By now it’s almost common knowledge that spending time in nature is good for you. Areas with more trees tend to be less polluted, so spending time there allows you to breathe easier. Spending time outdoors has been linked with reduced blood pressure and stress, and seems to motivate people to exercise more. So it’ll come as no surprise that there's research showing that spending time in nature is good, which has been known for thousands of years. There’s dozens of papers showing that.
University of Exeter Medical School researcher Mathew P. White said “We get this idea, patients are coming to us and they’re saying, ‘doctor, how long should I spend?’and the doctor is saying, I don’t really know.” So White and his team decided to find out by using data collected from nearly 20,000 people in England through the Monitor of Engagement with the Natural Environment Survey. And their answer? Two hours a week. People who spent at least that much time-either all at once or totaled over several shorter visits-were more likely to report good health and psychological well-being than those with no nature exposure. Remarkably, the researchers found that less than two hours offered no significant benefits.
So what’s so special about two hours? “ I have absolutely no idea. Really. We didn’t have an apriori(由因及果的)guess at what this would be. It emerged. And I’d be lying if I said we predicted this. I don’t know.” Even more noteworthy, the two-hour benchmark(基准)applied to men and women, to older and younger folks, to people from different ethnic backgrounds, occupational groups, socioeconomic levels and so on. Even people with long-term illnesses or disabilities benefited from time spent in nature—as long as it was at least 120 minutes per week.
While the findings are based on a tremendous number of people, nobody knows why or how nature has this benefit. “I want to be really clear about this. This is very early stages. We’re not saying everybody has to do 120. What research do we need to take this to the next step before doctors can have the true confidence to work with their patients? But it’ s certainly a starting point,” White said.
1.What is the first paragraph mainly about?
A.The benefits of spending time in nature.
B.The research of spending time in nature.
C.The characteristics of spending time in nature.
D.The common knowledge of spending time in nature.
2.What can we infer about the result of White and his team’s survey?
A.The time spent in nature should be 2 hours a week all at once.
B.2 hours a week at least in nature is beneficial to whomever you are.
C.The time spent in nature should be 2 hours a week, no more, no less.
D.2 hours a week in nature is too long for people with long-term illnesses.
3.What does White expect of the findings?
A.They will be in early stage.
B.They will be based on many people.
C.They will help all people go out in nature.
D.They will be improved and further research will be done.
4.Where is this text most likely from?
A.A diary B.A guidebook
C.A magazine D.A novel
高三英语阅读理解中等难度题
By now it's almost common knowledge that spending time in nature is good for you. Areas with more trees tend to be less polluted, so spending time there allows you to breathe easier. Spending time outdoors has been linked with reduced blood pressure and stress and seems to motivate people to exercise more.
“So it'll come as surprise that there's research showing that spending time in nature is good. There are dozens of papers showing that,” University of Exeter Medical School researcher Mathew P.White said.“We get this idea-patients are coning to us and they are asking, ‘Doctor, how long should I spend? ’And the doctor is saying,‘I don't really know.’”
So White and his team decided to find out by using data collected from nearly 20,000 people in England through the Monitor of Engagement with the Natural Environment Survey. And their answer? Two hours a week. People who spent at least that much time in nature either all at once or totaled over several shorter visits were more likely to report good heath and psychological well-being than those with no nature exposure.
Remarkably, the two-hour standard applied to men and women, to older and younger folks, to people from different ethnic backgrounds, occupational groups, socioeconomic levels, and so on. Even people with long-term illnesses or disabilities benefited from time spent in nature- as long as it was at least 120 minutes per week.
While the findings are based on a vast number of people, White cautions that it's rally just a correlation. Nobody knows why of how nature has this benefit, or even if the findings will stand up to more strict investigation.
“I want to be rally clear about this. This is in very early stages.We're not saying everybody has to do 120. This is really to start the conversation, saying, what would a threshold look like? What research do we need to take this to the next step before doctors can have the true confidence to work with their patients? But it's certainly a starting point.”
1.What does White want to figure out in the survey?
A.The benefits of being outside.
B.How long we should stay in nature.
