[越毒] 吴月叁阅读小犬总结（共68只，更新:6/3 10：58）

1木2头3人1

我想问下那个1.1.3 V5的三道题有答案么？

V5(v33) P1科学家经过研究发现广告与歌曲的联系，有音乐比没有音乐好，原声的比改唱的好，红人比不红的好，但是如果歌手不够红，那么改编歌词往往能够吸引顾客的注意力。

这种情况还解释了因为人们的注意力会放在了改过的词中, 原文有”lack of fit” (有题)

With songs more effective than without;

With vocal more effective than without;

With original lyrics when in high personal significance more effective than with altered lyrics when in low personal significance

P2解释为什么有名的人的音乐反而不如没有名的人的音乐有效。有三四个理由
对于当红歌手，原声比较重要，这个很容易证明，但是对于那些不咋地的歌手，改编歌词更能提高广告影响力，这是为啥呢？研究人员做出了假设，貌似是这些人听到歌被改了以后表示不爽，结果反而加深了印象
P3男女的有效性有差别：
对于男人和女人，研究人员发现，男人对于红歌手比较感冒，女的对于不红的比较感冒。

Q1主旨题:

Q2第二段的作用

A 对于第一段中研究人员提出的成果给出了更进一步的研究结果

B 对于第一段的提出的一些现象提供了解释/ 解释第一段中的一个puzzle
Q3下列哪种歌曲广告对消费者影响最大：

堇色锦瑟

3Q!!!!!

JUNO1031

Lz，能不能把每天新更新的V在哪里集体写一下，就类似数学和作文整理同学的那种，他们在1楼每天会说具体更新了神马，，因为之前的我自己都整理过了，如果之后更新再去70几页的文字里去找更新的，即使有颜色，也真的很麻烦，对不住，麻烦您了，真的谢谢了

yuezh08

lz能不能把每天更新的情况写一下，还有前面的版本是否有加新的了~谢谢了~

dearvc

谢谢无私奉献的楼主！！

裴小柒

lz辛苦了！！！

乱羽冰霰

amber8960

楼主 那篇肌肉疲劳的类似原文没有标明highlight！！！ 能帮忙标明吗 谢谢

-- by 会员 339215262 (2011/5/7 12:03:14)

同问! ! 另外一个小小建议希望楼主可以抽空回答一下楼里的高频问题 因为很多时候大家都有一样的疑问...
不过不管怎样还是要谢谢楼主 辛苦了!

WuApril

回复ls....那个不赖lz....
我考古的时候....没贴上highlight= =
注意highlight的部分
Interestingly— orunnervingly, depending on how you look at it —  some researchers are uncovering evidencethat Stanovnik’s rule of  thumb might be right. A spate ofrecent studies has contributed to  growing support for the notion that theorigins and controls of  fatigue lie partly, if not mostly, within thebrain and the central  nervous system. The new research puts fresh weightto the hoary  coaching cliché: you only think you’re tired.From the timeof Hippocrates, the limits of human exertion were  thought to reside inthe muscles themselves, a hypothesis that was  established in 1922 withthe Nobel Prize-winning work of Dr. A.V.  Hill. The theory went like this:working muscles, pushed to their  limit, accumulated lactic acid. When concentrations of lactic acid  reached acertain level, so the argument went, the muscles could no  longerfunction. Muscles contained an ‘‘automatic brake,’’  Hill wrote, ‘‘carefully adjusted by nature.’’Researchers, however, have long noted a linkbetween neurological  disorders and athletic potential.’’Questions about the muscle-centered model came up again in 1989 when Canadian researchers published the results of an experiment called Operation Everest II, in which athletes did heavy exercise in  altitudechambers. The athletes reached exhaustion despite the fact  that theirlactic-acid concentrations remained comfortably low.  Fatigue, it seemed,might be caused by something else.In 1999, three physiologists from theUniversity of Cape Town Medical  School in South Africa took the nextstep. They worked a group of  cyclists to exhaustion during a 62-milelaboratory ride and measured,  via electrodes, the percentage of legmuscles they were using at the  fatigue limit. If standard theories weretrue, they reasoned, the  body should recruit more muscle fibers as itapproached exhaustion —  a natural compensation for tired, weakeningmuscles.Instead, the researchers observed the opposite result. As theriders  approached complete fatigue, the percentage of active musclefibers  decreased, until they were using only about 30 percent. Even asthe  athletes felt they were giving their all, the reality was thatmore  of their muscles were at rest. Was the brain purposely holding back  thebody?‘‘It was as ifthe brain was playing a trick on the body, to save  it,’’ says Timothy Noakes, head of the Cape Towngroup.  ‘‘Which makes a lot of sense, if you think about it.In fatigue,  it only feels like we’re going to die. The actual physiological risks that fatigue represents are essentially trivial.’’From this, Noakes and his colleagues concluded that A.V. Hill had been right about the automatic brake, but wrong about its location. They postulated the existence of what they calleda central governor: aneural system that monitors carbohydrate stores, the levels of  glucoseand oxygen in the blood, the rates of heat gain and loss, and  work rates.The governor’s job is to hold our bodies safely back  fromthe brink of collapse by creating painful sensations that we  interpret asunendurable muscle fatigue.Fatigue, the researchers argue, is less anobjective event than a  subjective emotion — the brain’s clever, self-interested attempt  to scareyou into stopping. ‘‘It’s notthat they don’t feelthe pain; they just shift  their brain dynamics and alter their perceptionof reality so the  pain matters less. It’s basically a purposeful hallucination.’’Noakes and his colleagues speculate that the central governor theory holds the potential to explain not just feats of stamina but also  theiropposite: chronic fatigue syndrome (a malfunctioning,  overactivegovernor, in this view). Moreover,the governor theory  makes evolutionary sense. Animals whose brainssafeguarded an  emergency stash of physical reserves might well havesurvived at a  higher rate than animals that could drain their fuel tanksat will.The theory would also seem to explain a sports landscape in which ultra-endurance events have gone from being considered medically hazardous to something perilously close to routine. The Ironman  triathlonin Hawaii — a 2.4-mile swim, 112-mile bike ride and marathon-length run — was the ne plus ultra in endurance in the 1980’s, but hasnow been topped by the Ultraman, which is more than  twice as long. Onceobscure, the genre known as adventure racing,  which includes500-plus-mile wilderness races like Primal Quest, has  grown to more than400 events each year. Ultramarathoners, defined as  those who participatein running events exceeding the official  marathon distance of 26.2 miles,now number some 15,000 in the United  States alone. The underlying physicshave not changed, but rather our  sense of possibility. Athletic culture,like Robic, has discovered a  way to tweak its collective governor.

fwj

thx！
密码v5！