2. 职称英语
  3. There are plenty of studies which show that dogs act as social catalysts(催化剂

There are plenty of studies which show that dogs act as social catalysts(催化剂

游客2024-02-08  35
问题     There are plenty of studies which show that dogs act as social catalysts(催化剂), helping their owners forge intimate, long-term relationships with other people. But does that apply to the workplace? Christopher Honts and his colleagues at Central Michigan University were surprised to find that there was not much research on this question, and decided to put that right. They wondered in particular if the mere presence of a dog in the office-might make people collaborate more effectively. And. they found that it could.
    To reach this conclusion, they carried out two experiments. In the first, they brought together 12 groups of four individuals and told each group to come up with a 15-second advertisement for a made-up product.
    Everyone was asked to contribute ideas for the ad, but ultimately the group had to decide on only one. Some of the groups had a dog underfoot throughout, while the others had none. After the task, all the volunteers had to answer a questionnaire on how they felt about working with the other human members of the team. Mr. Honts found that those who had had a dog ranked their teammates more highly on measures of trust, team cohesion and intimacy than those who had not.
    In the other experiment, the researchers explored how the presence of an animal altered players’ behaviour in a game known as the prisoner’s dilemma. In this game played by the volunteers, all four members of each group had been "charged" with a crime. Individually, they could choose(without being able to talk to the others)either to snitch(告发)on their teammates or to stand by them. Each individual’s decision affected the outcomes for the other three as well as for himself in a way that was explained in advance. The lightest sentence would be given to someone who chose to snitch while the other three did not; the heaviest penalty would be borne by a lone non-snitch. The second-best outcome came when all four decided not to snitch. And so on. Having a dog around made volunteers 30% less likely to snitch than those who played without one. The moral. then: more dogs in offices and fewer in police stations. [br] What can we conclude from the second experiment?
选项 A、The volunteers are often in a dilemma.
B、All the members of each group are real prisoners.
C、The participants would snitch less with the presence of dogs.
D、Each individual’s decision won’t affect others.
答案 C
解析
转载请注明原文地址:https://tihaiku.com/zcyy/3433483.html
相关试题推荐
随机试题
最新回复(0)