Read the following paragraphs and answer the question.

        That was more than a decade ago. The word remained in relative obscurity until two years ago, when “selfie” began its climb to digital star. With smartphone in hand，we can now share with others how our narcissism (自恋）looks to us. This is not just the year of the selfie; this is the age of the selfie.

Which of the following can best explain the underlined word “obscurity” ?（）

Read the following paragraphs and answer the question.
     Well, all she had was a flat tire, but for an old lady, that was bad enough. Bryan crawled under the car looking for a place to put the jack, skinning his knuckles (指关节）a time or two. Soon he was able to change the tire. But he had to get dirty and his hands hurt. As he was finishing, she rolled down the window and began to talk to him. She said she couldn't thank him enough for coming to her aid.

Which of the following is closest in meaning to “skinning” ？（） 

⑥Is Google really wrecking our memory? The answer is “it depends.” The Columbia University report doesn’t offer evidence of actual memory diminishing. Instead, the suggestion is that, influenced by Internet and search engine use, our memories are switching job hats and becoming more external. Instead of remembering “ends,” we’re remembering “means.” Search engines like Google are simply becoming extensions of our brains, sort of like wireless electronic devices. 

The phrase “job hats” in Paragraph 6 refers to （）.

Read the following paragraphs and answer the question.
     The Palace Hotel at Fort Romper was painted a light blue, a color of blue found on the legs of a certain bird that makes it bright in any surroundings. The Palace Hotel, then, looked always loud and screaming in a way that made the bright winter scenes of Nebraska seem only a dull gray. It stood alone, and when the snow was falling, the town two hundred yards away could not be seen.

What does the writer mean by ”loud and screaming”?（） 

Attention to detail is something everyone can and should do especially in a tight job market. Bob Crossley， a human-resources expert notices this in the job applications that come cross his desk every day. “It‘s amazing how many candidates eliminate themselves，” he says. “Resumes(简历) arrive with stains. While other candidates don’t bother to spell the company‘s things at the cost of something larger they work toward. ”To keep from losing the forest for the trees，“ says Charles Garfield， associate professor at the University of California， San Francisco， ”we must constantly ask ourselves how the details we’re working on fit into the larger picture. If they don‘t fit well， we should drop them and move to something else.“ We can’t always be perfectionists.

The example of the Apollo II moon launch is given to illustrate that（）. 

②People who are to be happy fix their attention on the convenience of things: the pleasant parts of conversation, the well-prepared dishes, the goodness of the wine and the fine weather. They enjoy all the cheerful things. Those who are to be unhappy think and speak only of the opposite things. Therefore, they are continually dissatisfied. By their remarks, they sour (使变坏) the pleasure of society, offend(顶撞) many people, and make themselves disagreeable everywhere. If this turn of mind was founded in nature, such unhappy persons would be the more to be pitied. The intention of criticizing(批评) and being disliked is perhaps taken up by imitation(模仿). It grows into a habit, unknown to its possessors. The habit may be strong, but it may be cured when those who have realized its bad effects on their interests and tastes. I hope this little warning may be of service to them, and help them change this habit.

The phrase“ sour the pleasure of society” most nearly means“（）”. 

②Social support cushions stress in a number of ways. First, friends, relatives and co-workers may let us know that they value us. Our self-respect is strengthened when we feel accepted by others in spite of (尽管) our faults and difficulties. Second, other people often provide us with informational support. They help us to define and understand our problems and find solutions to them. Third, we typically find social companionship ( 同伴) supportive. Taking part in free-time activities with others helps us to meet our social needs while at the same time distracting(转移注意力) us from our worries and troubles. Finally, other people may give us instrumental (手段的) support—money aid, material resources, and needed services—that reduces stress by helping us resolve and deal with our problems.

Which of the following is closest in meaning to the underlined word “cushions” ?（）

Read the following paragraphs and answer the question.

