Lighting Up The Lies

 

　　You should spend about 20 minutes on Questions 1-13 which are based on Reading Passage below.

 

　　Last year Sean A. Spence, a professor at the school of medicine at the University of Sheffield in England, performed brain scans that showed that a woman convicted of poisoning a child in her care appeared to be telling the truth when she denied committing the crime. This deception study, along with two others performed by the Sheffield group, was funded by Quickfire Media, a television production company working for the U.K.'s Channel 4, which broadcast videos of the researchers at work as part of a three-part series called "Lie Lab." The brain study of the woman later appeared in the journal European Psychiatry.

 

　　Functional magnetic resonance imaging (fMRI) purports to detect mendacity by seeing inside the brain instead of tracking peripheral measures of anxiety—such as changes in pulse, blood pressure or respiration —measured by a polygraph. Besides drawing hundreds of thousands of viewers, fMRI has pulled in entrepreneurs. Two companies—Cephos in Pepperell, Mass., and No Lie MRI in Tarzana, Calif.—claim to predict with 90 percent or greater certitude whether you are telling the truth. No Lie MRI, whose name evokes the casual familiarity of a walk-in dental clinic in a strip mall, suggests that the technique may even be used for “risk reduction in dating”.

 

　　Many neuroscientists and legal scholars doubt such claims—and some even question whether brain scans for lie detection will ever be ready for anything but more research on the nature of deception and the brain. An fMRI machine tracks blood flow to activated brain areas. The assumption in lie detection is that the brain must exert extra effort when telling a lie and that the regions that do more work get more blood. Such areas light up in scans; during the lie studies, the illuminated regions are primarily involved in decision making.

 

　　To assess how fMRI and other neuroscience findings affect the law, the Mac-Arthur Foundation put up $10 million last year to pilot for three years the Law and Neuroscience Project. Part of the funding will attempt to set criteria for accurate and reliable lie detection using fMRI and other brain-scanning technology. “I think it's not possible, given the current technology, to trust the results,” says Marcus Raichle, a neuroscientist at the Washington University School of Medicine in St. Louis who heads the project's study group on lie detection. “But it’s not impossible to set up a research program to determine whether that’s possible.” A major review article last year in the American Journal of Law and Medicine by Henry T. Greely of Stanford University and Judy Illes, now at the University of British Columbia, explores the deficiencies of existing research and what may be needed to move the technology forward. The two scholars found that lie detection studies conducted so far (still less than 20 in all) failed to prove that fMRI is “effective as a lie detector in the real world at any accuracy level.”

 

　　Most studies examined groups, not individuals. Subjects in these studies were healthy young adults—making it unclear how the results would apply to someone who takes a drug that affects blood pressure or has a blockage in an artery. And the two researchers questioned the specificity of the lit-up areas; they noted that the regions also correlate with a wide range of cognitive behaviors, including memory, self- monitoring and conscious self-awareness.

 

　　The biggest challenge for which the Law and Neuroscience Project is already funding new research—is how to diminish the artificiality of the test protocol. Lying about whether a playing card is the seven of spades may not activate the same areas of the cortex as answering a question about whether you robbed the corner store. In fact, the most realistic studies to date may have come from the Lie Lab television programs. The two companies marketing the technology are not waiting for more data. Cephos is offering scans without charge to people who claim they were falsely accused if they meet certain criteria in an effort to get scans accepted by the courts. Allowing scans as legal evidence could open a potentially huge and lucrative market. “We may have to take many shots on goal before we actually see a courtroom.” says Cephos chief executive Steven Laken. He asserts that the technology has achieved 97 percent accuracy and that the more than 100 people scanned using the Cephos protocol have provided data that have resolved many of the issues that Greely and Illes cited.

 

　　But until formal clinical trials prove that the machines meet safety and effectiveness criteria, Greely and Illes have called for a ban on non-research uses. Trials envisaged for regulatory approval hint at the technical challenges. Actors, professional poker players and sociopaths would be compared against average Joes. The devout would go in the scanner after nonbelievers. Testing would take into account social setting. White lies—“no, dinner really was fantastic”—would have to be compared against untruths about sexual peccadilloes to ensure that the brain reacts identically.

 

　　There potential for abuse prompts caution. “The danger is that people’s lives can be changed in bad ways because of mistakes in the technology,” Greely says. “The danger for the science is that it gets a black eye because of this very high profile use of neuroimaging that goes wrong.” Considering the long and controversial history of the polygraph, gradualism may be the wisest course to follow for a new diagnostic that probes an essential quality governing social interaction.

 

　　Question 1-7

 

　　Use the information in the passage to match the people (listed A-D) with opinions or deeds below. Write the appropriate letters A-D in boxes 1-7 on your answer sheet.

