2. 职称英语
  3. Dr. Rablen and Dr. Oswald have just published a study which concludes that N

Dr. Rablen and Dr. Oswald have just published a study which concludes that N

游客2024-11-30  9
问题     Dr. Rablen and Dr. Oswald have just published a study which concludes that Nobel science laureates live significantly longer than those of their colleagues who were nominated for a prize, but failed to receive one. They work with data from 1901 to 1950, and the search is restricted to men (to avoid differences in life span between the sexes), and those killed prematurely are eliminated. That gave them 135 prize winners and 389 also-rans.
    The theory they were testing was that status itself, rather than the trappings of status, such as wealth, act to prolong life. This idea was first declared by Sir Michael Marmot, of University College, London. Sir Michael studied the health of British civil servants and discovered, contrary to his and everyone else’s expectations, that those at the top of the hierarchy — whom the stress of the job was expected to have affected adversely — were actually far healthier than the supposedly unstressed functionaries at the bottom of the heap. Subsequent research has confirmed this result, and suggested it is nothing to do with the larger salaries of those at the top. But Dr. Rablen and Dr. Oswald thought it would be interesting to refine the observation still further, by studying individuals who were all, in a sense, at the top. By comparing people good enough to be considered for a Nobel, they could measure what the status of having one was worth.
    Comparing winners and also-rans from within the same countries, to avoid yet another source of bias, Dr. Rablen and Dr. Oswald found that the winners lived, on average, two years longer than those who had merely been nominated. Exactly what causes this increased longevity is unclear. It is not the cash, though. The inflation adjusted value of the prize has fluctuated over the years, so the two researchers were able to see if the purchasing power of the money was correlated with longevity. It was not.
    With the hierarchically ordered individuals studied by Sir Michael and his successors, both medical records and experiments on animals suggest stress hormones are involved. It is, indeed, more stressful to be at the bottom than the top, even if being at the top involves making decisions on the fate of nations. The result Dr. Rablen and Dr. Oswald have come up with, though, suggests a positive effect associated with high status, rather than the absence of a negative effect, since unsuccessful nominees never know that they have been nominated.
    A similar effect has been noted once before, in a different field. Research published a few years ago by Donald Redelmeier and Sheldon Singh showed that Oscar winning actors and actresses live 3.6 years longer than those who are nominated, but do not win. However, in that case the failed nominees do know that they have failed. And, curiously, Oscar winning scriptwriters live 3.6 years less than do nominees. Perhaps writers, unlike actors and scientists, live in a world of inverted snobbery. [br] What is the two doctors’ possible explanation for their findings?
选项 A、People at the top don’t need to worry about money.
B、People who suffer greater stress pay more attention to health.
C、It is in fact less stressful to be at the top than the bottom.
D、High status has a positive effect on people.
答案 D
解析 事实细节题。文中第四段对两位博士的研究结果作了分析。其中，该段尾句谈到“两位博士的结论表明高等地位会产生积极影响(a positive effect associated with high status)”。因此，[D]为原文的同义转述，正确。第三段后半部分明确指出两位博士研究的长寿与钱无关，由此排除[A]；文中并未提到压力更大的人更关注健康，故[B]错；从第四段第二句可知，[C]是对麦克爵士的研究结果的解释，故也应排除。
转载请注明原文地址:https://tihaiku.com/zcyy/3867301.html
相关试题推荐
随机试题
最新回复(0)