영어 모의고사 (자동 편성)

Identical information can provoke strikingly different reactions depending on how it ①is worded, a phenomenon economists call the framing effect. Patients told that a surgical procedure carries a ninety percent survival rate tend to consent to it far more readily than patients ②told that the same procedure carries a ten percent mortality rate, even though the two descriptions convey exactly the same statistical reality. This discrepancy arises because language does more than transmit facts; it also supplies an emotional lens through which those facts ③interpreting. Positive framing, which emphasizes what will be preserved or gained, tends to encourage risk-averse choices, whereas negative framing, which emphasizes what might be lost, often ④pushes people toward riskier alternatives in an attempt to avoid the loss altogether. Recognizing how deeply framing shapes judgment is therefore essential, not because the underlying facts change, but because the very same facts, ⑤dressed in different language, can lead reasonable people toward entirely opposite conclusions.

Standard economic theory assumes that money is fungible, meaning that a dollar earned as salary is functionally identical to a dollar received as a tax refund or won in a lottery. In practice, however, people routinely sort their finances into separate mental accounts, ①treating money differently depending on its source or intended purpose, a process economists call mental accounting. A household that would never dip into its retirement savings to pay for a vacation might nonetheless spend an unexpected bonus on that very trip without hesitation, even though both sums ②are, in strictly financial terms, equally available for either purpose. This compartmentalization can produce decisions that appear inconsistent when viewed through a purely rational lens: the same individual who diligently saves a portion of every paycheck may simultaneously ③carrying high-interest credit card debt, effectively paying more to borrow than they earn on their savings. Mental accounting is not always harmful, however; by assigning specific categories to specific funds, individuals can also impose useful discipline on their spending, ④preventing money earmarked for essential needs from being diverted toward impulsive purchases. The practice thus reveals that financial behavior is guided less by pure arithmetic than by psychological categories that individuals ⑤impose on money's origin and purpose.

People routinely seek out information that confirms what they already believe while ①overlooking or dismissing evidence that contradicts those beliefs, a pattern known as confirmation bias. This tendency operates not because individuals are deliberately dishonest, but because the mind finds it cognitively less ②taxing to absorb information that fits an existing framework than to reconstruct that framework from scratch. Investors who believe a particular company will succeed, for instance, tend to interpret ambiguous news about that company ③unfavorably, while investors who are skeptical of the same company interpret identical news unfavorably, even though both groups are examining the same underlying facts. Social media platforms can ④intensify this effect by algorithmically presenting users with content similar to what they have previously engaged with. Over time, such selective exposure can harden initial impressions into convictions that feel objectively verified, even though they rest on a systematically ⑤filtered sample of evidence.

Policymakers seeking to improve public welfare without restricting individual freedom have increasingly embraced an approach known as nudging, which alters the environment in which choices are made rather than mandating particular outcomes. A nudge preserves every option that was previously available; it simply arranges those options so that the choice deemed most beneficial becomes easier or more visible than the alternatives. Despite ongoing debate over its ethics, governments across many countries have adopted nudge-based programs, reporting outcomes that are frequently ___________ compared with those achieved through traditional regulation or public information campaigns alone.

Facial recognition software has moved rapidly into shopping malls, schools, and apartment buildings. Proponents note that it can unlock doors and speed up identity checks far faster than any human guard. Independent studies, however, have repeatedly found that many commercial systems perform less accurately on women and people with darker skin tones, which means that _______________. Several cities have already reported cases in which an innocent person was detained based on a flawed match.

Two patients diagnosed with the same disease and prescribed the same medication can respond in strikingly different ways, one recovering quickly while the other experiences little benefit or even harmful side effects. (A) This approach has proven especially valuable in cancer treatment, where tumors from two patients with the same diagnosis may carry entirely different genetic mutations that respond to entirely different drugs, though widespread adoption still faces real obstacles, since genetic sequencing remains expensive in many regions. (B) By sequencing a patient's DNA before treatment begins, doctors can increasingly predict which medication is likely to work best and at what dose, replacing a strategy once described as one-size-fits-all with something closer to a tailored fit. (C) Precision medicine starts from the observation that this variation often traces back to differences buried in each patient's genome, differences that determine how efficiently a body absorbs, breaks down, or responds to a given drug.

주어진 문장: No individual, he pointed out, could realistically process every piece of available information before choosing. Classical economic theory long assumed that decision makers gather all relevant information, calculate every possible outcome, and select the single option that maximizes their benefit. ( ① ) Herbert Simon, however, questioned this assumption, arguing that human beings operate under real constraints of time, knowledge, and mental capacity that make such exhaustive calculation practically impossible. ( ② ) Instead of searching endlessly for the theoretically perfect choice, people typically stop once they find an option that seems good enough to meet their immediate needs, a strategy Simon termed satisficing. ( ③ ) A shopper comparing refrigerators, for example, rarely examines every model available; she instead sets a few practical criteria, such as price and size, and selects the first appliance that satisfies them adequately. ( ④ ) This approach is not a failure of reasoning but rather a sensible adaptation to a world where information is costly and time is genuinely limited. ( ⑤ ) Consequently, models assuming unlimited rationality often fail to predict actual behavior, while frameworks acknowledging these cognitive boundaries offer a far more realistic account of how ordinary decisions are actually made.

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.

This finding is particularly striking given that the two groups of employees faced no difference whatsoever in the financial terms of the plan itself. Employers have long experimented with how retirement savings plans are presented to new hires. ( ① ) In one common arrangement, employees receive a form and must actively check a box to begin contributing a portion of their salary to a savings account. ( ② ) Under this opt-in arrangement, a substantial share of eligible employees never get around to enrolling, often citing simple procrastination rather than genuine disinterest in saving. ( ③ ) When employers instead enroll employees automatically and require them to check a box only if they wish to withdraw, participation rates climb to well over ninety percent. ( ④ ) Only the framing of the choice, not its economic substance, appears to determine whether employees end up saving for retirement. ( ⑤ ) This gap between the two arrangements reveals just how powerfully a default setting can shape decisions that people generally regard as carefully considered.

Consequently, even seasoned professionals who believe themselves immune to such influence often fail to notice how much their final judgment has shifted. The anchoring effect can be surprisingly resistant to conscious correction. ( ① ) Even when individuals are explicitly warned in advance that a number they are about to see is randomly generated and therefore meaningless, their subsequent estimates still drift toward that arbitrary figure. ( ② ) This occurs because the mind uses the initial number as a starting point and then adjusts insufficiently away from it, a process that leaves the final judgment biased toward the anchor. ( ③ ) Experimental studies have repeatedly demonstrated this effect across a wide range of tasks, from estimating historical dates to appraising real estate. ( ④ ) The bias persists not because people lack expertise, but because the adjustment process itself is inherently incomplete. ( ⑤ ) Awareness of the anchoring effect, therefore, does not guarantee immunity from it, which is precisely what makes the bias so difficult to counteract in practice.