题目内容
Recent legal research indicated that incorrect identification is a major factor in many miscarriages of justices. It also suggests that identification of people by witnesses in courtroom is not as 21 as commonly believed. Recent studies do not support the degree of judges, jurors, lawyers and the police have in eyewitness evidence.The Law Commission recently published an educational paper, "Total Recall The Reliability of Witness 22 ", as a companion guide to a proposed code of evidence. The paper finds that commonly held perceptions about how our minds work and how well we remember are often wrong. But while human memory is 23 change, it should not be underestimated.In court witnesses are asked to give evidence about events, and judges and juries assess its Fallibility. The paper points out that memory is complex, and reliability of any person’s recall must be assessed 24 .Both common sense and research say memory declines over time. The accuracy of recall and recognition are 25 their best immediately after encoding the information, declining at first rapidly, then gradually. The longer the delay, the more likely it is that information obtained after the event will interfere 26 the original memory, which reduces accuracy.The paper says 27 interviews or media reports can create such distortions. "People are particularly susceptible to having their memories 28 when the passage of time allows the original memory to fade, and will be most susceptible if they repeat the 29 as fact."Witnesses may see or read information after the event, then integrate it to produce something 30 than what was experienced, significantly reducing the reliability of their memory of an event or offender, "Further, witnesses may strongly believe in their memories, even though aspects of those memories are verifiably false.\ 26().
查看答案
搜索结果不匹配？点我反馈
更多问题
Recent legal research indicated that incorrect identification is a major factor in many miscarriages of justices. It also suggests that identification of people by witnesses in courtroom is not as 21 as commonly believed. Recent studies do not support the degree of judges, jurors, lawyers and the police have in eyewitness evidence.The Law Commission recently published an educational paper, "Total Recall The Reliability of Witness 22 ", as a companion guide to a proposed code of evidence. The paper finds that commonly held perceptions about how our minds work and how well we remember are often wrong. But while human memory is 23 change, it should not be underestimated.In court witnesses are asked to give evidence about events, and judges and juries assess its Fallibility. The paper points out that memory is complex, and reliability of any person’s recall must be assessed 24 .Both common sense and research say memory declines over time. The accuracy of recall and recognition are 25 their best immediately after encoding the information, declining at first rapidly, then gradually. The longer the delay, the more likely it is that information obtained after the event will interfere 26 the original memory, which reduces accuracy.The paper says 27 interviews or media reports can create such distortions. "People are particularly susceptible to having their memories 28 when the passage of time allows the original memory to fade, and will be most susceptible if they repeat the 29 as fact."Witnesses may see or read information after the event, then integrate it to produce something 30 than what was experienced, significantly reducing the reliability of their memory of an event or offender, "Further, witnesses may strongly believe in their memories, even though aspects of those memories are verifiably false.\ 28().
Passage 1Is language, like food, a basic human need without which a child at a critical period of life can be starved and damaged Judging from the drastic experiment of Frederick II in the thirteenth century, it may be hoping to discover what language a child would speak if he heard no mother tongue, he told the nurses to keep silent.All the infants died before the first year. But clearly there was more than lack of language here. What was missing was good mothering. Without good mothering, in the first year of life especially, the capacity to survive is seriously affected.Today no such severe lack exists as that ordered by Frederick. Nevertheless, some children are still backward in speaking. Most often the reason for this is that the mother is insensitive to the signals of the infant whose brain is programmed to learn language rapidly. If these sensitive periods are neglected, the ideal time for acquiring skills passes and they might never be learned so easily again. A bird learns to sing and to fly rapidly at the right time, but the process is slow and hard once the critical stage has passed.Experts suggest that speech stages are reached in a fixed sequence and at a constant age, but there are cases where speech has started late in a child who eventually turns out to be of high IQ. At twelve weeks a baby smiles and makes vowel-like sounds; at twelve months he can speak simple words and understand simple commands; at eighteen months he has a vocabulary of three to fifty words. At three he knows about 1 000 words which he can put into sentences, and at four his language differs from that of his parents in style rather than grammar.Recent evidence suggests that an infant is born with the capacity to speak. What is special about man’s brain, compared with that of the monkey, is the complex system which enables a child to connect the sight and feel of, say, a toy bear with the sound pattern "toy-bear". And even more incredible is the young brain’s ability to pick out an order in language from the mixture of sound around him, to analyze, to combine and recombine the parts of a language in new ways.But speech has to be induced, and this depends on interaction between the mother and the child, where the mother recognizes the signals in the child’s babbling, grasping and smiling, and responds to them. Insensitivity of the mother to these signals dulls the interaction because the child gets discouraged and sends out only the obvious signals. Sensitivity to the child’s non-verbal signals is essential to the growth and development of language. If a child starts to speak later than others, he will () in the future.
Recent legal research indicated that incorrect identification is a major factor in many miscarriages of justices. It also suggests that identification of people by witnesses in courtroom is not as 21 as commonly believed. Recent studies do not support the degree of judges, jurors, lawyers and the police have in eyewitness evidence.The Law Commission recently published an educational paper, "Total Recall The Reliability of Witness 22 ", as a companion guide to a proposed code of evidence. The paper finds that commonly held perceptions about how our minds work and how well we remember are often wrong. But while human memory is 23 change, it should not be underestimated.In court witnesses are asked to give evidence about events, and judges and juries assess its Fallibility. The paper points out that memory is complex, and reliability of any person’s recall must be assessed 24 .Both common sense and research say memory declines over time. The accuracy of recall and recognition are 25 their best immediately after encoding the information, declining at first rapidly, then gradually. The longer the delay, the more likely it is that information obtained after the event will interfere 26 the original memory, which reduces accuracy.The paper says 27 interviews or media reports can create such distortions. "People are particularly susceptible to having their memories 28 when the passage of time allows the original memory to fade, and will be most susceptible if they repeat the 29 as fact."Witnesses may see or read information after the event, then integrate it to produce something 30 than what was experienced, significantly reducing the reliability of their memory of an event or offender, "Further, witnesses may strongly believe in their memories, even though aspects of those memories are verifiably false.\ 23().
Passage 4Plant adaptation can be remarkably complex. Certain species of orchids, for instance, imitate female bees, other plants look and smell like animals, and still others have the appearance of stone. These strange adaptations to life represent just a few of the sophisticated means by which plants enhance their chances of survival.Mimicry in plants or animals is a three-part system. There is a model; the animal, plant, or substrate being imitated. There is a mimic; the organism that imitates the model. And there is a signal receiver or dupe; the animal that cannot effectively distinguish between the model and the mimic. Mimetic traits may include morphological structures, color patterns, behaviors, or other attributes of the mimic that promote its resemblance to a model. That model may be either an unrelated species or an inanimate objects such as the background against which an organism spends most of its time.Mimicry is not an active strategy on the part of an individual plant; flowers do no deliberately trick or deceive animals into visiting them. Mimicry arises as the result of evolution through natural selection and the occurrence of random generic mutations that lead over many generations to the appearance of favorable characteristics. If such traits help to camouflage a plant, for example, the plant is likely to have survival advantage over other plants that are less well camouflaged. The plant will leave more descendants, thereby passing the advantage to the next generation. For natural selection to favor the evolution of mimicry, the mimic must derive a reproductive advantage from modeling itself after another organism or object; its fitness, measured as the number of offspring produced that survive into the next generation must be increased as the result of deception. The word "camouflage" (in line 4, para. 3) most probably means （）
微信支付 
支付宝支付