Question

Bad news sells. If it bleeds, it leads. No news is good news, and good news is no news. Those are the classic rules for the evening broadcasts and the morning papers. But now that information is being spread and monitored in different ways, researchers are discovering new rules. By tracking people’s e-mails and online posts, scientists have found that good news can spread faster and farther than disasters and sob stories.

“The ‘if it bleeds’ rule works for mass media”, says Jonah Berger, a scholar at the University of Pennsylvania. “They want your eyeballs and don’t care how you’re feeling. But when you share a story with your friends, you care a lot more how they react. You don’t want them to think of you as a Debbie Downer.”

Researchers analyzing word-of-mouth communication—e-mails, Web posts and reviews, face-to-face conversations—found that it tended to be more positive than negative, but that didn’t necessarily mean people preferred positive news. Was positive news shared more often simply because people experienced more good things than bad things? To test for that possibility, Dr. Berger looked at how people spread a particular set of news stories on The New York Times’ website. He and a Penn colleague analyzed the “most e-mailed” list for six months. One of his first findings was that articles in the science section were much more likely to make the list than non-science articles. He found that science amazed Times’ readers and made them want to share this positive feeling with others.

Readers also tended to share articles that were exciting or funny, or that inspired negative feelings like anger or anxiety, but not articles that left them merely sad. They needed to be aroused（激发） one way or the other, and they preferred good news to bad. The more positive an article, the more likely it was to be shared, as Dr. Berger explains in his new book, “Contagious: Why Things Catch On.”

1.What do the classic rules mentioned in the text apply to?

A. News reports.

B. Research papers.

C. Private e-mails.

D. Daily conversations.

2.What can we infer about people like Debbie Downer?

A. They are socially inactive.

B. They are good at telling stories.

C. They are inconsiderate of others.

D. They are careful with their words.

3.Which tended to be most e-mailed according to Dr. Berger’s research?

A. Sports news.B. Science articles.

C. Personal accounts.D. Financial reviews.

4.What can be a suitable title for the text?

A. Sad Stories Travel Far and Wide

B. Online News Attracts More people

C. Reading Habits Change with the Times

D. Good News Beats Bad on Social Networks

Answer

1.A

2.C

3.B

4.D

【解析】

试题分析: 信息正以各种不同的方式被传播关注，研究人员正在寻找新的法则。通过扫描人脑，并跟踪他们的电子邮件和网上的帖子，神经学家和心理学家发现，好新闻比灾难和悲伤的报道传播得更快、更远。

1.1】A 细节理解题。根据文中第一段Those are the classic rules for the evening broadcasts and the morning papers.可知，那些经典的规则适应于新闻报道。故选A。

2.2】C 推理判断题。根据文中“They want your eyeballs and don’t care how you’re feeling. But when you share a story with your friends, you care a lot more how they react. You don’t want them to think of you as a Debbie Downer.(他们想要吸引你的眼球，不在乎你的感觉。但是当你和你的朋友们分享一个故事的时候，你更关心他们的反应。你不想让他们认为你是一个Debbie Downer。)”可推知，Debbie Downer是指无视他人的人。故选C。

3.3】B 细节理解题。根据文中He and a Penn colleague analyzed the “most e-mailed” list for six months. One of his first findings was that articles in the science section were much more likely to make the list than non-science articles. 可知，科学文章是most e-mailed。故选B。

4.4】D 主旨大意题。本文主要讲现在通过互联网，好的消息战胜坏的消息，故选D。

考点：考查社会现象类短文阅读。