     Is Google really wrecking our memory? The answer is “it depends.” The Columbia University report doesn’t offer evidence of actual memory diminishing. Instead, the suggestion is that, influenced by Internet and search engine use, our memories are switching job hats and becoming more external. Instead of remembering “ends,” we’re remembering “means.” Search engines like Google are simply becoming extensions of our brains, sort of like wireless electronic devices.

The phrase “job hats” refers to （）.

Read the following paragraphs and answer the question. 

        But something unexpected happened. A patient who had been so depressed and could barely speak became ebullient after the 45-minute brain scan. Then a second patient, who seemed incapable of even a smile, emerged actually telling jokes. Then another and another. Was this some coincidence? Aimee Parow, the technician who made these observations (she is now a medical student in New York) didn’t think so. She mentioned the patients’ striking mood shifts to her boss, and together they completely refocused the study: to see if the electromagnetic fields might actually have a positive effect on depressive mood.

The word “ebullient” can be best replaced by（ ）.

Read the following paragraphs and answer the question.

     In China today, Internet addiction has acquired a symbolic function that is about more than health. At Film Forum on August 6th, “Web Junkie, ”by the Israeli filmmakers, takes us inside an Internet-addiction treatment center in Beijing to chronicle the ways in which technology, wealth, and autonomy are altering the ties between young people and the elders who strain to comprehend those changes. 

Which of the following is closest in meaning to the phrase “Web Junkie”?（）

Read the two passages and choose the most likely answer to each of the questions. Blacken the letter corresponding to your choice on the ANSWER SHEET. 

Passage 1
①   One day a man saw an old lady, stranded on the side of the road, but even in the dim light of day, he could see she needed help. So he pulled up in front of her Mercedes and got out. His Pontiac was still sputtering
when he approached her.
②   Even with the smile on his face, she was worried. No one had stopped to help for the last hour or so. Was he going to hurt her? He didn't look safe; he looked poor and hungry. He could see that she was frightened, standing out there in the cold. He knew how she felt. It was those chills which only fear can put in you. He said, “I am here to you, ma'am. Why don't you wait in the car where it's warm? By the way, my name is Bryan Anderson.”
③   Well, all she had was a flat tire, but for an old lady, that was bad enough. Bryan crawled under the car looking for a place to put the jack, skinning his knuckles (指关节）a time or two. Soon he was able to change the tire. But he had to get dirty and his hands hurt. As he was finishing, she rolled down the window and began to talk to him. She said she couldn't thank him enough for coming to her aid.
④   Bryan just smiled as he closed her trunk. The lady asked how much she owed him. Any amount would have been all right with her. She already imagined all the awful things that could have happened had he not stopped. Bryan never thought twice about being paid. This was not a job to him. This was helping someone in need, and many people had given him a hand in the past. He had lived his whole life that way, and it never occurred to him to act any other way. He told her that if she really wanted to pay him back, the next time she saw someone who needed help, she could give that person the assistance he/she needed, and Bryan added, “And think of me.”
⑤   He waited until she started her car and drove off. It had been a cold and depressing day, but he felt good as he headed for home, disappearing into the twilight.
⑥   A few miles down the road the lady saw a small cafe. She went in to grab a bite to eat. It was a dingy looking restaurant the waitress came over and brought a clean towel to wipe her wet hair. She had a sweet smile, one that even being on her face for the whole day couldn't erase. The lady noticed the waitress was nearly eight months pregnant, but she never let the strain and aches change her attitude. The old lady wondered how someone who had so little could be so giving to a stranger. Then she remembered Bryan.
⑦   After the lady finished her meal, she paid with a hundred dollar bill. The waitress quickly went to get change, but the old lady had slipped right out the door. She was gone by the time the waitress came back. The waitress wondered where the lady could be. Then she noticed something written on the napkin. There were tears in her eyes when she read what the lady wrote: “You don’t owe me anything. Somebody once helped me out, the way I’m helping you. If you really want to pay me back, here is what you do: Do not let this chain of love end with you. Under the napkin were four more $100 bills.”
⑧   That night when she got home from work and climbed into bed, she was thinking about the money and what the lady had written. How could the lady have known how much she and her husband needed it? With the baby due next month, it was going to be hard...
⑨   She knew how worried her husband was, and as he lay sleeping next to her, she gave him a soft kiss and whispered soft and low, “Everything’s going to be all right. I love you, Bryan Anderson.” 

