2. 考研
  3. Letting it out may be bad for your emotional health. Many people assume that sharing feelings openly and often is a positive ide

Letting it out may be bad for your emotional health. Many people assume that sharing feelings openly and often is a positive ide

admin2014-02-27  57
问题     Letting it out may be bad for your emotional health. Many people assume that sharing feelings openly and often is a positive ideal that promotes mental health. But some social critics and psychologists now conclude that repressing one’s feelings may do more good than venting emotions.
    "A small number of researchers are taking an empirical look at the general assumption that speaking out and declaring one’s feelings is better than holding them in," writes Christina Sommers, a resident fellow at the American Enterprise Institute.
    At Suffilk University, psychologist Jane Bybee classified high-school students on the basis of their self-awareness: "sensitizers" were extremely aware of their internal states, "repressors" focused little on themselves, and "intermediates" occupied the middle range. Bybee then collected student evaluations of themselves and each other, along with teacher evaluations of the students. On the whole, the repressors were more socially and academically successful than their more "sensitized" classmates. Bybee speculated that repressed people, not emoters, may have a better balance of moods.
    In a study at Catholic University in Washington, D.C., researcher George Bonanno tested the assumption that, in order to recover mental health, people need to vent negative emotions by discussing their feelings openly. Bonanno and other researchers found that, among adolescent girls who had suffered sexual abuse, those who "showed emotional avoidance" were healthier than those who more openly expressed grief or anger.
    One study of Holocaust survivors supports Bonanno in suggesting that verbalizing strong emotions may not improve a person’s mental health. Researchers found that Holocaust survivors who were encouraged to talk about their experiences in the war fared worse than repressors. They concluded that repression was not pathological response to Holocaust experience and that "talking through" the atrocities failed to being closure to the survivors.
    Sommers note that in many societies it has been considered normal to repress private feelings, and that "in most cultures stoicism and reticence are valued, while the free expression of emotions is deemed a personal shortcoming." She is concerned that pushing someone to be "sensitizers" may also create a preoccupation with self that excludes outside interests. Sommers is particularly critical of educational approaches that attempt to encourage self-discovery and self-esteem through excessive "openness".
    Healthy stoicism should not be confused with the emotional numbness that may be brought on by post-traumatic stress disorder. Most people experiencing such traumas as war, assault, or natural disaster can benefit from immediate counseling, according to the National Institute of Mental Health.
According to Jane Bybee, "sensitizers" were_____.
选项 A、extremely sensitive to other’s feelings
B、evaluated positively by the teachers
C、more successful than "intermediates"
D、not as emotionally healthy as "repressors"
答案D
解析 这是一道细节题。题干中的信号词为sensitizers，出自于文章第三段第一句话。文章第三段指出：心理学家简.伯彼根据学生的自我意识把中学生分类——“反应敏感者”非常了解自己的内心情感，“压抑情感者”几乎不关注自己的内心情感，而“中间类型者”则介于这两者之间；然后，伯彼收集了学生的自评、互评以及老师对他们的评语；总体上，相对于他们“更敏感的”同学，“压抑情感者”更善于社交，学习成绩更好；伯彼推测，“压抑情感者”而不是“过分表达感情者”可能具有更好的心态平衡。这说明，“反应敏感者”不如“压抑情感者”心理健康。D说“不像‘压抑情感者’那样心理健康”，这与文章的意思相符。文中提到extremely时是说“‘反应敏感者’非常了解自己的内心情感”，并不是说对别人的情感异常敏感，所以A不对；文中提到teachers时是说“伯彼收集了学生的自评、互评以及老师对他们的评语；总体上，相对于他们更敏感的同学，‘压抑情感者’更善于社交，学习成绩更好”，这说明B与文章的意思不符；文中没有提到C。
转载请注明原文地址:https://kaotiyun.com/show/fFO4777K
0

考研英语一

相关试题推荐
随机试题
最新回复(0)