4008-125-888
det培训
首页>sat>SAT真题回忆>2019年8月24日北美SAT阅读真题回忆及答案解析—第二篇

2019年8月24日北美SAT阅读真题回忆及答案解析—第二篇

2019-09-25 15:18来源:互联网作者:上海管理员

摘要:今天上海新航道SAT培训小编为大家带来的是SAT北美8月份的考试,值得庆幸的是大家考的都是新题。根据大家的反应来看,普遍都有加试而且大部分学生觉得小说比较难,其他文章和科目都比较正常。下面跟上海新航道SAT培训班一起来看下SAT阅读真题。2019年8月24日北美SAT阅读真题回忆及答案解析—第二篇

今天上海新航道SAT培训小编为大家带来的是SAT北美8月份的考试,值得庆幸的是大家考的都是新题。根据大家的反应来看,普遍都有加试而且大部分学生觉得小说比较难,其他文章和科目都比较正常。下面跟上海新航道SAT培训班一起来看下SAT阅读真题。2019年8月24日北美SAT阅读真题回忆及答案解析—第二篇

第二篇

Getting out the vote

Only about half of the people who could vote in the 2012 U.S. presidential election actually did so (53.6 percent of the voting-age population). This puts turnout in the U.S. among the worst in developed countries. By way of contrast, 87.2 percent of Belgians, 80.5 percent of Australians and 73.1 percent of Finns voted in their last elections. In a nation quick to defend democracy both within its borders and beyond, why are more Americans not exercising what is arguably their biggest democratic right?

Certainly there are political and mechanical obstacles within the American voting climate that make it difficult for people to even get to the polls, such as onerous voter ID laws or a shortage of polling stations in some locales. The absence of automatic voter registration (as in Finland) or mandatory registration (as in Australia) also limits turnout.

But beyond these structural hurdles, most theories that examine the mindset of those who do not vote speak to disengagement from electoral politics or disbelief in government's ability to affect progress. Solutions that aim to address these problems typically inform people about the importance of their vote in electing a government that works for them. Yet this tactic does not appear to sway many. Despite such efforts, turnout has consistently hovered around 50 percent for the past nine U.S. presidential elections—the highest being 56.9 percent in 2008.

Behavioral science might explain why these informational interventions fall short. A substantive body of evidence indicates that the environment in which we make decisions can fundamentally alter them. For example, what we think others are doing, how voting makes us feel about ourselves, and what we need to do to vote all affect whether or not we participate on Election Day. So instead of simply telling Americans to vote, the science suggests we need to think about the context in which citizens decide to cast their ballots.

A number of traditional mobilization efforts are directed at getting citizens to agree they will vote come election time. But just as many of us intend to exercise, eat healthy and save for retirement, people often fail to act on their intentions. As a 2015 review by researchers at Harvard University and the University of Pennsylvania concluded, making concrete plans can help people translate goals into actions across a number of domains.

In a field experiment conducted among 287,000 would-be voters in Pennsylvania during the 2008 Democratic primary election, researchers tried to see if voter turnout could be increased by helping people make a concrete plan to implement their intentions. One to three days before the November 2008 election, behavioral scientists David Nickerson, now at Temple University, and Todd Rogers of Harvard asked one group of would-be voters about their intentions to vote and a second group about their intentions and also about when, where and how they would accomplish the goal of voting.

Voter records showed that making a plan was more than twice as effective as simply asking people about their intentions. Overall there was a 4.1 percentage point increase in the likelihood of voting by making a plan relative to people who did not receive a phone call. (The average effectiveness of commercial phone banks, assessed from dozens of studies, is about one percentage point.)

Conventional wisdom (and practice) suggests that we could convince people to vote by stressing that their particular ballot is very important because not many other people are voting. Yet findings in behavioral science indicate that most of us are motivated by the desire to conform to the social norm—meaning we are more likely to do what most people are doing.

Two get-out-the-vote field experiments during the 2005 general election in New Jersey and the 2006 primary election in California tested these hypotheses. They found that individuals were much more motivated to vote when they believed lots of other people were voting compared with when they thought relatively few others were voting.

In another field experiment run by researchers at Yale University and the University of Northern Iowa during the 2006 primary election in Michigan, potential voters received direct mail noting that both they and their neighbors would be informed of who had voted after the election. Amazingly, this led to an 8.1 percent increase in turnout—one of the most successful get-out-the-vote tactics studied to date. Conventional direct-mail reminders, in contrast, yield just a 0.162 percent increase in turnout on average, according to a 2013 estimate based on 110 studies.

If most of us vote, then being part of the truant few who do not feels like we are shirking a social contract. Publicizing voting records may therefore increase the salience of this social obligation and possibly bring shame on nonvoters. Following through, however, allows them to maintain their self-identity as contributing members of society.

Some of the largest-ever experimental effects on voter turnout come from an experiment that used people's desire to shape or conform to a worthy self-identity, that is, the identity of “someone who votes.”

In a study published in 2011, psychologists at Stanford University and Harvard presented would-be voters in the 2008 presidential election in California and in the 2009 gubernatorial election in New Jersey with a preelection survey that framed voting as either an expression of self-identity (“How important is it to you to be a voter?”) or simply an activity (“How important is it to you to vote?”). In both cases, participants completed the survey the day before or the morning of the election.