Read the two passages and choose the most likely answer to each of the questions. Blacken the letter corresponding to your choice on the ANSWER SHEET. 

Passage 2
①   The study of home economics began in the United States after the American Revolution. In colonial America, as in the Old World, a young woman received instruction in homemaking and child care primarily at home. But in the 19th century a number of forces helped create a favorable climate for the introduction of home economics as a field of study in schools. Among the most significant were a spirit of humanitarianism, faith in education, and a belief in the equal rights of women.
②   The early American's confidence in a person’s ability to shape his or her environment through education led to the founding of colleges that taught occupational skills. When women began to share in higher education, the household arts became a part of the curriculum as both a cultural and a professional field of study.
③   The first institutions to provide a foundation for the growth of home economics education were the land-grant colleges and universities. These land-grant institutions sought “to promote the liberal and practical education of the industrial classes.” They offered technical courses that were related to the lives of their students. Some of these courses were especially designed to serve the needs of women students.
④   By 1890, domestic science courses were being offered widely in American public high schools, as well as in colleges and universities. These courses included instruction in cooking, sewing, home decoration, home sanitation, home hygiene, home nursing, etc. The teaching of domestic science in the secondary schools led to a demand for the training of home economics teachers in the colleges. However, the major emphasis on home management remained until the early part of the 20th century.
⑤   In 1909 the American Home Economics Association was founded, The members of the association were dedicated to the improvement of living conditions in the home and the community, and they worked to win acceptance for home economics education. Their efforts were aided greatly by the passage of the Vocational Education Act of 1917, which provided federal funds to pay the salaries of home economics teachers as well as teachers of agricultural, trade, and industrial subjects. By 1920, 6,000 high schools in the United States were offering courses in home economics. As the social sciences developed, some of their findings were incorporated into the home economics curriculum. the original emphasis on food, clothing, and shelter was broadened to include such topics as human relationships. By 1935, home economics educators were being urged to glean from ” all fields of knowledge, all lines of activity” whatever might serve to improve families and family life.
⑥   As the scope of home economics training broadened, the variety of professions in home economics increased on the university level, home economics training became more and more specialized. On the secondary school level, the focus of home economics education changed from “how to do it” to “why it is done.” Overall, the study of home economics has been influenced by the changing quality of modem life. Today, home economics students are no longer taught merely how to cook and sew but also how to buy the food they prepare and fabrics for the clothing they make. In fact, a large number of home economics courses place greater emphasis on consumer education than on homemaking skills. Moreover, home economics appears to be moving away from areas of concern only to the individual or the family and toward problems of national and international concern, such as overpopulation, urban poverty, and the development of emerging nations. 

①There are two types of people in the world. Although they have equal degree of health and wealth and other comforts of life, one becomes happy and the other becomes unhappy. This arises from the different ways in which they consider things, persons，events and the resulting effects upon their minds.
②People who are to be happy fix their attention on the convenience of things: the pleasant parts of conversation, the well-prepared dishes, the goodness of the wine and the fine weather. They enjoy all the cheerful things. Those who are to be unhappy think and speak only of the opposite things. Therefore, they are continually dissatisfied. By their remarks, they sour (使变坏) the pleasure of society, offend(顶撞) many people, and make themselves disagreeable everywhere. If this turn of mind was founded in nature, such unhappy persons would be the more to be pitied. The intention of criticizing(批评) and being disliked is perhaps taken up by imitation(模仿). It grows into a habit, unknown to its possessors. The habit may be strong, but it may be cured when those who have realized its bad effects on their interests and tastes. I hope this little warning may be of service to them, and help them change this habit.
③Although in fact it is chiefly an act of the imagination, it has serious results in life since it brings on deep sorrow and bad luck. Those people offend many others; nobody loves them, and no one treats them with more than the most common politeness and respect. This frequently puts them in bad temper and draws them into arguments. If they aim at getting some advantages in social position or fortune, nobody wishes them success. Nor will anyone start a step or speak a word to favor their hopes. If they bring on themselves public objections, no one will defend or excuse them, and many will join to criticize their wrongdoings. These people should change this bad habit and be pleased with what is pleasing, without worrying needlessly about themselves and others. If they do not, it will be good for others to avoid any contact(接触) with them. Otherwise, it can be disagreeable and sometimes very inconvenient, especially when one becomes mixed up in their quarrels.

