单词很忙

Although ethics classes are common around the world, scientists are unsure if their lessons can actually change behavior; evidence either way is weak, relying on contrived laboratory tests or sometimes unreliable self-reports. But a new study published in Cognition found that, in at least one real-world situation, a single ethics lesson may have had lasting effects.

The researchers investigated one class session’s impact on eating meat. They chose this particular behavior for three reasons, according to study co-author Eric  Schwitzgebel, a philosopher at the University of California, Riverside: students’ attitudes on the topic are variable and unstable, behavior is easily measurable, and ethics literature largely agrees that eating less meat is good because it reduces environmental harm and animal suffering. Half of the students in four large philosophy classes read an article on the ethics of factory-farmed meat, optionally watched an 11-minute video on the topic and joined a 50-minute discussion. The other half focused on charitable giving instead. Then, unknown to the students, the researchers studied their anonymized meal-card purchases for that semester—nearly 14,000 receipts for almost 500 students.

Schwitzgebel predicted the intervention would have no effect; he had previously found that ethics professors do not differ from other professors on a range of behaviors, including voting rates, blood donation and returning library books. But among student subjects who discussed meat ethics, meal purchases containing meat decreased from 52 to 45 percent—and this effect held steady for the study’s duration of several weeks. Purchases from the other group remained at 52 percent.

“That’s actually a pretty large effect for a pretty small intervention,” Schwitzgebel says. Psychologist Nina Strohminger at the University of Pennsylvania, who was not involved in the study, says she wants the effect to be real but cannot rule out some unknown confounding variable. And if real, she notes, it might be reversible by another nudge: “Easy come, easy go.”

Schwitzgebel suspects the greatest impact came from social influence- classmates or teaching assistants leading the discussions may have shared their own vegetarianism, showing it as achievable or more common. Second, the video may have had an emotional impact. Least rousing, he thinks, was rational argument, although his co-authors say reason might play a bigger role. Now the researchers are probing the  specific effects of teaching style, teaching assistants’ eating habits and students’ video exposure. Meanwhile, Schwitzgebel—who had predicted no effect—will be eating his words.

尽管道德课在世界各地都很常见，但科学家们不确定这些课程是否真的能改变行为;这两种说法的证据都很薄弱，依赖于人为的实验室测试或有时不可靠的自我报告。但发表在《认知》杂志上的一项新研究发现，至少在一种现实世界的情况下，一堂道德课可能会产生持久的影响。

研究人员调查了一堂课对吃肉的影响。研究报告的合著者、加州大学河滨分校(University of California, Riverside)的哲学家埃里克·施维茨格贝尔(Eric Schwitzgebel)表示，他们选择这种特殊的行为有三个原因:学生对这个话题的态度是可变的、不稳定的;行为是容易衡量的;伦理文献基本上同意少吃肉是件好事，因为它减少了对环境的危害和动物的痛苦。在四门大型哲学课上，一半的学生阅读了一篇关于工厂养殖肉类伦理的文章，选择性地观看了一段11分钟的视频，并参加了一场50分钟的讨论。另一半则专注于慈善捐赠。然后，在学生不知情的情况下，研究人员研究了他们在那个学期的匿名餐卡消费——近500名学生的近14,000张收据。

施维茨格贝尔预测，干预不会产生任何效果;他之前发现，伦理教授在投票率、献血、归还图书馆书籍等一系列行为上与其他教授没有什么不同。但在讨论肉类伦理的学生中，购买含肉餐食的比例从52%下降到45%，而且这种影响在研究持续的几周内保持稳定。另一组的购买量保持在52%。

施维茨格贝尔说:“这实际上是一个相当小的干预措施产生了相当大的效果。”宾夕法尼亚大学(University of Pennsylvania)的心理学家尼娜·斯特罗明格(Nina Strohminger)没有参与这项研究，她说她希望这种效果是真实的，但不能排除一些未知的混杂变量。她指出，如果这是真的，它可能会被另一个推动所逆转:“来得容易，去得也快。”

Schwitzgebel怀疑最大的影响来自社会影响——引导讨论的同学或助教可能分享了他们自己的素食主义，表明这是可以实现的或更普遍的。其次，这段视频可能造成了情感上的影响。他认为，最不令人振奋的是理性论证，尽管他的合著者认为理性可能发挥更大的作用。现在，研究人员正在探索教学风格、助教的饮食习惯和学生观看视频的具体影响。与此同时，曾预言不会有任何影响的施维茨格贝尔将收回自己的话。

句子成分分析：

"That's [actually] a pretty large effect [for a pretty small intervention]," Schwitzgebel says.

句子语法结构详解：

(That's = That is)

* is 为系动词作谓语，采用一般现在时。
* says 为谓语，采用一般现在时。动词采用第三人称单数形式。
* that 为指示代词。a 为不定冠词。

句子相关词汇解释：

Vocabulary:

句子成分分析：

Psychologist NinaStrohminger (at the University of Pennsylvania), (who was not involved in the study), says | she 

wants the effect tobe real but cannot rule out some unknown confounding variable.

句子语法结构详解：

(cannot = can not)

* who 为关系代词，引导非限制性定语从句。
* was 为系动词作谓语，采用一般过去时。
* involved 为形容词作表语。
* says 为谓语，采用一般现在时。动词采用第三人称单数形式。
* she 开头为宾语从句，引导词 that 被省略。
* wants 为谓语，采用一般现在时。动词采用第三人称单数形式。
* to be 为不定式，作宾语补足语(或称复合宾语)。
* be 为系动词。
* real 为形容词作表语。
* rule 为谓语。
* can 为情态动词。she 为人称代词主格。the 为定冠词。

句子相关词汇解释：

Phrase:

Vocabulary:

句子成分分析：

Leastrousing, <he thinks>, was rational argument, || although his co-authors say | reason might play a bigger role.

句子语法结构详解：

(bigger 为 big 的比较级形式)

* Least rousing 为动名词，在句中作主语。
* thinks 为谓语，采用一般现在时。动词采用第三人称单数形式。
* was 为系动词作谓语，采用一般过去时。
* although 为连词，引导让步状语从句。
* say 为谓语，采用一般现在时。
* reason 开头为宾语从句，引导词 that 被省略。
* play 为谓语。
* may 为情态动词。he 为人称代词主格。his 为形容词型物主代词。a 为不定冠词。

句子相关词汇解释：

Vocabulary:

以上是蜂贝为您整理编写的文章《考研英语之阅读理解文段精选详解第135篇——秒词邦巧记背单词软件》的全部内容。蜂贝是国内权威分题型分考点背诵中高考/四六级考研/专升本/出国单词的专业单词软件。扫描如下小程序码，进入蜂贝官方小程序获取更多英语相关资料！ 【关键词：高考单词；高考英语；高中单词；高中英语；单词app；单词软件；记单词app；记单词软件；背单词软件；背单词app；英语单词；四六级单词；四六级英语；四六级单词app；四六级单词软件；考研单词app；考研单词软件；核心单词；高考冲刺复习；高考英语教材；高考英语真题；四六级真题；四六级试题；考研真题；考研英语单词；考研英语真题】