Being “a voter,” one might argue, is about who you are as an upstanding citizen—a part of your identity that feels good to embrace and act on. The act of voting is simply that, an action, and one that anyone can, in principle, take. The results showed a remarkable 10.9 percentage point increase in turnout among people in the “voter” identity condition.

Such an increase nationally could have historic consequences. Indeed, it would bring American voter turnout up to 64.5 percent—ahead of both Canada and the U.K., lifting the nation from 31st to 19th place out of 34 developed countries in a Pew Research Center analysis.

Although tackling political barriers to voting remains critical, the great strength of these behavioral interventions lies in their ability to overwhelm obstacles by catalyzing citizen motivation. And for people who do not vote because they believe one person's ballot cannot change election outcomes, behavioral science also offers a reason why voting is important for individuals.

Research has found that in addition to signaling who we are to others, our actions tell us something about ourselves—shaping our own preferences and beliefs. From this perspective, people who do not vote are not merely abstaining from the democratic process in one instance. They are also “telling” themselves: “I don't care about politics.” Moving forward, they may also become less interested in civic rights, local governance, foreign affairs, and so on. And for those who do vote, participation is not just an expression of interest in current politics but also a seed that could grow into an active political life.

参考答案

11 无行号细节题;N and R seek to answer in their study = would prompting people to think ahead ... increase vote ;

12 单询证;voters desire to be viewed as civically responsible = line 74-76 ... allows them to maintain their self-identity as contribute ...;

13 文章主旨 = explain how insights from a particular scientific field might be used to increase vote turnout;

14 词汇题;simply = merely; 真题考过;

15 询证题*2;which motivates many people to vote = a teacher signs up for a conference after learning several teacher will attend;

16 line46-50 Yet findings in behavioral science indicat ... ;

17 词汇题 yield = produce; 真题考过;

18 读图题;figure1, greatest percentage increase vote = person was asked a definite plan for voting;

19 读图题;quotation from 2010 paper by N and R from Figure 1. which choice best helps explain a finding regarding multiple-voter = target in one-eligible-boter households were less likely to have made voting plan before ... ;

20 图文结合题; researchers who conducted the 2006 study ... to assess = the effectiveness of a conventional strategy compared with newer strategies;


相关热点: sat解析
免费领取资料

免费领取最新剑桥雅思、TPO、SAT真题、百人留学备考群,名师答疑,助教监督,分享最新资讯,领取独家资料。

方法1:扫码添加新航道老师

微信号:shnc_2018

方法2:留下表单信息,老师会及时与您联系

热门课程

  • SAT考前模考冲刺班
  • 走读班(3-6人)
  • 住宿班(3-6人)
  • SAT一对一
课程名称 班级人数 课时 学费 报名
SAT考前模考冲刺班 40课时 ¥3800 在线咨询
SAT十一特训班 6-8人 48课时 ¥16800 在线咨询
SAT模考刷题班 不限 4天 ¥5800 在线咨询
课程名称 班级人数 课时 学费 报名
SAT强化班(3-6人,走读) 3-6人 64课时 ¥21800 在线咨询
SAT冲刺班(3-6人.走读) 3-6人 32课时 ¥11800 在线咨询
SAT预备班(3-6人,走读) 3-6人 32课时 ¥10800 在线咨询
SAT基础班(3-6人,走读) 3-6人 64课时 ¥20800 在线咨询
课程名称 班级人数 课时 学费 报名
课程名称 班级人数 课时 学费 报名
SAT一对一 1 按需定制 在线咨询

免责声明
1、如转载本网原创文章,请表明出处;
2、本网转载媒体稿件旨在传播更多有益信息,并不代表同意该观点,本网不承担稿件侵权行为的连带责任;
3、如本网转载稿、资料分享涉及版权等问题,请作者见稿后速与新航道联系(电话:021-64380066),我们会第一时间删除。

  • 徐家汇校区
  • 人民广场校区
  • 浦东校区
  • 中山公园校区
  • 杨浦校区
  • 闵行校区
  • 松江校区
  • 封闭集训营
  • 地址:徐汇区裕德路126号

    乘车路线:地铁1、4号线上海体育馆、3号线9号线宜山路站、11号线上海游泳馆站

  • 地址:南京西路338号天安中心24楼

    乘车路线:地铁1、2、8号线人民广场站

  • 地址:浦东新区世纪大道1128号岚桥国际大厦3楼(地铁2号线世纪大道站12号口出)

    乘车路线:地铁2、4、6号线世纪大道站

  • 地址:长宁路1158号 贝多芬广场 A座4楼414室

    乘车路线:乘车路线:地铁3、4号线中山公园站

  • 地址:杨浦区国宾路18号万达广场A座18楼

    乘车路线:地铁10号线五角场站

  • 地址:东川路1779-19号

    乘车路线:地铁5号线 东川路站4号口出

  • 地址:松江大学城四期校区:文汇路928弄想飞天地2204

    乘车路线:地铁9号线松江大学城站下

  • 地址:上海市浦东新区惠南镇拱极路2151号

    乘车路线:地铁16号线惠南站

  • 微信公众号
  • 微信社群

注册/登录

+86
获取验证码

登录

+86

收不到验证码?

知道了

找回密码

+86
获取验证码
下一步

重新设置密码

为您的账号设置一个新密码

保存新密码

密码重置成功

请妥善保存您的密码
立即登录

为了确保您的帐号安全

请勿将帐号信息提供给他人/机构