①By good fortune, I was able to raft (漂流) down the Motu River in New Zealand twice last year. The magnificent four-day journey traverses (穿过) one of the last wilderness areas in the North Island.
②The first expedition was led by “Buzz”, an American guide with a great deal of rafting experience and many stories to tell of mighty rivers such as the Colorado. With a leader like Buzz, there was no reason to fear any of the great rapids on the Motu.
③The first half day, in the gentle upper reaches, was spent developing teamwork and coordination. Strokes had to be mastered, and the discipline of following commands without question was strict. In the boiling fury of a rapid, there would be no room for any mistake. When Buzz bellowed (吼叫) above the roar of the water, an instant reaction was essential.
④We mastered the Motu. In every rapid we fought against the river and we overcame it. The screamed commands of Buzz were matched only by the fury of our paddles, as we took the raft exactly where Buzz wanted it to go.
⑤At the end of the journey, there was a great feeling of triumph. We proved that we were so superior and powerful that we had overcome the mystery and majesty of the Motu.
⑥The second time I went down the Motu, the experience I had gained should have been invaluable, but the guide on this journey was a Kiwi with a very soft voice. It seemed that it would not even be possible to hear his voice above the noise of the rapids.
⑦As we approached the first rapid, he never even raised his voice. He did not attempt to take command of us or the river. Gently and quietly he felt the mood of the river and watched every little whirlpool. There was no drama and no shouting. There was no contest to be won.
⑧We sped through each rapid with grace and beauty and, after a day, the river had become our friend, not our enemy. The quiet Kiwi was not our leader, but only the person whose sensitivity was more developed than our own. Laughter replaced the tension of achievement.
⑨Soon the quiet Kiwi was able to lean back and let all of us take turns as leader. A quiet nod was enough to draw attention to the things our lack of experience prevented us from seeing. If we made a mistake, then we laughed and it was the next person’s turn.
10We began to penetrate the mystery of the Motu, and like the quiet Kiwi, we listened to the river and we looked carefully for all those things we had not even noticed the first time.
11At the end of the journey, we had overcome nothing except ourselves. We did not want to leave behind our friend, the river. There was no contest, and so nothing had been won. Rather we had become one with the river.
12It is difficult to believe that the external circumstances of the two journeys were similar. The difference was in an attitude and a flame of mind. At the end of the first journey, it seemed that there could be no other way. Given the opportunity to choose a leader, everyone would have chosen someone like Buzz. At the end of the second journey, we had glimpsed a very different vision and we felt humble—and intensely happy.

