题目内容
Researchers produced evidence to support what most of us already knew--that a cup of tea is the answer to any crisis. Dr. Malcolm Cross, a psychologist at City University London, tested the anxiety levels of a group of people following a 1 situation and revealed that even a single cup of tea has a 2 calming effect. His team gave 42 volunteers a mental arithmetic exam and 3 offered half of them a cup of tea and the other half a glass of water. The water group’s anxiety levels soared 4 25 percent compared to before the task, 5 the tea group actually reported a four percent reduction in anxiety---despite the difficult test, they were more relaxed than when they started. According to a survey carried out for the research, 68 percent of Britons 6 tea in a dilemma, making it the nation’s most common response to trouble of 7 kind. About 60 percent said the promise of comfort and warmth was the main reason for putting the kettle on. "The 8 of making and drinking tea--particularly during times of stress---is at the very 9 of British culture," Cross said. This study shows that the social psychological 10 of tea enhance the effects of its chemical make-up on our bodies and brains.
查看答案
搜索结果不匹配？点我反馈
更多问题
"I smoke for my health," I proclaimed in a newspaper article published in 1979. Since I am a doctor, this advice attracted amused attention. I reasoned that smoking made me cough and thus prevented pneumonia; smoking made my heart go faster and eliminated the need for special exercise; smoking restrained my appetite and kept me trim. And then, at 51, I had a heart attack. I knew the risk factors for early heart disease, high blood-cholesterol levels and smoking. The first four were in my favor, but 1; chose to smoke. Strange how the evidence that linked smoking to heart disease appeared unclear to me, and how the same data now appear overwhelmingly convincing. Why stop now Smokers who stop after their first heart attack have an 80-percent chance of living ten more years—if they don’t, a 60-per cent chance. As a smoker, I always resented the fact that we smokers received only scorn from nonsmokers. How could nonsmokers know that smoking was bad for the health if there were no smokers to prove it Being a member of the experimental group, rather than the control group, deserves a certain measure of social appreciation. I’ve done my time. I’m now ready to be a control. No longer smoke for my health. My health can’t stand the help. Will I miss the late-night trips to find a store that’s still open and selling cigarettes Will I miss searching through ashtrays (烟灰缸) to find the longest butt that is still smokable Only time will tell. Not smoking may give me the time to find out. Was it easy to stop Sure. Here is all you have to do. First, experience a severe crushing pain under your breastbone as you finish a cigarette. Next, have yourself admitted to a coronary-care(心脏康复) unit and be stripped of your clothing and belongings. Finally, remain in the unit at ad-solute bed rest for four days while smoking is forbidden. This broke my had-it. See if it works for you. Which of the following is NOT true according to the passage
The first device men had for measuring time was the sundial, which was invented around 700 B.C. The early sundial was a hollow half bowl with a bead (有孔小珠) fixed in the center. As the sun traveled across the sky, the shadow of the bead traveled in and is across the face of the bowl. The bowl was divided into 12 equal parts called hours. The length of these hours varied with the seasons, as days were longer or shorter. In the summer an hour might have been half again as long as our hours now, in the winter only half as long. For 1,600 years this way of measuring hours by dividing the daylight into 12 parts didn’t change. A minute is the sixtieth part of an hour and a second is the sixtieth part of a minute. Both of these measurements are for convenience in dividing time into useful sections. The ancient Babylonians reckoned time more accurately than the people who came after than for several thousand years. They used a water clock, the water running through a hole of a very carefully calculated size from one jar into another. The time it took for the water to drip completely through was the length of the day of the equinox. Day and night are equal at that time, each lasting 12 hours. Our modem industry depends on clocks and timing. Assembly lines run on exact time schedules. In the manufacture of almost every article around you there are certain processes that must be timed precisely. China must be baked for an exact length of time, glass hardened, paint dried electrically, canned food processed. If you look around your room, you will probably see dozens of other things that had to be timed when they were made, some of them to a millionth of a second. Parts of radio tubes and light bulbs must be timed as exactly as this. Our whole world runs on a time schedule. Trains and planes, schools and business, radios, traffic lights, and the cake for dessert all depend on the clock. Flyers make a clock out of the sky, so they can call directions. They imagine it to be a huge clock face with their plane at the center of the dial. The nose of the plane points to 12 o’clock. Then if one man yells "see gull at 2 o’clock", everybody knows exactly where to look. Measured by the sundial, an hour in the summer is______.our hours now.
