og verbal 47-51 或者新verbal 56-60

inferno19

这篇的逻辑我实在看不清楚，希望有高手能指教。

In an attempt to improve the overall performance of clerical workers, many companies have introduced computerized performance monitoring and control systems (CPMCS) that record and report a worker's computer-driven activities. However, at least one study has shown that such monitoring may not be having the desired effect. In the study, researchers asked monitored clerical workers and their supervisors how assessments of productivity affected supervisors' ratings of workers' performance.    In    contrast to    unmonitored    workers doing the same work, who without exception identified the most important element in their jobs as customer service, the monitored workers and their supervisors all responded that productivity was the critical factor in assigning ratings. This finding suggested that there should have been a strong correlation between a monitored worker's productivity and the overall rating the worker received. However, measures of the relationship between overall rating and individual elements of performance clearly supported the conclusion that supervisors gave considerable weight to criteria such as attendance, accuracy, and indications of customer satisfaction.


It is possible that productivity may be a"hygiene factor"; that is, if it is too low, it will hurt the overall rating. But the evidence suggests that beyond the point at which productivity becomes "good enough," higher productivity per se is unlikely to improve a rating.


这个系统用来attempt to improve overall performance,通过record and report workers' computer driven activities, 研究者问的两组人却是这个系统下how assessments of productivity affected supervisors' ratings of workers' performance.    这是说productivity和performance是等价的吗？assessments of productivity的发出者是system?


第一个问题，显然只能选c，但是c项题干说before the final results of the study were known,答案的解释是说Only lines 17-20 refer to the expected outcome of the study，原文是说This finding suggested that there should have been a strong correlation between a monitored worker's productivity and the overall rating the worker received.既然是finding，那么就与expected outcome毫无瓜葛，与should have been没什么关系。


最后一道题我感觉也很奇怪：The primary purpose of the passage is to discuss a study of the use of a particular method
文中说的是However, at least one study has shown..这明显是用一个研究来指出这个有可能会不能带来预期的效果，因而primary purpose应该是指出这个系统可能不能有效实现many companies' attempt..


发现了阅读的重要性。。开始抠og，是不是抠太死了？




如果版主宠幸了这个帖子的话，请教一下斑竹说的文章读慢一点来提高正确率，这个慢是什么概念

inferno19

哎。。自己顶一个，实在是不理解啊

dphxmg

This finding suggested that there should have been a strong correlation between a monitored worker's productivity and the overall rating the worker received.

实际上，‘suggest’和'should have been'表明从句里的内容是研究人员根据之前的问卷调查的结果做出的推论并非事实本身。

本文实际上在转述一个研究报告。该报告的研究对象是CPMCS。即，本文谈论的是对CPMCS的研究，而不是CPMCS自身。实际上，这个文章有点像研究性论文开篇的文献综述。