When the French Institute in Haiti (海地) asked me to speak on a subject of my own choice, I picked heroism. It's a subject I know well. I've read many books about it.
I spoke of some well-known heroes. I suggested that I was something of a hero myself. Then I told how the hero, in the face of danger, discovers all the great, lasting values of life.
When I left the platform, a gentleman came to me. "Great lecture," he said. "I'm Doctor Bonbon. I've been asked to make your stay here as pleasant as possible. Would you like to go hunting sharks with me? You seem to enjoy facin danger."
I accepted gladly. I saw myself struggling with a huge fish on my rod ...
I was to speak again the next afternoon. So we agreed to start early in the morning.
"By the way," the doctor said as we set out, "you should try out your coucteau.”
"My... what？"
"Your snorkel (潜水呼吸管) . You need to breathe. I'll show you how to work the underwater gun too. What's the matter? Something wrong?"
I had to sit down. I tried to tell myself it wasn't so. But there was no doubt about it. I wasn't to fish with a rod. I was to go right down into the water. I opened my mouth to protest ...
"You know," the doctor said, "I can't tell you how much we all enjoyed your lecture on courage."
I said nothing. There are times when you have to protect your means of earning a living. I was known as a good speaker. If I had to be eaten by sharks to keep my reputation, I was ready. I put on my mask.
"Now put on the lead belt. It will get you down there instantly," the doctor said. "They'll go down with you." He pointed to the four big men on board.
Bodyguards, I thought with relief.
"They're the beaters (轰赶猎物的人) ," the doctor said. "They'll go ahead and drive the sharks toward you. Then all you have to do is shoot." I didn't have the courage to object. They helped me over the side.
At the bottom the first thing I saw was a big fish. I screamed.
I can't quite remember what followed. All I know is that, contrary to what I had said in my lecture, in the face of danger the hero does not discover the great values of life. At last I opened my eyes again. The big fish was gone.
I tried to return to the surface. Then I saw a huge form above my head. I seized my gun. I closed my eyes and pressed the trigger.
The gun was torn from me.
In seconds I was at the surface. Luckily, the boat was near. I was on board in an instant.
"Where's your gun?" asked the doctor.
I explained that I had hit a shark. The beast had torn the weapon from my hands.
The four big men were climbing back into the boat now. One of them had my gun. He spoke to the doctor in his native language.
"It seems," the doctor said to me, "that you shot at the hull of the boat."
He was trying to suggest that I had mistaken the boat passing over my head for a shark. The very idea!
When I stepped to the platform that afternoon, Doctor Bonbon was sitting in the front row. But I didn't let his mocking stare disturb me. I was determined to rise once more to the level of my subject.
"Ladies and gentlemen," I began, "when the hero finds himself facing danger, the first thing he discovers ..."

①Since we are social beings, the quality of our lives depends in large measure on our interpersonal relationships. One strength of the human conditions is our possibility to give and receive support from one another under stressful(有压力的) conditions. Social support makes up of the exchange of resources among people based on their interpersonal（人际间的） ties. Those of us with strong support systems appear better able to deal with major life changes and daily problems. People with strong social ties live longer and have better health than those without such ties. Studies over types of illnesses, from depression (抑郁症) to heart disease, show that the presence of social support helps people defend themselves against illness, and the absence of such support makes poor health more likely.
②Social support cushions stress in a number of ways. First, friends, relatives and co-workers may let us know that they value us. Our self-respect is strengthened when we feel accepted by others in spite of (尽管) our faults and difficulties. Second, other people often provide us with informational support. They help us to define and understand our problems and find solutions to them. Third, we typically find social companionship ( 同伴) supportive. Taking part in free-time activities with others helps us to meet our social needs while at the same time distracting(转移注意力) us from our worries and troubles. Finally, other people may give us instrumental (手段的) support—money aid, material resources, and needed services—that reduces stress by helping us resolve and deal with our problems.

A person may have an idea about himself that will prevent him from doing good work. He may believe that he is not capable of accomplishing something even though there is no reason for it. A child may think he is stupid because he does not understand how to make use of the most of his mental abilities, or he may accept another person's mistaken estimate of his ability. People advanced in years may be handicapped by the mistaken belief that they are incapable of learning anything new because of their age.
A person who believes that he is incapable will not make a real effort, because he feels that it would be futile. He won't go at a job (尽全力工作) with the confidence necessary for success, and he won't work hard, even though he may think he is doing so. He is, therefore, likely to fail, and the failure will strengthen his belief in his incompetence.
Alfred Adler, a famous psychiatrist (精神病医生) , had an experience that illustrates this. When he was a small boy he got off to a poor start in arithmetic (算术) . His teacher got the idea that he had no ability in arithmetic, and told his parents what she thought so that they would not expect too much of him. In this way, they, too, developed the idea, "Isn't it too bad that Alfred can't do arithmetic?" He accepted their mistaken estimate of his ability, felt that it was useless to try, and ended up very poor at arithmetic, just as was expected.
One day, however, he became very angry at the teacher and other students because they laughed when he said he knew how to do a problem, which none of the other students had been able to work out.
Alfred succeeded in solving the problem. This gave him confidence. He rejected the idea that he couldn't do arithmetic and was determined to show others that he could. His anger and his newly found confidence stimulated him to be at arithmetic problems with a new vigor. He worked with interest, determination, and purpose. Before long he became extraordinarily good at arithmetic. He not only proved that he could do arithmetic, but he learned early in life from his own experience that if a person goes at a job with all his heart he may astonish himself as well as others with his ability.
This experience made him realize that many people have more ability than they think they have. Lack of success is as often the result of lack of knowledge of how to apply one's ability, lack of confidence, and lack of determination as it is the result of lack of ability.

