영어 모의고사 (자동 편성)

Among the many tools available to those who design choice environments, few are as quietly ①powerful as the default option, the alternative that takes effect automatically unless a person actively selects something else. Because changing a default requires ②deliberate effort, many individuals simply accept whatever arrangement has been preselected for them, regardless of whether that arrangement actually serves their interests best. Countries that automatically enroll citizens in organ donation programs, requiring an explicit request to opt out, consistently report far ③lower donor registration rates than countries that require citizens to actively opt in. Employers who automatically enroll new hires in retirement savings plans likewise see participation rates climb dramatically compared with employers who leave enrollment entirely voluntary. What makes default options so influential is not merely convenience; a default also functions as an implicit signal about what is considered ④normal or recommended, subtly shaping perceptions even among individuals who believe themselves to be deciding ⑤independently.

Imagine a man locked inside a room who does not understand a single word of Chinese, yet who possesses a giant rulebook written entirely in English. Slips of paper covered with Chinese characters are passed in through a slot, and by following the rulebook's instructions step by step, he produces replies that appear ①fluent to anyone outside. From the perspective of a native speaker reading the responses, the room seems to understand Chinese ②perfectly. Yet the man inside understands nothing at all; he is merely manipulating shapes according to formal rules, without grasping their ③meaning. This scenario was designed to challenge the assumption that a computer running a sophisticated program truly ④fails to understand language simply because it produces convincing output. Passing every external test of intelligence, the argument suggests, is not the same as possessing genuine understanding, since syntax alone can never generate ⑤semantics.

When people look back on a multi-day journey, they ①rarely recall every hour with equal clarity; instead, memory tends to compress the entire experience into just a few representative moments. Psychologists have found that two points carry ②disproportionate weight in this process: the single moment when emotion, whether joy or discomfort, reached its highest intensity, and whatever happened right before the experience concluded. Consider two hikers who complete an identical five-day trek. The first finishes with a ③grueling, rain-soaked final climb, while the second enjoys a calm, scenic descent on the last afternoon despite having endured an equally difficult ascent earlier in the trip. Even though both hikers faced comparable hardship overall, the second is far ④less likely to remember the journey fondly, simply because the trip ended pleasantly. This pattern reveals that overall satisfaction is not calculated as an average of every experienced moment; rather, it is shaped disproportionately by whichever moments felt most ⑤intense and by however the experience happened to end.

A biosensor works by pairing a biological component, such as an enzyme or antibody, with an electronic device that converts a biological reaction into a signal a computer can ①read. When the target molecule, whether glucose in blood or a trace of a pathogen, binds to the biological component, it triggers a ②massive measurable change that the device translates into a readable number. This design has already transformed diabetes management, letting patients monitor blood sugar ③continuously through a small sensor worn under the skin rather than pricking a finger several times a day. Engineers are now racing to extend the same principle to detect subtler targets, from cancer cells circulating in the bloodstream to trace ④contaminants in drinking water. The central challenge is not detecting the target but doing so reliably outside a controlled laboratory, since a sensor that performs well on a clean lab bench can behave ⑤erratically once exposed to a real body or a real river.

Long before humans learned to drill for oil, microorganisms had already ①mastered the art of converting sunlight and carbon dioxide into stored chemical energy. Modern biofuel research borrows this ability, cultivating algae or engineered bacteria in large tanks where they can be coaxed into producing oils and sugars that can be ②refined into fuel usable in existing engines. Unlike crops grown for corn-based ethanol, which ③compete directly with food production for arable land, many algae strains can thrive in shallow ponds, wastewater, or even coastal seawater unsuitable for conventional agriculture. Engineers have also learned to tinker with the metabolic pathways of these organisms, boosting oil yield far beyond what any wild strain would naturally produce on its own. Despite this progress, producing biofuel at a cost competitive with fossil fuel remains ④difficult, since harvesting and processing the organisms ⑤conserves a substantial share of the energy the fuel itself will eventually provide.

