|
95. Scientific research that involves international collaboration has produced papers of greater influence, as measured by the number of times a paper is cited in subsequent papers, than has research without any collaboration. Papers that result from international collaboration are cited an average of seven times, whereas papers with single authors are cited only three times on average. This difference shows that research projects conducted by international research teams are of greater importance than those conducted by single researchers.
Which one of the following is an assumption on which the argument depends?
A. Prolific writers can inflate the number of citations they receive by citing themselves in subsequent papers. B. It is possible to ascertain whether or not a paper is the product of international collaboration by determining the number of citations it has received. C. The number of citations a paper receives is a measure of the importance of the research it reports. D. The collaborative efforts of scientists who are citizens of the same country do not produce papers that are as important as papers that are produced by international collaboration. E. International research teams tend to be more generously funded than are single researchers.
In my view, the reasoning in this argument is that: Papers that result from international collaboration are cited an average of seven times, whereas papers with single authors are cited only three times on average.à research projects conducted by international research teams are of greater importance than those conducted by single researchers.
The hidden assumption is that we can evaluate the importance of research projects by the number of times a paper is cited in subsequent papers.
Obviously, C is the best answer.
A. is out of scope. We can also have good reasons to doubt whether the prolific writers is representative enough to reflect the whole situation of the single authors. B. the same mistake. Even we can ascertain whether or not a paper is the product of international collaboration by determining the number of citations it has received. The preceding assumption have no effect on the conclusion. C. is the best answer. D. is absurd. We have not known anything about the domestic or the alien authors. E. is out of scope too. There is nothing relevant to fund in this argument.
上面的解释是没错，可是C答案明显是原文第一句（highlight）的改写啊……假设题这样也行吗？ | 
京公网安备11010202008513号 京ICP证101109号 京ICP备12012021号
发表于 2009-8-20 15:36:00
楼主
