雅思閱讀模擬題：Lighting Up The Lies

　　新東方在線雅思網特為大家準備了雅思閱讀模擬題：Lighting Up The Lies。雅思模擬試題在雅思備考過程中所起的作用不可小覷，通過模擬練習題，我們可以很直接地了解到自己的備考狀況，從而可以更有針對性地進行之后的復習。希望以下內容能夠對大家的雅思備考有所幫助!更多雅思報名官網的最新消息，最新、最專業的雅思備考資料，新東方在線雅思網將第一時間為大家發布。

　　Lighting Up The Lies

　　You should spend about 20 minutes on Questions 1-13 which are based on Reading Passage below.

　　Last year Sean A. Spence, a professor at the school of medicine at the University of Sheffield in England, performed brain scans that showed that a woman convicted of poisoning a child in her care appeared to be telling the truth when she denied committing the crime. This deception study, along with two others performed by the Sheffield group, was funded by Quickfire Media, a television production company working for the U.K.'s Channel 4, which broadcast videos of the researchers at work as part of a three-part series called "Lie Lab." The brain study of the woman later appeared in the journal European Psychiatry.

　　Functional magnetic resonance imaging (fMRI) purports to detect mendacity by seeing inside the brain instead of tracking peripheral measures of anxiety—such as changes in pulse, blood pressure or respiration —measured by a polygraph. Besides drawing hundreds of thousands of viewers, fMRI has pulled in entrepreneurs. Two companies—Cephos in Pepperell, Mass., and No Lie MRI in Tarzana, Calif.—claim to predict with 90 percent or greater certitude whether you are telling the truth. No Lie MRI, whose name evokes the casual familiarity of a walk-in dental clinic in a strip mall, suggests that the technique may even be used for “risk reduction in dating”.

　　Many neuroscientists and legal scholars doubt such claims—and some even question whether brain scans for lie detection will ever be ready for anything but more research on the nature of deception and the brain. An fMRI machine tracks blood flow to activated brain areas. The assumption in lie detection is that the brain must exert extra effort when telling a lie and that the regions that do more work get more blood. Such areas light up in scans; during the lie studies, the illuminated regions are primarily involved in decision making.

　　To assess how fMRI and other neuroscience findings affect the law, the Mac-Arthur Foundation put up $10 million last year to pilot for three years the Law and Neuroscience Project. Part of the funding will attempt to set criteria for accurate and reliable lie detection using fMRI and other brain-scanning technology. “I think it's not possible, given the current technology, to trust the results,” says Marcus Raichle, a neuroscientist at the Washington University School of Medicine in St. Louis who heads the project's study group on lie detection. “But it’s not impossible to set up a research program to determine whether that’s possible.” A major review article last year in the American Journal of Law and Medicine by Henry T. Greely of Stanford University and Judy Illes, now at the University of British Columbia, explores the deficiencies of existing research and what may be needed to move the technology forward. The two scholars found that lie detection studies conducted so far (still less than 20 in all) failed to prove that fMRI is “effective as a lie detector in the real world at any accuracy level.”

　　Most studies examined groups, not individuals. Subjects in these studies were healthy young adults—making it unclear how the results would apply to someone who takes a drug that affects blood pressure or has a blockage in an artery. And the two researchers questioned the specificity of the lit-up areas; they noted that the regions also correlate with a wide range of cognitive behaviors, including memory, self- monitoring and conscious self-awareness.

　　The biggest challenge for which the Law and Neuroscience Project is already funding new research—is how to diminish the artificiality of the test protocol. Lying about whether a playing card is the seven of spades may not activate the same areas of the cortex as answering a question about whether you robbed the corner store. In fact, the most realistic studies to date may have come from the Lie Lab television programs. The two companies marketing the technology are not waiting for more data. Cephos is offering scans without charge to people who claim they were falsely accused if they meet certain criteria in an effort to get scans accepted by the courts. Allowing scans as legal evidence could open a potentially huge and lucrative market. “We may have to take many shots on goal before we actually see a courtroom.” says Cephos chief executive Steven Laken. He asserts that the technology has achieved 97 percent accuracy and that the more than 100 people scanned using the Cephos protocol have provided data that have resolved many of the issues that Greely and Illes cited.