⑥Is Google really wrecking our memory? The answer is “it depends.” The Columbia University report doesn’t offer evidence of actual memory diminishing. Instead, the suggestion is that, influenced by Internet and search engine use, our memories are switching job hats and becoming more external. Instead of remembering “ends,” we’re remembering “means.” Search engines like Google are simply becoming extensions of our brains, sort of like wireless electronic devices. 

The phrase “job hats” in Paragraph 6 refers to （）.

①Could Google, the world’s largest search engine, be causing our memory banks to be weak? Maybe, say four Columbia University researchers, who believe Google’s instant search mechanics could be training our brains to get rid of information we’re sure of quickly finding again with a few taps on a keyboard.
②Times certainly have changed. I can still remember having to memorize stuff back in grade school like linking verbs—“is, am, are, was, were, have, has, had, etc.”—as if reciting a ritual chant, or the precise sequence of northeastern states, left to right, top to bottom. Nowadays, I just look up Google Maps if I can’t remember whether it’s Vermont before New Hampshire, or whether to answer “this is he” or “this is him” when someone asks for me on the phone.
③But we’ve heard this tune before, right? I’m looking at a book on my shelf, The Shallows, by author Nicholas Carr, whose article “Is Google Making Us Stupid?” set off all kinds of cultural and scientific discussions in 2008. The Shallows elaborated on points in that article and brought in actual neurological research to support Carr’s thesis that the Internet may be dramatically rewiring our brains.
④And with the Columbia research, the evidence that something’s up is growing. In the study, titled “Google Effects on Memory: Cognitive Consequences of Having Information at Our Fingertips,” the Columbia University researchers claim that when we’re sure of access to information in the future, our ability to summon that information from memory drops. Conversely, our ability to recall how to access the information goes up. Thus, the researchers argue, “The Internet has become a primary form of external memory, where information is stored collectively outside ourselves.”
⑤According to Betsy Sparrow, the study’s lead, “Since the coming of search engines, we are reorganizing the way we remember things. Our brains rely on the Internet for memory in much the same way they rely on the memory of a friend, family member or co-worker. We remember less through knowing information itself than by knowing where the information can be found.”
⑥Is Google really wrecking our memory? The answer is “it depends.” The Columbia University report doesn’t offer evidence of actual memory diminishing. Instead, the suggestion is that, influenced by Internet and search engine use, our memories are switching job hats and becoming more external. Instead of remembering “ends,” we’re remembering “means.” Search engines like Google are simply becoming extensions of our brains, sort of like wireless electronic devices.
⑦And it’s not unacceptable to consider ways in which such a memory shift might actually benefit us. “Perhaps those who teach in any context, be they college professors, doctors or business leaders, will become increasingly focused on teaching greater understanding of ideas and ways of thinking, and less focused on memorization,” suggests Sparrow.
⑧Would that be such a bad thing? After all, I’ve always thought the popular notion that memorizing precisely where something is on a map as a sign of “intelligence” was pretty dumb. I’d rather have an accurate working knowledge of the details that separate, say, Shia from Sunni, the two main branches of Islam, than how to point at random to Turkey or Brazil on a globe.

Read the passage and answer the questions.

