2. 考研
  3. Science has few more controversial topics than human intelligence—in particular, whether variations in it are a result of nature

Science has few more controversial topics than human intelligence—in particular, whether variations in it are a result of nature

admin2021-02-21  118
问题    Science has few more controversial topics than human intelligence—in particular, whether variations in it are a result of nature or nurture, and especially whether such variations differ between the sexes. The mines in this field can blow up an entire career, as Larry Summers found out in 2005 when he spoke of the hypothesis that the mathematical aptitude needed for physics and engineering, as well as for maths itself, is innately rarer in women than in men. He resigned as president of Harvard University shortly afterwards.
   It is bold, therefore, of Jonathan Wai, Martha Putallaz and Matthew Makel, of Duke University in North Carolina, to enter the argument with a paper that addresses both questions. In this paper, they describe how they sifted through nearly three decades of standardised tests administered to American high-school students to see what had been happening to the country’s brightest sparks. They draw two conclusions. One is that a phenomenon called the Flynn effect applies in particular to the brightest of the bright. The other is that part, but not all, of the historic difference between the brainiest men and women has vanished.
   The three researchers drew their data from Duke University’s Talent Identification Programme, TIP, which is designed to discover especially clever candidates early on: all the participants had scored in the top 5% of ability when confronted with exams designed for much older students. TIP, in turn, draws on three national exams: SAT, EXPLORE and ACT.
   In the early 1980s, the ratio of males to females in the top 0.01% of maths scores in SAT, the Scholastic Aptitude Test, was around 13 to 1. By the early 1990s, it had fallen to four to one. After this, however, it remained unaltered.
   It is clear that the rise itself must be "nurture" of some sort, but the subsequent stasis could have either explanation. A line of reasoning in favour of "nature" is that put forward by Simon Baron-Cohen, a psychologist at Cambridge University. This connects the extreme systematising patterns of thought which make a good mathematician with the advantage of men among those with Asperger’s syndrome, a form of autism that does not harm a person’s general intelligence. But the difference could equally well be the result of some as-yet-unclear difference between the ways girls and boys are brought up.
   That such unclear environmental influences can have real effects on IQ is eloquently illustrated by the Flynn effect. This phenomenon, brought to the world’s attention in the 1980s by James Flynn of the University of Otago, in New Zealand, is that average IQs around the world have been rising at the rate of 0.3 points a year for the past eight decades. Using the TIP data, Dr Wai and his colleagues showed that this is as true of the brightest youngsters in American society as it is of lesser mortals, suggesting that even they can have their abilities boosted by whatever is causing the Flynn effect. Once again, the changes seem to be mainly in mathematics. Scores in the brightest children’s verbal-reasoning and reading abilities demonstrate no clear trend, but all three national tests show sustained improvements in their mathematical ability over the past three decades.
   [A] aims to find out extraordinarily smart people based on three exams in America.
   [B] shows, with colleagues, that general IQs of the cleverest youngsters have been rising.
   [C] assumes that genetically, there is an inequality in mathematical ability between sexes.
   [D] presents that there are some relationships between intelligence and Asperger’s syndrome.
   [E] shows that IQ has been rising on average under environmental influences.
   [F] finds an inequality in mathematical ability between sexes according to his research.
   [G] concludes, with his colleagues, that intelligent difference between sexes doesn’t change.
Jonathan Wai
选项
答案B
解析 Jonathan Wai出现在文中的第二段和最后一段，解题句在最后一段。该段指出，通过分析TIP的数据，卫博士和他的同事们证实了无论是天才还是普通人，都适应弗林效应。B中的the cleverest youngsters与原文the brightest youngsters同义，that general IQs…have been rising阐明了原文中this指代的内容，故确定B为本题的正确答案。
转载请注明原文地址:https://www.kaotiyun.com/show/Y1Y4777K
0

考研英语二

相关试题推荐
随机试题
最新回复(0)