If the universality of immersion-style language programs, emergency test prep classes, tired college kids is any indication, cramming (临时抱佛脚) is a wildly popular study strategy. Professors frown upon it yet conspire by squeezing vast topics like "Evolution" or "World history 1914 to present" into the last week of a course. So is cramming effective or not A new study by UC-San Diego psychologists confirms what you may suspect deep down: The answer is no. Hurried memorization is a hopeless approach for retaining information. But it’s not all bad news. The team offers a precise formula for better study habits, and it doesn’t necessarily need dogged discipline and routine. To arrive at their prescription, the scientists tested the "spacing effect" on long-term memory. In other words, they wanted to know how the time gap between study sessions influences the ability to remember material on test day. They asked 1,354 volunteers to memorize 32 trivial facts, such as "Who invented snow golf." (Rudyard Kipling) and "What European nation consumes the most spicy Mexican food" (Norway). Participants reviewed the answers anywhere from several minutes to several months after first learning them, and then were tested up to a year later. The findings Students perform better when they space their study sessions rather than when they try to cram everything into their heads during one sitting. But for those who must cram, timing is everything. According to the researchers, if you have only one date on which to study, choose a day that’s closer to when you first learned the material than when you take the test--but not too close. For instance, if you have a French lesson on Monday and a quiz the following Monday, you should study on Wednesday for maximum retention. Tuesday is too early and Sunday is too late. If you want to remember something for a year, wait about a month to review what you learned. Hal Pashler, one of the lead authors, suspects that most crammers don’t realize the error of their ways. "Even in the scientific community, cram-type summer courses on new research methods are extremely popular," he told me in an email. And I have never heard people who take these courses even notice the fact that they are a perfect prescription for rapid forgetting." Which of the following can best describe professors’ attitude toward cramming
Is it possible to be both fat and fit--not just fit enough to exercise, but fit enough to live as long as someone a lot lighter Not according to a 2004 study from the Harvard School of Public Health which looked at 115,000 nurses aged between 30 and 55. Compared with women who were both thin and active, obese (overweight) but active women had a mortality rate that was 91% higher. Though far better than the inactive obese (142% higher), they were still worse off than the inactive lean (5% higher). A similar picture emerged in 2008 after researchers examined 39,000 women with an average age of 54. Compared with active women of normal weight, the active but overweight were 54% more likely to develop heart disease. That’s settled, then. Or is it Steven Blair, a professor of exercise science at the University of South Carolina, describes the official focus on obesity as an "obsession ... and it’s not grounded in solid data". Blair’s most fascinating study, in the Journal of the American Medical Association in 2007, took 2,600 people aged 60 and above, of various degrees of fatness, and tested their fitness on the exercise device, rather than asking them to quantify it themselves. This is an unusually rigorous approach, he claims, since many rival surveys ask participants to assess their own fitness, or ignore it as a factor altogether. "There is an ’association’ between obesity and fitness," he agrees, "but it is not perfect. As you progress towards overweight, the percentage of individuals who are fit does go down. But here’s a shock: among class Ⅱ obese individuals [with a body mass index between 35 and 39.9], about 40% or 45% are still fit. You simply cannot tell by looking whether someone is fit or not. When we look at these mortality rates in fat people who are fit, we see that the harmful effect of fat just disappears: their death rate during the next decade is half that of the normal weight people who are unfit." One day--probably about a hundred years from now--this fat-but-fit question will be answered without the shadow of a doubt. In the meantime, is there anything that all the experts agree on Oh yes: however much your body weighs, you’ll live longer if you move it around a bit. Blair’s study proves that ______.
微信支付 
支付宝支付