C.The significance of outdoor activities.
D.Whether the British spend enough time in nature
2.What can we learn from the last two paragraphs?
A.The two-hour standard applies to everyone.
B.The reason why nature is beneficial is clear.
C.Further study is needed to confirm White's result.
D.The findings of White's survey have bee widely used.
3.What does underlined word“threshold”in the last paragraph mean?
A.Strict investigation. B.Following step.
C.Healthy lifestyle. D.Staring point.
4.What can be the best title for this text?
A.Nature and Health B.Two-hour Staying in Nature
C.Tips to Improve Health D.The Starting Point
高三英语阅读理解简单题查看答案及解析
By now it’s almost common knowledge that spending time in nature is good for you. Areas with more trees tend to be less polluted, so spending time there allows you to breathe easier. Spending time outdoors has been linked with reduced blood pressure and stress, and seems to motivate people to exercise more. So it’ll come as no surprise that there's research showing that spending time in nature is good, which has been known for thousands of years. There’s dozens of papers showing that.
University of Exeter Medical School researcher Mathew P. White said “We get this idea, patients are coming to us and they’re saying, ‘doctor, how long should I spend?’and the doctor is saying, I don’t really know.” So White and his team decided to find out by using data collected from nearly 20,000 people in England through the Monitor of Engagement with the Natural Environment Survey. And their answer? Two hours a week. People who spent at least that much time-either all at once or totaled over several shorter visits-were more likely to report good health and psychological well-being than those with no nature exposure. Remarkably, the researchers found that less than two hours offered no significant benefits.
So what’s so special about two hours? “ I have absolutely no idea. Really. We didn’t have an apriori(由因及果的)guess at what this would be. It emerged. And I’d be lying if I said we predicted this. I don’t know.” Even more noteworthy, the two-hour benchmark(基准)applied to men and women, to older and younger folks, to people from different ethnic backgrounds, occupational groups, socioeconomic levels and so on. Even people with long-term illnesses or disabilities benefited from time spent in nature—as long as it was at least 120 minutes per week.
While the findings are based on a tremendous number of people, nobody knows why or how nature has this benefit. “I want to be really clear about this. This is very early stages. We’re not saying everybody has to do 120. What research do we need to take this to the next step before doctors can have the true confidence to work with their patients? But it’ s certainly a starting point,” White said.
1.What is the first paragraph mainly about?
A.The benefits of spending time in nature.
B.The research of spending time in nature.
C.The characteristics of spending time in nature.
D.The common knowledge of spending time in nature.
2.What can we infer about the result of White and his team’s survey?
A.The time spent in nature should be 2 hours a week all at once.
B.2 hours a week at least in nature is beneficial to whomever you are.
C.The time spent in nature should be 2 hours a week, no more, no less.
D.2 hours a week in nature is too long for people with long-term illnesses.
3.What does White expect of the findings?
A.They will be in early stage.
B.They will be based on many people.
C.They will help all people go out in nature.
D.They will be improved and further research will be done.
4.Where is this text most likely from?
A.A diary B.A guidebook
C.A magazine D.A novel
高三英语阅读理解中等难度题查看答案及解析
阅读小面短文,在空白处填入1个适当的档次或括号内单词的正确形式。
By now it’s almost common knowledge that spending time in nature is good for you. Areas with 1.(many) trees tend to be less polluted, so spending time there allows you to breathe easier. Spending time outdoors contributes to good health, with blood pressure and stress 2.(reduce), and seems to motivate people 3.(exercise) more.
A survey showed that people 4.spend 2 hours in nature — either all at once or totaled over several shorter 5.(visit) — were more likely to report good health and psychological well-being than those with no nature 6.(expose). Remarkably, the researchers found that less than two hours offered no significant benefits. The two-hour benchmark (临界值) 7.(apply) to men and women, to older and younger folks and so on. Even people8.long-term illnesses or disabilities benefited from time 9.(spend) in nature — as long as it was at least 120 minutes per week.
While the findings are based on 10.tremendous number of people, scientists caution that it’s really just a correlation. Nobody knows why or how nature has this benefit or even if the findings will stand up to stricter investigation.