Bacteria have been cutting up invading viral DNA for billions of years, long before any scientist thought to borrow the trick for use in a ①laboratory. The CRISPR-Cas9 system, as it is now known, relies on a short guide RNA that ②matches a specific DNA sequence, leading a scissor-like enzyme called Cas9 directly to that exact location in the genome. Once Cas9 arrives at the target site, it ③repairs both strands of the DNA helix, and the cell's own repair machinery rushes in to mend the cut, often introducing a small change in the process. By supplying the cell with a template during this repair step, scientists can direct that machinery to ④insert a specific new sequence rather than merely disabling the original gene. What once required years of painstaking work to alter a single gene can now be accomplished within days, a shift in ⑤speed that has reshaped nearly every corner of biological research.

Picture a woman who receives a plain ceramic mug as a free gift at a conference and, later that afternoon, ①refuses to sell it for anything less than triple its price in the gift shop downstairs. Before she owned the mug, she would never have paid extra for it; once it became hers, however, its value in her mind ②declined sharply, simply because she now possessed it. Researchers have ③repeatedly observed this pattern across many everyday objects, from coffee mugs and concert tickets to office chairs and old furniture inherited from relatives. Owners ④consistently demand more money to give something up than buyers are willing to offer for that very same item, revealing a curious asymmetry rooted purely in possession itself. Some economists argue that this effect explains why negotiations over inherited property so often ⑤collapse, since each side quietly attaches a different value to what it currently holds.

The rejection of unfair offers in the ultimatum game raises an intriguing evolutionary question. (A) One explanation suggests that a willingness to punish unfairness, even at a personal cost, may have conferred long-term advantages within small communities where reputation and repeated interaction mattered greatly. (B) If punishing unfairness is costly in the short term, why would such a tendency have persisted across generations rather than being eliminated by more narrowly self-interested behavior? (C) An individual known to reject unfair offers discourages others from proposing unfair terms in future interactions, ultimately securing fairer treatment over the course of a lifetime.

주어진 문장: This experiment shows that consumers do not simply weigh money saved against money spent, but react to the very presence or absence of a price tag itself. Classical economic theory assumes that consumers evaluate every price change in the same rational way, weighing marginal benefit against marginal cost regardless of the absolute numbers involved. ( ① ) Behavioral economists, however, have discovered a striking exception: the moment a price drops to exactly zero, people's judgment shifts in a way that ordinary discounting cannot explain. ( ② ) 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. ( ③ ) When both prices were merely reduced by the same amount, most participants still preferred the higher-quality option. Yet once the cheaper chocolate's price was lowered to zero, the majority abruptly switched their preference, even though the price gap between the two options had not actually changed. ( ④ ) Researchers explain this reversal by noting that a free item carries no perceived risk of loss, which makes it feel disproportionately attractive compared with any option that still requires payment, however small. ( ⑤ )

In some cases, nature alone is simply too slow, and human ingenuity is called on to speed things along. When an oil tanker ruptures and crude spreads across open water, cleanup crews increasingly reach not only for skimmers and floating booms but also for something far smaller: bacteria that eat oil. ( ① ) Certain naturally occurring microbes possess enzymes capable of breaking hydrocarbon molecules apart, using the carbon as an energy source and gradually converting a toxic slick into carbon dioxide and harmless byproducts. ( ② ) Bioremediation, as this approach is called, works far more slowly than mechanical cleanup, often taking months rather than days. ( ③ ) But it can reach contamination trapped in soil or sediment that skimmers and booms can never reach. ( ④ ) Scientists have learned to accelerate the process by adding nutrients that help native microbial populations multiply faster, or in some cases by introducing engineered strains selected specifically for their appetite for a particular pollutant. ( ⑤ ) Because the method relies on living organisms rather than heavy machinery, it also tends to leave a far gentler footprint on the surrounding ecosystem than excavation or chemical treatment ever could.