①Taste is such a subjective matter that we don’t usually conduct preference tests for food. The most you can say about anyone’s preference, is that it’s one person’s opinion. But because the two big cola (可口饮料) companies—Coca-Cola and Pepsi Cola are marketed so aggressively, we’ve wondered how big a role taste preference actually plays in brand loyalty. We set up a taste test that challenged people who identified themselves as either Coca-Cola or Pepsi fans: Find your brand in a blind tasting.
②We invited staff volunteers who had a strong liking for either Coca-Cola Classic (传统型) or Pepsi, Diet (低糖的) Coke, or Diet Pepsi. These were people who thought they’d have no trouble telling their brand from the other brand.
③We eventually located 19 regular cola drinkers and 27 diet cola drinkers. Then we fed them four unidentified samples of cola one at a time, regular colas for the one group, diet versions for the other. We asked them to tell us whether each sample was Coke or Pepsi; then we analyzed the records statistically to compare the participants’ choices with what mere guess-work could have accomplished.
④Getting all four samples right was a tough test, but not too tough, we thought, for people who believed they could recognize their brand. In the end, only 7 out of 19 regular cola drinkers correctly identified their brand of choice in all four trials. The diet-cola drinkers did a little worse-only 7 to 27 identified all four samples correctly.

⑤While both groups did better than chance would predict, nearly half the participants in each group made the wrong choice two or more times. Two people got all four samples wrong. Overall, half the participants did about as well on the last round of tasting as on the first, so fatigue, or taste burnout was not a factor. Our preference test results suggest that only a few Pepsi participants and Coke fans may really be able to tell their favorite brand by taste and price.①Taste is such a subjective matter that we don’t usually conduct preference tests for food. The most you can say about anyone’s preference, is that it’s one person’s opinion. But because the two big cola (可口饮料) companies—Coca-Cola and Pepsi Cola are marketed so aggressively, we’ve wondered how big a role taste preference actually plays in brand loyalty. We set up a taste test that challenged people who identified themselves as either Coca-Cola or Pepsi fans: Find your brand in a blind tasting. 

②We invited staff volunteers who had a strong liking for either Coca-Cola Classic (传统型) or Pepsi, Diet (低糖的) Coke, or Diet Pepsi. These were people who thought they’d have no trouble telling their brand from the other brand.
③We eventually located 19 regular cola drinkers and 27 diet cola drinkers. Then we fed them four unidentified samples of cola one at a time, regular colas for the one group, diet versions for the other. We asked them to tell us whether each sample was Coke or Pepsi; then we analyzed the records statistically to compare the participants’ choices with what mere guess-work could have accomplished.
④Getting all four samples right was a tough test, but not too tough, we thought, for people who believed they could recognize their brand. In the end, only 7 out of 19 regular cola drinkers correctly identified their brand of choice in all four trials. The diet-cola drinkers did a little worse-only 7 to 27 identified all four samples correctly.

⑤While both groups did better than chance would predict, nearly half the participants in each group made the wrong choice two or more times. Two people got all four samples wrong. Overall, half the participants did about as well on the last round of tasting as on the first, so fatigue, or taste burnout was not a factor. Our preference test results suggest that only a few Pepsi participants and Coke fans may really be able to tell their favorite brand by taste and price.①Taste is such a subjective matter that we don’t usually conduct preference tests for food. The most you can say about anyone’s preference, is that it’s one person’s opinion. But because the two big cola (可口饮料) companies—Coca-Cola and Pepsi Cola are marketed so aggressively, we’ve wondered how big a role taste preference actually plays in brand loyalty. We set up a taste test that challenged people who identified themselves as either Coca-Cola or Pepsi fans: Find your brand in a blind tasting. 