高三英语语法填空中等难度题查看答案及解析
It may be common knowledge that what British people call “football” is known as “soccer” in the US, and “colour” in British English(BrE) goes without the “u” in American English (AmE). But according to a chart made recently by website Grammar Check, these are far from being the only differences between the two countries’ use of English. The chart outlined 63 of the main contrasts between BrE and AmE, from the more well-known “lift/elevator” and “autumn/fall” to the lesser-known “garden/yard” and “petrol/gasoline”.
Some of the vocabulary mismatches are so different that two people in a conversation may fail to understand each other. For example,the two countries have different names for certain food. “ Biscuits “ and “sweets” in Britain are known as “cookies” and “candy” , respectively, in the US. But while getting food names mixed up only causes confusion, some misunderstandings may lead to embarrassment if you’re not careful. I f a British man in the US is asked to show up a party in “pants”, there’s a chance that he might get a lot of stares from other guests. “Pants” in the UK means underwear. “Trousers” are what you need to ask a British friend to wear if you don’t want them to cause a scene among your friends.
However, even if 63 is already a lot, there are still many differences that the chart failed to cover. If a US girl walks into a UK barber and says “I want to have my bangs fixed”, for example, it could take a while before the hairdresser realizes what she means is actually her “fringe”.
1.By presenting the first paragraph, the author mainly tell us .
A. the chart is made by Grammar Check
B. people are much more familiar with “lift/elevator”
C. BrE and AmE are different in spelling
D. There are many differences between BrE and AmE
2.If a British man is asked to join in a party in “pants”, he might .
A. get into an embarrassment
B. be attractive among his friends
C. be puzzled at others’ dresses
D. ask for a pair of trousers instead
3.Why is the example in the barber mentioned?
A. To confirm some examples are unknown.
B. To support the author's opinion on the topic.
C. To indicate the British are slow in understanding.
D. To show the hairdresser isn’t familiar with “bangs”.
高三英语阅读理解中等难度题查看答案及解析
It's common knowledge that the woman in Leonardo da Vinci's most famous painting seems to look back at observers, following them with her eyes no matter where they stand in the room. But this common knowledge turns out wrong.
A new study finds that the woman in the painting is actually looking out at an angle that's 15.4 degrees off to the observer's right—well outside of the range that people normally believe when they think someone is looking right at them. In other words, said the study author, Horstmann, ''She's not looking at you. '' This is somewhat ironic, because the entire phenomenon of a person's gaze (凝视) in a photograph or painting seeming to follow the viewer is called the ''Mona Lisa effect''. That effect is absolutely real, Horstmann said. If a person is illustrated or photographed looking straight ahead, even people viewing the portrait from an angle will feel they are being looked at. As long as the angle of the person’s gaze is no more than about 5 degrees off to either side, the Mona Lisa effect occurs.
Horstmann and his co-author were studying this effect for its application in the creation of artificial-intelligence avatars(虚拟头像) when Horstmann took a long look at the ''Mona Lisa'' and realized she wasn't looking at him. To make sure it wasn't just him, the researchers asked 24 people to view images of the ''Mona Lisa'' on a computer screen.
So why do people repeat the belief that her eyes seem to follow the viewer? Horstmann isn't sure. It's possible, he said, that people have the desire to be looked at, so they think the woman is looking straight at them. Or maybe the people who first coined the term ''Mona Lisa effect'' just thought it was a cool name.
1.What is generally believed about the woman in the painting ''Mona Lisa''?
A.She attracts the viewers to look back.
B.She seems mysterious because of her eyes.
C.She fixes her eyes on the back of the viewers.
D.She looks at the viewers wherever they stand.
2.What gaze range in a painting will cause the Mona Lisa effect?
A. B.
C. D.
3.Why was the experiment involving 24 people conducted?
A.To confirm Horstmann's belief.
B.To create artificial-intelligence avatars.
C.To calculate the angle of Mona Lisa's gaze.
D.To explain how the Mona Lisa effect can be applied.
4.What can we learn from the text?
