雅思阅读速度及答题质量的提升，离不开考生在备考的过程中不断的进行练习，为了便于大家更好的进行备考和练习，小编为大家带来了雅思阅读真题及答案解析分享，一起来具体的了解一下吧。
一起来具体的了解一下小编为大家带来的雅思阅读真题内容：
Nature or Nurture?
A A few years ago, in one of the most fascinating and disturbing experiments in behavioural psychology, Stanley Milgram of Yale University tested 40 subjects from all walks of life for their willingness to obey instructions given by a ‘leader’ in a situation in which the subjects might feel a personal distaste for the actions they were called upon to perform. Specifically Milgram told each volunteer ‘teacher-subject’ that the experiment was in the noble cause of education, and was designed to test whether or not punishing pupils for their mistakes would have a positive effect on the pupils’ ability to learn.
B Milgram’s experimental set-up involved placing the teacher-subject before a panel of thirty switches with labels ranging from ‘15 volts of electricity (slight shock)’ to ‘450 volts (danger — severe shock)’ in steps of 15 volts each. The teacher-subject was told that whenever the pupil gave the wrong answer to a question, a shock was to be administered, beginning at the lowest level and increasing in severity with each successive wrong answer. The supposed ‘pupil’ was in reality an actor hired by Milgram to simulate receiving the shocks by emitting a spectrum of groans, screams and writings together with an assortment of statements and expletives denouncing both the experiment and the experimenter. Milgram told the teacher-subject to ignore the reactions of the pupil, and to administer whatever level of shock was called for, as per the rule governing the experimental situation of the moment.
C As the experiment unfolded, the pupil would deliberately give the wrong answers to questions posed by the teacher, thereby bringing on various electrical punishments, even up to the danger level of 300 volts and beyond. Many of the teacher-subjects balked at administering the higher levels of punishment, and turned to Milgram with questioning looks and/or complaints about continuing the experiment. In these situations, Milgram calmly explained that the teacher-subject was to ignore the pupil’s cries for mercy and carry on with the experiment. If the subject was still reluctant to proceed, Milgram said that it was important for the sake of the experiment that the procedure be followed through to the end. His final argument was ‘you have no other choice. You must go on’. What Milgram was trying to discover was the number of teacher-subjects who would be willing to administer the highest levels of shock, even in the face of strong personal and moral revulsion against the rules and conditions of the experiment.
D Prior to carrying out the experiment, Milgram explained his idea to a group of 39 psychiatrists and asked them to predict the average percentage of people in an ordinary population who would be willing to administer the highest shock level of 450 volts. The overwhelming consensus was that virtually all the teacher-subjects would refuse to obey the experimenter. The psychiatrists felt that ‘most subjects would not go beyond 150 volts’ and they further anticipated that only four per cent would go up to 300 volts. Furthermore, they thought that only a lunatic fringe of about one in 1,000 would give the highest shock of 450 volts.
E What were the actual results? Well, over 60 per cent of the teacher-subjects continued to obey Milgram up to the 450-volt limit in repetitions of the experiment in other countries, the percentage of obedient teacher-subjects was even higher, reaching 85 per cent in one country. How can we possibly account for this vast discrepancy between what calm, rational, knowledgeable people predict in the comfort of their study and what pressured, flustered, but cooperative ‘teachers’ actually do in the laboratory of real life?
F One’s first inclination might be to argue that there must be some sort of built-in animal aggression instinct that was activated by the experiment, and that Milgram’s teache-subjects were just following a genetic need to discharge this pent-up primal urge onto the pupil by administering the electrical shock. A modern hard-core sociobiologist might even go so far as to claim that this aggressive instinct evolved as an advantageous trait, having been of survival value to our ancestors in their struggle against the hardships of life on the plains and in the caves, ultimately finding its way into our genetic make-up as a remnant of our ancient animal ways.
G An alternative to this notion of genetic programming is to see the teacher-subjects’ actions as a result of the social environment under which the experiment was carried out. As Milgram himself pointed out, ‘Most subjects in the experiment see their behaviour in a larger context that is benevolent and useful to society — the pursuit of scientific truth. The psychological laboratory has a strong claim to legitimacy and evokes trust and confidence in those who perform there. An action such as shocking a victim, which in isolation appears evil, acquires a completely different meaning when placed in this setting.’
H Thus, in this explanation the subject merges his unique personality and personal and moral code with that of larger institutional structures, surrendering individual properties like loyalty, self-sacrifice and discipline to the service of malevolent systems of authority.
I Here we have two radically different explanations for why so many teacher-subjects were willing to forgo their sense of personal responsibility for the sake of an institutional authority figure. The problem for biologists, psychologists and anthropologists is to sort out which of these two polar explanations is more plausible. This, in essence, is the problem of modern sociobiology — to discover the degree to which hard-wired genetic programming dictates, or at least strongly biases, the interaction of animals and humans with their environment, that is, their behaviour. Put another way, sociobiology is concerned with elucidating the biological basis of all behaviour.
Questions 14-19
Reading Passage 2 has nine paragraphs, A-I.