②We invited staff volunteers who had a strong liking for either Coca-Cola Classic (传统型) or Pepsi, Diet (低糖的) Coke, or Diet Pepsi. These were people who thought they’d have no trouble telling their brand from the other brand.
③We eventually located 19 regular cola drinkers and 27 diet cola drinkers. Then we fed them four unidentified samples of cola one at a time, regular colas for the one group, diet versions for the other. We asked them to tell us whether each sample was Coke or Pepsi; then we analyzed the records statistically to compare the participants’ choices with what mere guess-work could have accomplished.
④Getting all four samples right was a tough test, but not too tough, we thought, for people who believed they could recognize their brand. In the end, only 7 out of 19 regular cola drinkers correctly identified their brand of choice in all four trials. The diet-cola drinkers did a little worse-only 7 to 27 identified all four samples correctly.

⑤While both groups did better than chance would predict, nearly half the participants in each group made the wrong choice two or more times. Two people got all four samples wrong. Overall, half the participants did about as well on the last round of tasting as on the first, so fatigue, or taste burnout was not a factor. Our preference test results suggest that only a few Pepsi participants and Coke fans may really be able to tell their favorite brand by taste and price.①Taste is such a subjective matter that we don’t usually conduct preference tests for food. The most you can say about anyone’s preference, is that it’s one person’s opinion. But because the two big cola (可口饮料) companies—Coca-Cola and Pepsi Cola are marketed so aggressively, we’ve wondered how big a role taste preference actually plays in brand loyalty. We set up a taste test that challenged people who identified themselves as either Coca-Cola or Pepsi fans: Find your brand in a blind tasting.
②We invited staff volunteers who had a strong liking for either Coca-Cola Classic (传统型) or Pepsi, Diet (低糖的) Coke, or Diet Pepsi. These were people who thought they’d have no trouble telling their brand from the other brand.
③We eventually located 19 regular cola drinkers and 27 diet cola drinkers. Then we fed them four unidentified samples of cola one at a time, regular colas for the one group, diet versions for the other. We asked them to tell us whether each sample was Coke or Pepsi; then we analyzed the records statistically to compare the participants’ choices with what mere guess-work could have accomplished.
④Getting all four samples right was a tough test, but not too tough, we thought, for people who believed they could recognize their brand. In the end, only 7 out of 19 regular cola drinkers correctly identified their brand of choice in all four trials. The diet-cola drinkers did a little worse-only 7 to 27 identified all four samples correctly.

⑤While both groups did better than chance would predict, nearly half the participants in each group made the wrong choice two or more times. Two people got all four samples wrong. Overall, half the participants did about as well on the last round of tasting as on the first, so fatigue, or taste burnout was not a factor. Our preference test results suggest that only a few Pepsi participants and Coke fans may really be able to tell their favorite brand by taste and price.①Taste is such a subjective matter that we don’t usually conduct preference tests for food. The most you can say about anyone’s preference, is that it’s one person’s opinion. But because the two big cola (可口饮料) companies—Coca-Cola and Pepsi Cola are marketed so aggressively, we’ve wondered how big a role taste preference actually plays in brand loyalty. We set up a taste test that challenged people who identified themselves as either Coca-Cola or Pepsi fans: Find your brand in a blind tasting.
②We invited staff volunteers who had a strong liking for either Coca-Cola Classic (传统型) or Pepsi, Diet (低糖的) Coke, or Diet Pepsi. These were people who thought they’d have no trouble telling their brand from the other brand.
③We eventually located 19 regular cola drinkers and 27 diet cola drinkers. Then we fed them four unidentified samples of cola one at a time, regular colas for the one group, diet versions for the other. We asked them to tell us whether each sample was Coke or Pepsi; then we analyzed the records statistically to compare the participants’ choices with what mere guess-work could have accomplished.
④Getting all four samples right was a tough test, but not too tough, we thought, for people who believed they could recognize their brand. In the end, only 7 out of 19 regular cola drinkers correctly identified their brand of choice in all four trials. The diet-cola drinkers did a little worse-only 7 to 27 identified all four samples correctly.
⑤While both groups did better than chance would predict, nearly half the participants in each group made the wrong choice two or more times. Two people got all four samples wrong. Overall, half the participants did about as well on the last round of tasting as on the first, so fatigue, or taste burnout was not a factor. Our preference test results suggest that only a few Pepsi participants and Coke fans may really be able to tell their favorite brand by taste and price.