A.Horstmann thinks it's cool to coin the term “Mona Lisa effect”.
B.The Mona Lisa effect contributes to the creation of artificial intelligence.
C.Feeling being gazed at by Mona Lisa may be caused by the desire for attention.
D.The position of the ruler in the experiment will influence the viewers' judgment.
高三英语阅读理解中等难度题查看答案及解析
It's common knowledge that the woman in Leonardo da Vinci's most famous painting seems to look back at observers, following them with her eyes no matter where they stand in the room. But this common knowledge turns out wrong.
A new study finds that the woman in the painting is actually looking out at an angle that's 15.4 degrees off to the observer's right—well outside of the range that people normally believe when they think someone is looking right at them. In other words, said the study author, Horstmann, ''She's not looking at you. '' This is somewhat ironic, because the entire phenomenon of a person's gaze (凝视) in a photograph or painting seeming to follow the viewer is called the ''Mona Lisa effect''. That effect is absolutely real, Horstmann said. If a person is illustrated or photographed looking straight ahead, even people viewing the portrait from an angle will feel they are being looked at. As long as the angle of the person’s gaze is no more than about 5 degrees off to either side, the Mona Lisa effect occurs.
Horstmann and his co-author were studying this effect for its application in the creation of artificial-intelligence avatars(虚拟头像) when Horstmann took a long look at the ''Mona Lisa'' and realized she wasn't looking at him. To make sure it wasn't just him, the researchers asked 24 people to view images of the ''Mona Lisa'' on a computer screen.
So why do people repeat the belief that her eyes seem to follow the viewer? Horstmann isn't sure. It's possible, he said, that people have the desire to be looked at, so they think the woman is looking straight at them. Or maybe the people who first coined the term ''Mona Lisa effect'' just thought it was a cool name.
1.What is generally believed about the woman in the painting ''Mona Lisa''?
A.She attracts the viewers to look back.
B.She seems mysterious because of her eyes.
C.She fixes her eyes on the back of the viewers.
D.She looks at the viewers wherever they stand.
2.What gaze range in a painting will cause the Mona Lisa effect?
A. B.
C. D.
3.Why was the experiment involving 24 people conducted?
A.To confirm Horstmann's belief.
B.To create artificial-intelligence avatars.
C.To calculate the angle of Mona Lisa's gaze.
D.To explain how the Mona Lisa effect can be applied.
4.What can we learn from the text?
A.Horstmann thinks it's cool to coin the term “Mona Lisa effect”.
B.The Mona Lisa effect contributes to the creation of artificial intelligence.
C.Feeling being gazed at by Mona Lisa may be caused by the desire for attention.
D.The position of the ruler in the experiment will influence the viewers' judgment.
高三英语阅读理解中等难度题查看答案及解析
Back in old times, people had little knowledge about the universe and nature. Things we now consider to be common sense were mysteries to our ancestors.
Over the years, major breakthroughs have been made in science and many phenomena have been explained. But still, there are always questions we can't yet answer, and The Guardian has listed some of them.
1. What makes us human?
Just looking at your DNA won't tell you - human DNA is 99 percent identical to that of the chimpanzee and, believe it or not, 50 percent identical to a banana's! A lot of the things we once thought were unique about us - language and tool use, recognizing ourselves in the mirror and so on – have since been seen in other animals. Perhaps it's our culture that makes the difference or maybe our ability to use fire. It's also possible that our capacity (能力) for co-operation and our trading skills are what make us unique.
2. Why do we dream?
Given the fact that we spend around a third of our lives sleeping, shouldn't we know everything about it? Unfortunately, scientists are still searching for a complete explanation of what happens when we sleep and why we dream.
Austrian psychologist Sigmund Freud believed dreams were the expressions of wishes that we can't fulfill in our real lives. Others have wondered whether dreams are just random "noise" coming from a sleeping brain.
3. Could we someday live forever?
Apart from accidents, most people die because of diseases that can be treated and aging. And since many diseases, such as diabetes(糖尿病) and cancer, are diseases of aging, treating aging itself could be the key to extending our lives.
