柯帕斯-高考英语真题翻译-2023-新全国卷1-阅读理解D
On March 7, 1907, the
English statistician Francis Galton published a paper which illustrated what
has come to be known as the “wisdom of crowds” effect. The experiment of
estimation he conducted showed that in some cases, the average of a large
number of independent estimates could be quite accurate.
翻译：1907年3月7日，英国统计学家弗朗西斯·高尔顿发表了一篇论文，阐述了所谓的“群体智慧”效应的现象。他进行的估算实验表明，在某些情况下，大量的独立估算的平均值可能相当准确。
This effect capitalizes
on the fact that when people make errors, those errors aren’t always the same.
Some people will tend to overestimate, and some to underestimate. When enough
of these errors are averaged together, they cancel each other out, resulting in
a more accurate estimate. If people are similar and tend to make the same errors,
then their errors won’t cancel each other out. In more technical terms, the
wisdom of crowds requires that people’s estimates be independent. If for
whatever reasons, people’s errors become correlated or dependent, the accuracy
of the estimate will go down.
翻译：这种效应利用了这样一个事实：当人们犯错误时，这些错误并非总是相同的。有些人常常会高估，有些人常常会低估。当这些误差足够多且被合起来被平均时，它们会相互抵消，从而得生更准确的估算值。如果相似的人倾向于犯同样的错误，那么他们的错误就不会相互抵消。用更专业的术语来说，群体智慧要求人们的估算是独立的。如果由于某种原因，人们的错误变得相经关联或相互依赖，估算的准确性就会下降。
But a new study led by
Joaquin Navajas offered an interesting twist (转折) on this classic phenomenon. The key finding of the study
was that when crowds were further divided into smaller groups that were allowed
to have a discussion, the averages from these groups were more accurate than
those from an equal number of independent individuals. For instance, the
average obtained from the estimates of four discussion groups of five was
significantly more accurate than the average obtained from 20 independent
individuals.
翻译：但是，由华金·纳瓦加斯领导的一项新的研究对这一经典现象提供了一个有趣的扭转，这项研究的关键发现是，当大的人群被进一步分成为允许进行讨论的小组时，这些小组的估算的平均值比同等数量的独立个体的估算平均值更准确。例如，从四个由五个人组成的讨论组获得的估算平均估值明显比从20个独立个体获得的估算平均值要准确得多。
In a follow-up study with
100 university students, the researchers tried to get a better sense of what
the group members actually did in their discussion. Did they tend to go with
those most confident about their estimates? Did they follow those least willing
to change their minds? This happened some of the time, but it wasn’t the
dominant response. Most frequently, the groups reported that they “shared arguments
and reasoned together”. Somehow, these arguments and reasoning resulted in a
global reduction in error. Although the studies led by Navajas have limitations
and many questions remain, the potential implications for group discussion and
decision-making are enormous.
翻译：在对100名大学生的后续研究中，研究人员试图更好地了解小组成员在讨论中实际做了什么。他们是否倾向于相信那些对自己的估算最有信心的人？他们追随那些最不愿意改变主意的人了吗？这种情况有时会发生，但不是主要的反应。最常见情况的是，这些小组报告说他们“分享论点，一起推理”。不知何故，这些论证和推理导致了错误的整体减少。尽管纳瓦加斯领导的研究有局限性并且仍存在许多问题，但对小组讨论和决策的潜在影响是巨大的。
32. What is paragraph 2
of the text mainly about?
A. The methods of
estimation.
B. The underlying logic of the effect.
C. The causes of people’s
errors.
D. The design of Galton’s
experiment.
32. 文章第二段主要讲的是什么?
A.估计方法。
B.效果的潜在逻辑。
C.人们犯错的原因。
D.高尔顿实验的设计。
33. Navajas’ study found
that the average accuracy could increase even if ________.
A. the crowds were
relatively small
B. there were occasional
underestimates
C. individuals did not
communicate
D. estimates were not fully independent
33. Navajas的研究发现，即使________。
A.人数相对较少
B.偶尔会被低估
C.个体没有交流
D.估计不是完全独立的
34. What did the
follow-up study focus on?
A. The size of the
groups.
B. The dominant members.
C. The discussion process.
D. The individual
estimates.
34. 后续研究的重点是什么?
A.群体的规模。
B.主要成员。
C.讨论过程。
D.个人估计。
35. What is the author’s
attitude toward Navajas’ studies?
A. Unclear.
B. Dismissive.
C. Doubtful.
D. Approving.
35. 作者对纳瓦贾人的研究持什么态度?
A.不清楚。
B.不屑一顾。
C.表示怀疑。
D.支持
答案：32—35 BDCD
登录下载word文档：