 

　　NB you may use any letter more than once

 

　　A Henry T. Greely &Judy Illes

 

　　B Steven Laken

 

　　C Henry T. Greely

 

　　D Marcus Raichle

 

　　1 The possibility hidden in a mission impossible

 

　　2 The uncertain effectiveness of functional magnetic resonance imaging for detecting lies

 

　　3 The hazard lying behind the technology as a lie detector

 

　　4 The limited fields for the use of lie detection technology

 

　　5 Several successful cases of applying the results from the lie detection technology

 

　　6 Cons of the current research related to lie-detector tests

 

　　7 There should be some requested work to improve the techniques regarding lie detection

 

　　Question 8-10

 

　　Do the following statements agree with the information given in Reading Passage 1?

 

　　In boxes 8-10 on your answer sheet, write

 

　　TRUE if the statement is true

 

　　FALSE if the statement is false

 

　　NOT GIVEN if the information is not given in the passage

 

　　8 The lie detection for a convicted woman was first conducted by researchers in Europe.

 

　　9 The legitimization of using scans in the court might mean a promising and profitable business.

 

　　10 There is always something wrong with neuroimaging.

 

　　Question 11-13

 

　　Summary

 

　　Complete the following summary of the paragraphs of Reading Passage, using No More than Three words from the Reading Passage for each answer. Write your answers in boxes 11-13 on your answer sheet.

 

　　It is claimed that functional magnetic resonance imaging can check lies by observing the internal part of the brain rather than following up 11 to evaluate the anxiety as 12 does. Audiences as well as 13 are fascinated by this amazing lie-detection technology.

 

　　參考譯文：

 

　　去年，英國謝菲爾德大學(xué)醫(yī)學(xué)院教授Sean A. Spence 在對一位將自己照顧的孩子毒死的婦女的大腦進(jìn)行掃描時發(fā)現(xiàn)，這位被定罪的婦女在否認(rèn)自己的犯罪事實(shí)時，看起來像是在說真話。這項(xiàng)關(guān)于欺騙的研究，連同其它兩個由謝菲爾德小組領(lǐng)導(dǎo)的研究是由Quickfire Media贊助的，Quickfire Media是一家電視節(jié)目制作公司，播出頻道為英國的第4頻道，該頻道播放這些研究人員在工作時的視頻，構(gòu)成一個由三部分組成的系列節(jié)目的一部分，該系列叫做“謊言實(shí)驗(yàn)室”。對該婦女大腦的研究之后出現(xiàn)在歐洲精神病學(xué)雜志上。

 

　　功能磁共振成像儀(fMRI)聲稱能通過看到大腦的內(nèi)部來進(jìn)行測謊，而不是通過追蹤焦慮的外在表現(xiàn):如通過測謊儀測出的脈搏，血壓或呼吸的變化，功能磁共振成像技術(shù)除了吸引成百上千的觀眾外，還吸引著企業(yè)家的目光。兩家公司——馬薩諸塞州Pepperell市的 Cephos 公司和加利福尼亞州Tarzana市的No Lie MRI 公司聲稱對人們是否在說實(shí)話的預(yù)測的準(zhǔn)確率可以達(dá)到90%甚至更高。No Lie MRI 這家公司的名字本身就會讓人想起一個熟悉的情景——就像走進(jìn)一家位于商業(yè)區(qū)的牙科診所，表明該技術(shù)甚至可能被 用于“降低約會的風(fēng)險。”

 

　　許多神經(jīng)科學(xué)家和法律學(xué)者卻懷疑此說法，有的甚至質(zhì)疑對謊言的探測而進(jìn)行大腦掃描測謊是否真的有用，還是只是一些對謊言的性質(zhì)和大腦所做的更多的研究罷了。功能磁共振成像儀追蹤到達(dá)大腦激活區(qū)的血流的行蹤。測謊背后的假設(shè)是，當(dāng)大腦在說謊時，它需要額外的運(yùn)作并且負(fù)責(zé)這些額外運(yùn)作的大腦區(qū)域需要更多的血液供給，而這些區(qū)域在被掃描時就會亮起，在對謊言進(jìn)行研究時，這些被照亮的區(qū)域就是主要參與決策的區(qū)域。

 

