영어 모의고사 (자동 편성)

Dual coding theory, first proposed to explain why certain kinds of information are remembered more readily than others, holds that the mind process ① verbal and visual material through two partially independent channels rather than a single unified system. According to this account, words and other linguistic symbols are encoded ② primarily through a verbal channel that represents meaning in an abstract, sequential form, while pictures and concrete objects are encoded through an imagery channel that preserves spatial and perceptual detail. When information engages both channels simultaneously, as when a textbook pairs ③ a written explanation with an accompanying diagram, the resulting memory trace benefits from two separate, mutually reinforcing pathways of retrieval rather than just one. This redundancy explains the well-documented picture superiority effect, whereby concrete, easily visualized words tend to be recalled ④ more accurately than abstract terms that resist mental imagery. Consequently, dual coding theory has profound implications for instructional design, suggesting that combining ⑤ carefully chosen visuals with concise verbal explanations can strengthen students' long-term retention of complex material.

Among the many strategies proposed to remove carbon dioxide from the atmosphere, one of the oldest ①draw on an agricultural technique predating modern industry, converting organic material into a stable form of charcoal known as biochar. Biochar is ②produced through pyrolysis, a process in which crop residues or wood chips are heated in an environment with little or no oxygen, ③preventing the material from burning away as in an open fire. This process leaves behind a carbon-rich solid that resists decomposition far longer than raw organic matter, locking carbon in a form remaining stable in soil for centuries. When mixed into farmland, biochar also improves soil structure, ④retaining moisture and nutrients otherwise lost, which can boost crop yields in depleted soils. For example, farmers ⑤cultivating nutrient-poor tropical soils have reported measurable increases in productivity after adding biochar.

Conventional economic wisdom holds that more options are always preferable to fewer, since a larger set of alternatives ①increases the likelihood that any individual will find one that precisely matches their preferences. When shoppers are presented with an extensive array of choices, they frequently experience heightened anxiety about making the wrong selection and, paradoxically, become ②less likely to make any purchase or decision at all. Furthermore, individuals who do eventually choose from an overwhelming array often report ③higher satisfaction with their selection than those who chose from a modest handful of options, since the sheer number of unexplored alternatives ④fosters lingering doubt about whether a better choice was overlooked. Businesses that recognize this dynamic have begun deliberately ⑤curating smaller, carefully selected assortments, betting that a narrower range of options can sometimes generate more sales and greater customer satisfaction than abundance.

Classical economic theory assumes that consumers evaluate every price change in the same ①rational way, weighing marginal benefit against marginal cost regardless of the absolute numbers involved. Behavioral economists, however, have discovered a ②striking exception: the moment a price drops to exactly zero, people's judgment shifts in a way that ordinary discounting cannot explain. In a well-known laboratory experiment, participants chose between two chocolates, one of higher quality priced at a small fee and one of lower quality offered for free. When both prices were merely reduced by the same amount, most participants still ③avoided the higher-quality option. Yet once the cheaper chocolate's price was lowered to zero, the majority ④abruptly switched their preference, even though the price gap between the two options had not actually changed. Researchers explain this reversal by noting that a free item carries no perceived risk of loss, which makes it feel disproportionately ⑤attractive compared with any option that still requires payment, however small.

Medieval philosophers told the story of a hungry donkey placed exactly midway between two identical, equally fragrant piles of hay, with no factor whatsoever tipping the balance toward either option. Because the donkey is assumed to be a perfectly ①rational creature that always chooses the option supported by the strongest reason, and because neither pile offers any advantage over the other, the donkey supposedly finds itself with no rational basis for choosing one pile rather than the other. ②Paralyzed by this perfect symmetry, the donkey starves to death precisely because it can find no reason to move in either direction. Critics of the story point out that real animals, and real humans, rarely face situations of such flawless symmetry, and that even a tiny, ③arbitrary preference is usually enough to break the tie in practice. The paradox nevertheless raises a serious question about whether purely rational deliberation can ever ④generate action on its own, without some additional nudge that reason alone ⑤willingly supplies.

John Rawls proposed an unusual thought experiment to determine what principles of justice a society ought to adopt. Imagine a group of rational people gathered to design the basic rules of their future society, but placed behind what he called a veil of ignorance, a condition under which none of them knows their own race, gender, wealth, talents, or social position in advance. Since no one can predict whether they will be born into privilege or poverty, _______________. Rawls argued that rational people placed in this position would not gamble on inequality; instead, they would favor arrangements that guarantee basic liberties for everyone and permit unequal outcomes only when those outcomes actually benefit the least advantaged.

When workers receive a five percent raise in a year when prices have climbed five percent as well, their real purchasing power has not changed at all, yet many still report feeling noticeably better off. (A) Employers exploit this pattern by favoring modest nominal raises over deeper structural adjustments, since a visible increase on a payslip satisfies employees more effectively than an explanation about inflation could. (B) The illusion persists even among people who claim to understand inflation well, which suggests that the bias operates at an intuitive level that formal knowledge does not easily override. (C) This tendency to judge economic well-being by nominal figures printed on a paycheck, rather than by what that money can actually purchase, is known among economists as money illusion.

If moral responsibility is supposed to depend only on what a person chooses and intends, this outcome seems deeply unfair. Two drivers, equally distracted by their phones, run a red light in exactly the same careless manner. ( ① ) By pure chance, a child happens to be crossing the street in front of one driver but not the other; the first driver kills the child, while the second driver drives through safely and never even notices the danger. ( ② ) Although both drivers behaved identically and made exactly the same reckless choice, society judges them very differently: one faces criminal charges and lifelong guilt, while the other receives, at most, a minor traffic ticket. ( ③ ) Philosophers call this troubling asymmetry moral luck, since factors entirely outside a person's control end up determining how severely we judge their moral character. ( ④ ) Yet few people are willing to excuse the unlucky driver as if nothing worse had happened. ( ⑤ ) Moral luck suggests that our everyday judgments rest on a foundation far shakier than we usually like to admit.

None of these individual passersby, however, has any direct evidence that the food itself is worth the wait. Consider how a line forms outside a small restaurant on an otherwise quiet street. ( ① ) The first few patrons may have arrived simply because of a personal recommendation or a delayed reservation, factors entirely unrelated to the restaurant's actual quality. ( ② ) As the line grows, passersby begin to notice it and, assuming that such popularity must be earned, decide to join the queue themselves. ( ③ ) Each additional person who joins makes the line appear even more compelling to the next passerby, creating a self-reinforcing cycle of imitation. ( ④ ) They are, in effect, relying entirely on the visible behavior of strangers as a proxy for information they do not personally possess. ( ⑤ ) The restaurant's true culinary merit, whatever it may be, has become almost irrelevant to the continued growth of the line.

Suppose that one day Mary is finally released from the room and shown a ripe red tomato for the first time. Imagine a brilliant scientist named Mary who has spent her entire life inside a black-and-white room, learning everything physical science could ever teach about color, including the exact wavelengths of light and the precise neural processes triggered when a person sees red. ( ① ) Despite this complete physical knowledge, Mary herself has never actually seen a color; every book, screen, and object in her world has been carefully restricted to shades of gray. ( ② ) Philosopher Frank Jackson argued that Mary would learn something entirely new at that moment, namely what it actually feels like to see red. ( ③ ) This is true even though she already possessed every physical fact about color there was to know beforehand. ( ④ ) If Mary genuinely gains new knowledge upon leaving the room, then physical facts alone cannot capture everything there is to know about conscious experience. ( ⑤ ) Something, it seems, was missing from her exhaustive scientific education all along.