　　But until formal clinical trials prove that the machines meet safety and effectiveness criteria, Greely and Illes have called for a ban on non-research uses. Trials envisaged for regulatory approval hint at the technical challenges. Actors, professional poker players and sociopaths would be compared against average Joes. The devout would go in the scanner after nonbelievers. Testing would take into account social setting. White lies—“no, dinner really was fantastic”—would have to be compared against untruths about sexual peccadilloes to ensure that the brain reacts identically.

　　There potential for abuse prompts caution. “The danger is that people’s lives can be changed in bad ways because of mistakes in the technology,” Greely says. “The danger for the science is that it gets a black eye because of this very high profile use of neuroimaging that goes wrong.” Considering the long and controversial history of the polygraph, gradualism may be the wisest course to follow for a new diagnostic that probes an essential quality governing social interaction.

　　Question 1-7

　　Use the information in the passage to match the people (listed A-D) with opinions or deeds below. Write the appropriate letters A-D in boxes 1-7 on your answer sheet.

　　NB you may use any letter more than once

　　A Henry T. Greely &Judy Illes

　　B Steven Laken

　　C Henry T. Greely

　　D Marcus Raichle

　　1 The possibility hidden in a mission impossible

　　2 The uncertain effectiveness of functional magnetic resonance imaging for detecting lies

　　3 The hazard lying behind the technology as a lie detector

　　4 The limited fields for the use of lie detection technology

　　5 Several successful cases of applying the results from the lie detection technology

　　6 Cons of the current research related to lie-detector tests

　　7 There should be some requested work to improve the techniques regarding lie detection

　　Question 8-10

　　Do the following statements agree with the information given in Reading Passage 1?

　　In boxes 8-10 on your answer sheet, write

　　TRUE if the statement is true

　　FALSE if the statement is false

　　NOT GIVEN if the information is not given in the passage

　　8 The lie detection for a convicted woman was first conducted by researchers in Europe.

　　9 The legitimization of using scans in the court might mean a promising and profitable business.

　　10 There is always something wrong with neuroimaging.

　　Question 11-13

　　Summary

　　Complete the following summary of the paragraphs of Reading Passage, using No More than Three words from the Reading Passage for each answer. Write your answers in boxes 11-13 on your answer sheet.

　　It is claimed that functional magnetic resonance imaging can check lies by observing the internal part of the brain rather than following up 11 to evaluate the anxiety as 12 does. Audiences as well as 13 are fascinated by this amazing lie-detection technology.

　　(轉第二頁)

　　文章題目：謊言揭秘

　　題材：論說文

　　結構：A:Sean A. Spence關于毒死孩子的婦女的測謊實驗

　　B:fMRI的測試方法及引起的關注

　　C:人們的懷疑及fMRI測謊的理論依據

　　D:為fMRI設立的研究項目，Henry T. Greely 和Judy Illes不信任fMRI

　　E:fMRI的研究對象令Henry T. Greely 和Judy Illes提出質疑

　　F:fMRI所面臨的最大問題，企業卻急于應用fMRI技術

　　G:fMRI的安全性和有效性標準設置有許多技術問題要解決

　　H:Henry T. Greely對于fMRI的警告及作者的建議

　　試題分析：

　　Question 1-7

　　題目類型：List of opinions and deeds

　　參考譯文：

　　去年，英國謝菲爾德大學醫學院教授Sean A. Spence 在對一位將自己照顧的孩子毒死的婦女的大腦進行掃描時發現，這位被定罪的婦女在否認自己的犯罪事實時，看起來像是在說真話。這項關于欺騙的研究，連同其它兩個由謝菲爾德小組領導的研究是由Quickfire Media贊助的，Quickfire Media是一家電視節目制作公司，播出頻道為英國的第4頻道，該頻道播放這些研究人員在工作時的視頻，構成一個由三部分組成的系列節目的一部分，該系列叫做“謊言實驗室”。對該婦女大腦的研究之后出現在歐洲精神病學雜志上。

