传已久的观点”；好像也另外出了个问作者如何看待科学家发现的态度题。

第三篇，讲影响雇员离职的因素。开头就说过去研究雇员为何离职，发现有四个因素作用，一个是 interior 工作感受，job satisfaction；一个是雇员individual因素，比如学历和年龄；一个是？，最后一个是雇员在工作岗位上的performance。但这些因素都是建立在研究全职人员离职的基础之上。那么兼职人员会在一个地方工作多久，是否也是受到相同因素的影响呢。 有个研究发现，如果兼职人员的该份兼职是个第二收入，不是用来养家糊口的，那他在工作上的frustration会比靠兼职吃饭的人少；另一个研究表明，如果该份兼职是primary income，则该兼职人员更不太可能离职。
出题的话，针对四个因素那里出了个细节题，我好像选的是兼职是第一收入的人比兼职是第二收入的人更不会离职？不确定是不是这个意思了，其他题我不记得了。还出了个 主旨题，我选了“一个特定领域的发现能否被应用到另一个领域”，选项好像是叫这个，毕竟是把对全职人员的研究看看能否扩大范围到兼职人员嘛，于是发现应用是可以的，只不过需要做一些修正和补充。
不算难，但一定要做到，回原文定位时要傻白甜（我一位NN阅读老师的原话），不要主观臆断。


第四篇，因为时间紧，所以看得没那么仔细，乍一看不知所云，我现在也回忆不出它的主题叫什么。但大致行文思路是，呈现了三个观点，作者对此没有评价。第一个观点，program involvement低了，才会有高的commercial recall。细节是有提到人们对在脱口秀间隙和电影院natural break？间隙插播广告的感受不一样。第二个观点，p i 高了，c c才会高，正相关。第三个观点，是有第三个人做了个补充研究，说明了为什么会出现第一个观点里所谈到的某个现象。
我记得出了个题，问第一个观点和第二个观点是哪个地方迥然相异，我选了那个p i对c c的作用两个作者的态度一正一负。另一个题，问作者为什么摆出第三个观点，我选的“解释为什么会出现前面段落里所讲的一个现象”，其他选项有resolve a contradiction等，感觉都不太对，似乎没提及。就选了感觉最好的那个。

billyisfragile!

JOURNAL ARTICLE
Review
Reviewed Work: Urbanism and Its End by Douglas W. Rae
Review by: Christopher Leo
Urban History Review / Revue d'histoire urbaine
Vol. 33, No. 1 (Fall 2004 automne), pp. 52-53
Published by: Urban History Review
Stable URL: http://www.jstor.org/stable/43560115
Page Count: 2

In at least one instance, he allows his managerial expertise to crowd out a wider perspective. He argues—against the academic conventional wisdom and in favour of the "practical" one—that the most dramatic impact of automobiles was not to draw residents out of the city, but to inundate city centres with traffic (223-30). In this case, the academics seem to have the stronger case. The suggestion that traffic congestion kills cities flies in the face of the obvious fact that all of the most successful cities suffer from serious congestion, while unsuccessful cities build roads in vain, in many cases until there is no city centre left.

第二段，主要是书评人A对作者R这个非传统观点的批判，注意看这里的标点符号，这段有大段的引号来引述书评人的原文，也就是书评人的观点。书评人A的观点总结起来，就是汽车给城市带来的没落，并不是一概而论。有的城市，尤其大城市（如纽约、东京、多伦多）就算汽车拥堵和难停车，城市也不会因为这些问题受太多本质的负面影响。只有在特定的城市，堵车停车这些问题才会有很大影响 -- 举例讲蒙特利尔，每当大家谈到开车去市中心，别人都会笑的，因为那地方停车实在太难。

If we could find an example of an obviously successful city— say New York, Tokyo, London, Toronto—whose economy was harmed by excess traffic, the road engineers' argument might gain a small measure of credibility. Ordinary observation, however, suggests that complaints about traffic and parking are not a major concern in those cities that actually have serious traffic and parking problems, but are a constant refrain in the New Havens and the Winnipegs of this world.

My observations in research in Winnipeg, Toronto, and Vancouver suggest to me that, rather than traffic being a cause of city failure, complaints about traffic and parking are symptoms of city failure. In Winnipeg, complaints about parking that would be considered laughable in Vancouver are offered as reasons for not spending time in a downtown that is beset by decay.

RicardoLEE

多谢楼主

RicardoLEE

bzy! 发表于 2019-10-8 20:13
JOURNAL ARTICLE
Attention versus Distraction: The Interactive Effect of Program Involvement and Atte ...

多谢！

浪逐曲奇

bzy! 发表于 2019-10-8 20:13
JOURNAL ARTICLE
Attention versus Distraction: The Interactive Effect of Program Involvement and Atte ...

哇塞 给大佬点个赞 这十之八九就是老头改编前的文章了哈哈哈

幸运宝宝

billyisfragile!

JOURNAL ARTICLE
Attention versus Distraction: The Interactive Effect of Program Involvement and Attentional Devices on Commercial Processing
Kenneth R. Lord and Robert E. Burnkrant
Journal of Advertising
Vol. 22, No. 1 (Mar., 1993), pp. 47-60
Published by: Taylor & Francis, Ltd.
https://www.jstor.org/stable/4188870
Page Count: 14

Viewer processing of television commercials is influenced by an affective triad of viewer involvement; that is,  involvement in a particular program interacts with both the viewer's involvement in the advertising message  and with the ad's inherent attention-engaging capacity. Two experiments were conducted to test hypotheses  relevant to this theory; the results support the assertion that both program involvement and dramatic  attentional devices used in television advertisements, based on their interaction with one another and with  viewers' processing motivation, have the capacity to enhance or hinder the generation of viewer thoughts  relevant to ad messages. Building on prior studies, this research reveals some of the cognitive processes  underlying program involvement as well as demonstrating the interactive nature of that construct in terms of  message and audience characteristics.

Program Involvement Literature

第四篇，因为时间紧，所以看得没那么仔细，乍一看不知所云，我现在也回忆不出它的主题叫什么。但大致行文思路是，呈现了三个观点，作者对此没有评价。第一个观点，program involvement低了，才会有高的commercial recall。细节是有提到人们对在脱口秀间隙和电影院natural break？间隙插播广告的感受不一样。第二个观点，p i 高了，c c才会高，正相关。第三个观点，是有第三个人做了个补充研究，说明了为什么会出现第一个观点里所谈到的某个现象。

Empirical findings regarding the effect of viewer involvement in television programming are varied. It has been argued by some that a high level of program  involvement should inhibit viewer processing of commercial messages. This conclusion is based primarily on a finding, generally consistent among the cited studies, that viewers demonstrated better recall for and learning of commercial message content when program  involvement was low than when it was high. For example, Bryant and Comisky (1978) found recall highest for a Hamm's beer commercial when it interrupted a minimally involving non-program control stimulus (a moving wave pattern), with recall decreasing somewhat for moderately involving positions in "Banacek," an action-adventure show, and falling substantially at the point of climax for the same program. An alternative view (Krugman 1983) is that commercials increase in their persuasive impact as the level of interest in the program goes up. Krugman's conclusion stems from a finding of less positive viewer attitudes toward a commercial sponsor when advertisements appeared in a "natural break" in a program (operationalized as Barbara Walters and variety segments, assumed to be low in involvement) than when they were aired in an "interrupted context" ("G.E.  Theater' and documentaries, assumed to be high in involvement).

月黑高飞寡妇

感谢分享！               

ZZZZZZZZZZS

感谢分享！               

fuyouzhishang

感谢分享！