Our knowledge of what causes us to age - and what allows some animals to live longer than others - is expanding rapidly. And though we haven't quite worked out all the details, we've worked out some pieces of the puzzles such as DNA damage and metabolism (新陈代谢), which are all leading to the invention of drugs that can slow down the aging process.
If we're lucky enough to lengthen our lives, we might even get to see the day when all of these questions are answered.
1.The main point of the passage is ______.
A. to inform people of the knowledge about the universe and nature
B. to introduce major breakthroughs that have been made in science
C. to present some questions we can't yet answer
D. to explain what were once mysteries to our ancestors
2.Chimpanzees and bananas are mentioned as examples to prove that ______.
A. human beings are actually not different from other animals
B. animals have completely different DNA from that of plants
C. both animals and plants share the same amount of DNA
D. DNA alone is not good enough to make humans different
3.The underlined word "identical" is closest in meaning to ______.
A. mysterious B. unique C. advanced D. same
4.Which of the following statements is TRUE according to the passage?
A. What were mysteries to our ancestors are considered to be common sense now.
B. Now we know much more about dreams than our ancestors did in the past.
C. With the invention of new drugs people can possibly live even longer.
D. If all the diseases can be treated people can theoretically live forever.
高三英语阅读理解中等难度题查看答案及解析
Setting aside for a rainy day
It’s a common regret in life that we spend more than we save---money that could go into a savings account or into a pension. Whatever age you are, it’ s never too late to start thinking about saving for your future. Here are several ways to get you going.
1.
It’s hard to know what you can afford to save if you don’t have an accurate budget, so doing this is a key first step. Once you’ve made a record of everything you spend each month and everything you earn, you’ll be able to see how much money you have left.
Get into a regular habit
2. Payday is great as you won’t be tempted (诱惑)to spend the cash. You can also set up a standing order to move money automatically into a savings account each month, so you won’t forget.
3.
There are different places you can put your savings, from tax-free ISAs(Individual Saving Accounts) to high-interest current accounts. Wherever you choose, keep an eye on the interest rate. Many have high rates for the first year and drop down afterwards. 4.
Set yourself a goal
If you know exactly what you’re saving for, it’s far more likely you’ll keep putting money away. 5.It’s also worth thinking about building an emergency fund for unexpected expenditures.
A.The earlier the better.
B.Earn as much interest as you can
C.Find out what you can afford to save
D.If that happens, look to move your money elsewhere.
E.Choose a fixed day each month to put money into savings.
F.If you don’t have much left after bills and essentials, you can use your budget to find ways to cut back.
G.It could be to make sure you’re comfortable in the future and have a relatively high standard of living
高三英语七选五中等难度题查看答案及解析
By 16:30, was almost closing time, all the paintings had been sold out.
A.which B.when
C.what D.that
高三英语单项填空中等难度题查看答案及解析
Now that you’re already in the workforce, you know what works for you. This knowledge can not only help you find a good job. 1.
The golden rule is to keep your job hunt separate from your current work. Don’t look for jobs while you’re working, and never use a work computer to search job listings. 2.
When you go on job interviews, your potential employer will ask why you’re looking to leave your current job. 3. Always answer positively, even if the truth is negative.
Great a networking tool as social media is, NEVER post that you’re looking for a job on Facebook or any other social media accounts. 4. You don’t want to start any rumors(传言)that you’re searching for a job, and you definitely don’t want anyone, especially your boss, to find out from someone else, especially from your social media account.
5. It presents an opportunity for you and your boss to have a frank discussion about what could make the job a better fit for you. Maybe you’ll end up getting the advancement or salary increase or other career path that would make you want to stay.
A. It can also help your job search, saving precious time.
B. If your current employer talks to you about it, be honest.
C. This is not the time to complain about your boss or the company.
D. Otherwise, this message will find its way to people from your office.
E. Try not to connect with anyone from work if you’re looking for another job.
F. It’s likely that you’re lonely because you don’t like your boss and coworkers.
G. You see, your work computer belongs to the company, and they have access to everything on it.
高三英语七选五困难题查看答案及解析