　　功能磁共振成像儀(fMRI)聲稱能通過看到大腦的內部來進行測謊，而不是通過追蹤焦慮的外在表現:如通過測謊儀測出的脈搏，血壓或呼吸的變化，功能磁共振成像技術除了吸引成百上千的觀眾外，還吸引著企業家的目光。兩家公司——馬薩諸塞州Pepperell市的 Cephos 公司和加利福尼亞州Tarzana市的No Lie MRI 公司聲稱對人們是否在說實話的預測的準確率可以達到90%甚至更高。No Lie MRI 這家公司的名字本身就會讓人想起一個熟悉的情景——就像走進一家位于商業區的牙科診所，表明該技術甚至可能被 用于“降低約會的風險。”

　　許多神經科學家和法律學者卻懷疑此說法，有的甚至質疑對謊言的探測而進行大腦掃描測謊是否真的有用，還是只是一些對謊言的性質和大腦所做的更多的研究罷了。功能磁共振成像儀追蹤到達大腦激活區的血流的行蹤。測謊背后的假設是，當大腦在說謊時，它需要額外的運作并且負責這些額外運作的大腦區域需要更多的血液供給，而這些區域在被掃描時就會亮起，在對謊言進行研究時，這些被照亮的區域就是主要參與決策的區域。

　　為了評估功能磁共振成像儀和其他神經科學的發現如何影響法律，麥克阿瑟基金去年出資1,000萬元來資助一個將耗時三年的“法律和神經科學項目”。部分資金將會用來嘗試設置使用功能磁共振成像儀和其它腦部掃描技術來進行測謊的準確性和可靠性的標準。華盛頓大學圣路易斯醫學院負責該項目測謊研究小組的神經學家 Marcus Raichle 認為“在現有的技術前提下，很難完全相信測謊的結果，但是建立一個項目以確定測謊結果的可能性這項提議是可行的。”斯坦福大學的 Henry T. Greely 和英國哥倫比亞大學的 Judy Illes 在去年發表在美國《法律與醫學雜志》上的一篇評論文章中探討了現行研究的不足之處以及為了推進技術進步可能需要改進之處。兩位學者發現，迄今為止進行的測謊研究(總數仍低于20)還不能證明磁共振成像儀作為測謊儀在現實世界中的任何的精度水平上都是有效的。

　　大多數的研究都是以團體而不是以個人為對象。這些研究的對象是健康的年輕成年人——所以不清楚如果對象變成因為服用了藥物而影響了血壓或是導致動脈堵塞的人時，這些研究結果是否還適用。兩位研究人員質疑了這些發亮的區域，他們指出，該區域也和一系列認知行為具有相關性，包括記憶，自我檢測和自我意識。

　　最大的挑戰——同時也是“法律和神經枓學項目”為其資助了新的研究項目——是如何減少測試協議的人為干預程度。關于一張撲克牌是否是黑桃7的謊言可能無法激活與回答你是否搶劫了街角的一家商店時的大腦皮質的同一區域。事實上，迄今為止最現實的研究，有可能是來自“謊言實驗室”這個電視節目。兩家經營這樣技術的公司不是再等待更多的數據。Cephos公司提供的免費的掃描是針對一些符合特定標準由法院準許的聲稱自己是無罪的人。允許對大腦的掃描作為法律證據可能會打開一個潛在的巨大和利潤豐厚的市場。Cephos公司的首席執行官Steven Laken說道“在上法庭之前，可能需要進行若干的測試”。他聲稱該技術已達到97%的準確率，并且有超過100個使用Cephos公司掃描的人已經通過獲得數據解決了許多Greely and Illes提到過的問題。

　　但是，Greely 和 Illes的呼吁在正式的臨床試驗證明該儀器能夠滿足安全性和有效性的標準前，該儀器不可用在非研究領域。要面對監管部門的批準的試驗要面對技術上的挑戰。演員，專業撲克玩家和反社會的人會和普通人進行比較。虔誠的人會跟在懷疑論者的后面接受掃描。測試將需要考慮到社會環境。善意的謊言——“不，晚餐真是太棒了”——將會和有關性過失這樣的謊言進行比對，以保證大腦對不同的謊言有相同的反應。

　　人們要小心這項技術被濫用的危險。Greely 認為“危險在于人們的生活可能會因為技術中的錯誤往不好的方向改變。科學的危險之處在于它有很多未知性，因為它很大程度上使用了錯誤的神經影像學。”鑒于漫長且有爭議的測謊儀的歷史，循序漸進可能是最明智的選擇，來使用它作為一個新的診斷手段來檢測社會治理的質量。