If, in fact, people are selfish and rational, then the proposer should offer the smallest possible share, while the responder should accept any offer, (20) no matter how small: after all, even one dollar is better than nothing. In numerous trials, however, two-thirds of the offers made were between 40 and 50 percent; only 4 percent (25) were less than 20 percent. Among responders, more than half who were offered less than 20 percent rejected the offer. Behavior in the game did not appreciably depend on the players’ (30) sex, age, or education. Nor did the amount of money involved play a significant role: for instance, in trials of the game that were conducted in Indonesia, the sum to be shared was (35) as much as three times the subjects’ average monthly income, and still responders refused offers that they deemed too small. The author refers to the sum of one dollar (line 21) in order to 举例作用题 - question the notion that the amount of money involved significantly affected players’ behavior
- provide an example of one of the rare offers made by proposers that was less than 20 percent
- illustrate the rationality of accepting even a very small offer
- suggest a reason that responders rejected offers that were less than 20 percent
- challenge the conclusion that a selfish and rational proposer should offer a
responder the smallest possible share
答案是B 为什么不能选E 啊?谁能把意思解释一下,谢谢,有点晕! 
[此贴子已经被作者于2006-8-4 18:58:29编辑过] |