2022年考博英语-天津师范大学考试题库及全真模拟冲刺卷（附答案带详解）1. 单选题In most cases impoverished mothers have symptoms of anxiety because of the （ ）they must cope with in their daily lives, rather than because of true mental health issues.问题1选项A.adversityB.substanceC.depletionD.trauma【答案】A【解析】考查名词辨析。adversity意为“困境，不幸”；substance意为“物质，材料”；depletion意为“消耗，用尽”；trauma意为“创伤”。句意：在大多数情况下，贫困的母亲有焦虑的症状，因为他们必须应对日常生活中的不幸，而不是因为真正的心理健康问题。2. 单选题Women bosses are viewed as less qualified and capable than their male （ ）according to a study.问题1选项A.equivalentsB.counterpartsC.peersD.substitutes【答案】B【解析】考查名词辨析。equivalent意为“同等物”；counterpart意为“职位(或作用)相当的人”；peer意为“同龄人”；substitute意为“替代物”。句意：根据一项研究，女性老板被认为不如男性老板合格、有能力。3. 单选题Scientific journals can provide reliable information because of the process called peer review , in which other scientists (peers) evaluate the value and credibility of research before allowing it to appear in print.Peer-review is performed by knowledgeable scientists who are not directly involved with the research being evaluated. In fact, reviewers are often scientific competitors. To remove any bias from the review process, most manuscripts (articles prior to publication) are considered by three reviewers independently. Reviewers consider the validity of the approach, the significance and originality of the finding, its interest and timeliness to the scientific community, and the clarity of the writing. Reviewers then provide feedback on the manuscript they have read. Journal editors rely on peer-review feedback to guide their publication decisions, and authors use reviewers comments to refine the text of their manuscript and the experiments within. Journal editors must occasionally resolve issues related to conflict of interest among reviewers; reviewers identities are generally not revealed to manuscript authors. This later rule is intended to free reviewers from any social pressures, allowing them to consider only the quality of the science before them.Reviewers are expected to keep the information in a manuscript confidential until it is published, but it is rare that the work comes as a complete surprise to the entire scientific community. This is because peer review is integrated into almost every step of science.Most research scientists request public funding for their experiments. Funding decisions are made by a committee of other scientists who debate each proposals likelihood of success, the validity of its approach, and the importance of the question being asked. Once funded, the experiments can begin, and preliminary data is often revealed at scientific meetings. This allows the findings to be debated and defended with colleagues prior to publication. Once the experiments are completed, a manuscript is written and circulated to all those who contributed to the work. Manuscripts commonly undergo several rounds of revision by the authors before being submitted to a journal for peer review, Journals vary in their selectivity and focus. Consequently, manuscripts are first sent to the most widely read journal likely to publish the work. If that journal declines to publish the manuscript, it can be sent to a different journal for consideration.Despite the best efforts of reviewers, cases of scientific misconduct do occur and incorrect or unsubstantiated data does get published. Some cases turn out to be elaborate hoaxes. For example, in 1912 Charles Dawson showed off parts of a skull and jawbone to the public and convinced scientists that the fossils represented the missing link between man and ape Dawsons Piltdown Man confused the scientific community for 40 years until it was discovered that the skull was only 500 years old rather than 500,000, and the jawbone was that of an orangutan. In other instances of misconduct, data in scientific journals has been inadequately documented or improperly reported Cases of scientific misconduct are rare but important because of the publicity they receive once they are discovered, eroding the publics trust in the peer-review system and science itself. To keep this type of conduct in check, scientific articles include detailed descriptions of experimental protocols that enable others to reproduce experiments.1.Scientific journals make for reliable reading owing to （ ）.2.Qualified peer reviewers（ ）.3.According to the passage, which of the following statements is true?4.It can be inferred that scientific journals（ ）.5.Scientific misconduct（ ）.问题1选项A.the literacy rate of readersB.the practice of peer reviewC.the reputation of the editorsD.the cooperation among authors问题2选项A.should have the relevant expertise and vast knowledgeB.fully dominate the editorial decisions about publicationC.need to discuss with other reviewers for sake of fairnessD.help rewrite the submitted manuscript to improve its quality问题3选项