2. 考研
  3. Scientists have long argued over the relative contributions of practice and native talent to the development of elite performanc

Scientists have long argued over the relative contributions of practice and native talent to the development of elite performanc

admin2018-12-01  19
问题    Scientists have long argued over the relative contributions of practice and native talent to the development of elite performance. This debate swings back and forth every century, it seems, but a paper in the current issue of the journal Psychological Science illustrates where the discussion now stands and hints—more tantalizingly, for people who just want to do their best—at where the research will go next.
   The value-of-practice debate has reached a stalemate. In a landmark 1993 study of musicians, a research team led by K. Anders Ericsson found that practice time explained almost all the difference(about 80 percent)between elite performers and committed amateurs. The finding rippled quickly through the popular culture, perhaps most visibly as the apparent inspiration for the "10,000-hour rule" in Malcolm Gladwell’s best-selling "Outliers" —a rough average of the amount of practice time required for expert performance.
   The new paper, the most comprehensive review of relevant research to date, comes to a different conclusion. Compiling results from 88 studies across a wide range of skills, it estimates that practice time explains about 20 percent to 25 percent of the difference in performance in music, sports and games like chess. In academics, the number is much lower—4 percent—in part because it’s hard to assess the effect of previous knowledge, the authors wrote.
   One of those people, Dr. Ericsson, had by last week already written his critique of the new review. He points out that the paper uses a definition of practice that includes a variety of related activities, including playing music or sports for fun or playing in a group. But his own studies focused on what he calls deliberate practice: one-on-one lessons in which an instructor pushes a student continually, gives immediate feedback and focuses on weak spots. "If you throw all these kinds of practice into one big soup, of course you are going to reduce the effect of deliberate practice," he said in a telephone interview.
   Zach Hambrick, a co-author of the paper of the journal Psychological Science, said that using Dr. Ericsson’ s definition of practice would not change the results much, if at all, and partisans on both sides have staked out positions. Like most branches of the nature-nurture debate, this one has produced multiple camps, whose estimates of the effects of practice vary by as much as 50 percentage points.
The paper published in Psychological Science introduces_____.
选项 A、why the debate swings back and forth for a long time
B、what the current situation of the discussion is
C、where the people who just want to do their best are standing
D、what the significance of the debate is
答案B
解析 推断题。根据题干关键词定位到第一段。原文but a paper in the current issue of the journal Psychological Science illustrates where the discussion now stands and hints--more tantalizingly，for people who just want to do their best—at where the research will go next．(最近的一期《心理科学》上的一篇论文，介绍了这场争论的现状。对那些只想全力以赴 的人来说，更吸引人的是，文章暗示了未来的研究方向。)故B项“争论的现状是什么”为 正确答案。同时排除C项“那些只想全力以赴的人的所在位置”。A项“为什么这个争论 反复好长时间”和D项“这个争论有什么意义”均与题干无关，故排除。
转载请注明原文地址:https://kaotiyun.com/show/7v6Z777K
0

考研英语一

相关试题推荐
随机试题
最新回复(0)