Which paragraph contains the following information?
Write the correct letter A-I in boxes 14-19 on your answer sheet.
14 a biological explanation of the teacher-subjects’ behaviour
15 the explanation Milgram gave the teacher-subjects for the experiment
16 the identity of the pupils
17 the expected statistical outcome
18 the general aim of sociobiological study
19 the way Milgram persuaded the teacher-subjects to continue
Questions 20-22
Choose the correct letter, A, B, C or D.
Write your answers in boxes 20-22 on your answer sheet.
20 The teacher-subjects were told that were testing whether
A a 450-volt shock was dangerous.
B punishment helps learning.
C the pupils were honest.
D they were suited to teaching.
21 The teacher-subjects were instructed to
A stop when a pupil asked them to.
B denounce pupils who made mistakes.
C reduce the shock level after a correct answer.
D give punishment according to a rule.
22 Before the experiment took place the psychiatrists
A believed that a shock of 150 volts was too dangerous.
B failed to agree on how the teacher-subjects would respond to instructions.
C underestimated the teacher-subjects’ willingness to comply with experimental procedure.
D thought that many of the teacher-subjects would administer a shock of 450 volts.
Questions 23-26
Do the following statements agree with the information given in Reading Passage 2?
In boxes 23-26 on your answer sheet, write
TRUE if the statement agrees with the information
FALSE if the statement contradicts the information
NOT GIVEN if there is no information on this
23 Several of the subjects were psychology students at Yale University.
24 Some people may believe that the teacher-subjects’ behaviour could be explained as a positive survival mechanism.
25 In a sociological explanation, personal values are more powerful than authority.
26 Milgram’s experiment solves an important question in sociobiology.
大家在做完雅思阅读练习题目之后，可以参照以下答案解析进行分析：
Question 14
答案：F
关键词：biological explanation/teacher-subject
定位原文: F段第1句“…and that Milgram’s teacher-subjects were just following…”
解题思路: 文章F段第一句中genetic，built-in，instinct这些词与题干中的biological explanation对应。
Question 15
答案：A
关键词：explanation/for the experiment
定位原文: A段最后1句“Specifically…”
解题思路: 定位句中的短语in the cause of 即为题干explanation的同义替换。
Question 16
答案： B
关键词：identity/pupil
定位原文: B段第3句“The supposed “pupil” was…”
解题思路: 找到对应句后很容易得出答案B。
Question 17
答案： D
关键词：expected/statistical
定位原文: D段倒数第2句“The phychiatrists felt that “most subjects…”
解题思路: 定位到D段后，发现这些数字都是描述的实验预期的结果。
Question 18
答案： I
关键词：general aim/sociobiological study
定位原文: I段第3句“This, in essence, is…”
解题思路: 找到定位句后，比较容易得出答案。
Question 19
答案： C
关键词：persuaded/continue
定位原文: C段第2、3、4句“Many of the teacher-subjects balked…”
解题思路: 注意go on即为 continue的同义替换。
Question 20
答案: B
关键词：teacher-subjects were told...
定位原文: A段最后1句“Specifically, Milgram told each volunteer…”
解题思路: 定位句说得很清楚：Milgram向每位在试验中扮演教师角色的志愿者明确地解释，试验是为了崇高的教育事业而进行的，是要测试体罚犯错误的学生是否会对学生的学习能力产生积极的影响。这就对应选项B。
Question 21
答案： D
关键词：instructed to...
定位原文: B段最后1句“Milgram told the teacher-subject…”
解题思路: 其中的instructed跟文章中的told对应，按照控制试验条件的规则，不管电压多髙都要直接施加。
Question 22
答案： C
关键词： phychiatrists
定位原文: D段第2句“The overwhelming consensus…”E段第1、2句“What were the actual results? Well, over 60 per…”
解题思路: 由这两句话的反差可以看出，精神科医生的确低估了试验对象对规则的遵从程度，其中的be willing to 跟题干中的willingness属于同义表达。
Question 23
答案：NOT GIVEN
关键词：Yale University
定位原文: A段第1句“...Stanley Milgram of Yale University tested 40 subjects from…”
解题思路: all walks of life是社会各界的意思，我们并不能肯定试验者就是来自耶鲁大学的心理学学生。本题属于典型的完全未提及型NOT GIVEN。
Question 24
答案：TRUE
关键词：explain/survival mechanism
定位原文: F段第2句“A modem hard-core sociobiologist might…”
解题思路: 定位句中的advantageous trait 与题干中的positive survival mechanism 属于同义表达。
Question 25
答案：FALSE
关键词：sociobiological explanation
定位原文: H段内容和I段第1句“Here we have two radically different…”
解题思路: 定位句的两句话都在体现出个人价值观在被权威所统治。
Question 26
答案：FALSE
关键词：sociobiology
定位原文: I段整个段落内容
解题思路: 我们在文章最后一段可以得知Milgram的实验并未解决社会生物学上的这个重大问题，只不过是证明了这个问题的存在。
以上是小编为大家分享的雅思阅读真题及答案解析，希望能够对大家有所帮助。