　　為了評估功能磁共振成像儀和其他神經(jīng)科學(xué)的發(fā)現(xiàn)如何影響法律，麥克阿瑟基金去年出資1,000萬元來資助一個將耗時三年的“法律和神經(jīng)科學(xué)項(xiàng)目”。部分資金將會用來嘗試設(shè)置使用功能磁共振成像儀和其它腦部掃描技術(shù)來進(jìn)行測謊的準(zhǔn)確性和可靠性的標(biāo)準(zhǔn)。華盛頓大學(xué)圣路易斯醫(yī)學(xué)院負(fù)責(zé)該項(xiàng)目測謊研究小組的神經(jīng)學(xué)家 Marcus Raichle 認(rèn)為“在現(xiàn)有的技術(shù)前提下，很難完全相信測謊的結(jié)果，但是建立一個項(xiàng)目以確定測謊結(jié)果的可能性這項(xiàng)提議是可行的。”斯坦福大學(xué)的 Henry T. Greely 和英國哥倫比亞大學(xué)的 Judy Illes 在去年發(fā)表在美國《法律與醫(yī)學(xué)雜志》上的一篇評論文章中探討了現(xiàn)行研究的不足之處以及為了推進(jìn)技術(shù)進(jìn)步可能需要改進(jìn)之處。兩位學(xué)者發(fā)現(xiàn)，迄今為止進(jìn)行的測謊研究(總數(shù)仍低于20)還不能證明磁共振成像儀作為測謊儀在現(xiàn)實(shí)世界中的任何的精度水平上都是有效的。

 

　　大多數(shù)的研究都是以團(tuán)體而不是以個人為對象。這些研究的對象是健康的年輕成年人——所以不清楚如果對象變成因?yàn)榉昧怂幬锒绊懥搜獕夯蚴菍?dǎo)致動脈堵塞的人時，這些研究結(jié)果是否還適用。兩位研究人員質(zhì)疑了這些發(fā)亮的區(qū)域，他們指出，該區(qū)域也和一系列認(rèn)知行為具有相關(guān)性，包括記憶，自我檢測和自我意識。

 

　　最大的挑戰(zhàn)——同時也是“法律和神經(jīng)枓學(xué)項(xiàng)目”為其資助了新的研究項(xiàng)目——是如何減少測試協(xié)議的人為干預(yù)程度。關(guān)于一張撲克牌是否是黑桃7的謊言可能無法激活與回答你是否搶劫了街角的一家商店時的大腦皮質(zhì)的同一區(qū)域。事實(shí)上，迄今為止最現(xiàn)實(shí)的研究，有可能是來自“謊言實(shí)驗(yàn)室”這個電視節(jié)目。兩家經(jīng)營這樣技術(shù)的公司不是再等待更多的數(shù)據(jù)。Cephos公司提供的免費(fèi)的掃描是針對一些符合特定標(biāo)準(zhǔn)由法院準(zhǔn)許的聲稱自己是無罪的人。允許對大腦的掃描作為法律證據(jù)可能會打開一個潛在的巨大和利潤豐厚的市場。Cephos公司的首席執(zhí)行官Steven Laken說道“在上法庭之前，可能需要進(jìn)行若干的測試”。他聲稱該技術(shù)已達(dá)到97%的準(zhǔn)確率，并且有超過100個使用Cephos公司掃描的人已經(jīng)通過獲得數(shù)據(jù)解決了許多Greely and Illes提到過的問題。

 

　　但是，Greely 和 Illes的呼吁在正式的臨床試驗(yàn)證明該儀器能夠滿足安全性和有效性的標(biāo)準(zhǔn)前，該儀器不可用在非研究領(lǐng)域。要面對監(jiān)管部門的批準(zhǔn)的試驗(yàn)要面對技術(shù)上的挑戰(zhàn)。演員，專業(yè)撲克玩家和反社會的人會和普通人進(jìn)行比較。虔誠的人會跟在懷疑論者的后面接受掃描。測試將需要考慮到社會環(huán)境。善意的謊言——“不，晚餐真是太棒了”——將會和有關(guān)性過失這樣的謊言進(jìn)行比對，以保證大腦對不同的謊言有相同的反應(yīng)。

 

　　人們要小心這項(xiàng)技術(shù)被濫用的危險。Greely 認(rèn)為“危險在于人們的生活可能會因?yàn)榧夹g(shù)中的錯誤往不好的方向改變。科學(xué)的危險之處在于它有很多未知性，因?yàn)樗艽蟪潭壬鲜褂昧隋e誤的神經(jīng)影像學(xué)。”鑒于漫長且有爭議的測謊儀的歷史，循序漸進(jìn)可能是最明智的選擇，來使用它作為一個新的診斷手段來檢測社會治理的質(zhì)量。

 

2020年全國新東方在線零基礎(chǔ)雅思模擬練習(xí)題及答案。另外，提高作文，一定要寫，拿到題目，自己要去練習(xí)，不能看著標(biāo)準(zhǔn)答案去寫，這樣才會寫出自己的風(fēng)格。