2016年12月3日亚太SAT阅读真题：
篇：2016年12月3日亚太SAT阅读真题回忆-A Room with a View
第二篇：2016年12月3日亚太SAT阅读真题回忆-Letters of John Adams, Addressed to His Wife (双篇哦)
第三篇：2016年12月3日亚太SAT阅读真题原文-Madness of crowds, single ants beat colonies at easy choices
2016年12月3日亚太SAT阅读真题第四篇考试的一篇社会科学-The best lie detectors in the workplace，我们一起来看看原文回忆吧！
第四篇
题材：社会科学
2016年12月3日亚太SAT阅读真题第四篇The best lie detectors in the workplace
梗概
12月考试的社会科学题材文章选在于《华盛顿邮报》，文章发表于2013年4月5日。作者Adam Grunt是沃顿商学院的一名教授。这是一篇关于领导力的文章，作者认为的领导不必是任何时候都对他人持以信任态度，而是大多数时候相信大多数人，对别人持有信念的人才能够走得更远。
原文：
Lie detection is a notoriouslydifficult skill to master. In fact, even most so-called lie detection experts —experienced detectives, psychiatrists, job interviewers, judges, polygraphadministrators, intelligence agents and auditors — hardly do better thanchance. In a massive analysis of studies with more than 24,000 people,psychologists Charles Bond Jr. and Bella DePaulo found that even the expertsare right less than 55 percent of the time.
Still, some people are better judges of character than others. So whenwe need to count on people to assess honesty, we tend to turn to the skepticsamong us, expecting that they’ll be thorough and discerning.
Consider a clever study by psychologists Nancy Carter and Mark Weber,who presented business professionals with a scenario about an organizationstruggling with dishonesty in its hiring interviews. They had the chance tochoose one of two highly competent senior managers to be the company’s jobinterviewer. The majordifference(该句表述的差异是该实验开展的基础，重点考察)between the two managers wasn’t experience or skill, it was a matter ofpersonality: One manager was skeptical and suspicious, whereas the othermanager had a habit of trusting others. Eighty-five percent chose the skepticalmanager to make the hiring decisions, expecting the trusting manager to be naïve and easilyduped(结合该句考察人们对trusting others 的manager的看法).
But are we rightthat skeptics are better lie detectors? To find out, Carter and Webercreated videotapes of eight business students interviewing for a job. Half ofthe interviewees told the truth throughout the interview, while the other halfwas instructed to tell three significant lies apiece.
The results were surprising. The more trusting evaluators betteridentified the liars among the group than the skeptics did, and were also lesslikely to hire those liars. Contrary to conventional wisdom, it’s the skepticswho are easiest to fool. Why would this be? One possibility, according to Carter and Weber, isthat lie-detection skills cause people to become more trusting. If you’re goodat spotting lies, you need to worry less about being deceived by others,because you can often catch them in the act.
The otherpossibility(结合上段中的种解释，对两种解释进行对比，答案要总结该段中第二种解释的特点)is that by trusting others, we sharpen our skills in reading people. Skepticsassume that most people are hiding or misrepresenting something. This makesthem interpersonally risk-averse, whereas people who habitually trust othersget to see a wider range of actions — from honesty to deception and generosityto selfishness. Over time, this creates more opportunities to learn about thesignals that distinguish liars from truth tellers. It’s this latterexplanation, that trust improves our lie detection skills, that I find moreplausible. Children develop beliefs about the integrity and benevolence ofothers early in life, often years before they can master the art of spottingcon artists.
So what signals dotrusters use to spot lies? (考察该句以及第四段首句都是问句所起到的作用)Oneof the study’s findings is that they pay more attention to vocal cues thanskeptics do. This lines up beautifully with a breakthrough review led by thepsychologist Alder Vrij. His team examined several decades of research andconcluded that most of us rely heavily on nonverbal cues, such as nervousnessor confidence, even though they can be misleading.
SAT真题下载：
更多真题下载，请：SAT真题下载
