영어 모의고사 (자동 편성)

Eyewitness testimony ①has long carried weight in courtrooms, yet decades of research reveal that memories of witnessed events are more malleable than most people assume. When individuals who observe an event ②are later exposed to misleading information about what they saw, whether through a leading question or a conversation with another witness, their recollections frequently incorporate details that never occurred, a phenomenon known as the misinformation effect. In one classic paradigm, participants who watched a video of a traffic accident and ③were then asked how fast the cars were going when they smashed into each other reported higher speed estimates and were more likely to falsely recall broken glass than participants asked the identical question using the milder verb hit. Crucially, these distorted memories often feel genuine to the person experiencing them, since the original memory trace ④become blended with the newly introduced information rather than existing as a separate, contradictory record. Such findings ⑤have prompted legal systems to adopt cautious interviewing protocols designed to minimize suggestive questioning during investigations.

Labeling theory approaches deviance not as a ① fixed property of certain acts, but as a social process created when powerful groups attach a negative label to a person's behavior. According to this view, nearly everyone breaks minor rules at some point, yet only some individuals are ② singled out, caught, and formally branded as delinquents, criminals, or troublemakers. Sociologist Howard Becker argued that this label often becomes what he called a master status, a single identity that ③ overshadows every other trait a person has. Once labeled, an individual may find legitimate opportunities ④ expanding, pushing them toward the very community of offenders that the label predicted they would join. This process, sometimes called secondary deviance, illustrates how social reaction can produce the outcome it claims merely to describe, a pattern critics see as deeply ⑤ troubling.

Students who read many books across many different subjects often develop a habit that quieter learners sometimes ① lack: the habit of comparing new information with what they already know. A student who has read about ancient wars, ocean ecosystems, and modern economics can more easily ② notice when two different subjects share a similar pattern. This kind of connection-making is closely related to what psychologists call critical thinking, since seeing a familiar pattern in an unfamiliar topic allows a person to ask ③ sharper questions instead of accepting new information at face value. Extensive reading also builds a large mental library of examples, which makes it ④ harder to evaluate whether a new claim sounds reasonable or exaggerated. Teachers often notice that widely read students argue more carefully, supporting their opinions with ⑤ specific examples rather than vague generalizations.

For decades, memory researchers assumed that repetition alone determined how well information would be retained, an assumption that an influential theory proposed by Craik and Lockhart eventually overturned. According to their framework, what matters most is not how many times a person rehearses material but how deeply that material is processed during encoding. ①Shallow processing, which involves attending merely to superficial features such as the shape of letters or the sound of a word, produces memory traces that fade quickly and remain ②vulnerable to interference. Elaborative processing, by contrast, requires connecting new information to existing knowledge, generating meaningful associations, and analyzing semantic content, thereby producing traces that are considerably more ③fragile. Consequently, a student who merely repeats a definition aloud without considering its implications is less likely to retain it than one who relates the concept to a personal example. This distinction reshaped educational practice, encouraging teachers to design tasks that demand ④comprehension rather than ⑤mechanical repetition, since durable memory depends on the depth, not the frequency, of cognitive engagement.

Many readers assume that once they finish a book, there is ① no reason to open it again. Yet teachers who study reading often disagree, arguing that a second reading can ② reveal details a first reading misses completely. During a first reading, most of a student's attention goes toward simply following the plot, wondering what will happen next. Once the ending is already known, a second reading frees the mind to notice ③ smaller things, such as a clever hint the author placed early in the story or a change in a character's tone. Some students who reread their favorite novel report that it feels almost like reading the ④ same book, because they now understand the characters' motives more deeply. Teachers therefore encourage students not to rush toward new titles alone, but to occasionally return to a book they already loved, since a second visit often teaches ⑤ more than the first.

Science labs feel far ① safer than they actually are, largely because the equipment looks harmless and the experiments are carefully planned by a teacher. This false sense of security leads some students to skip small precautions, such as wearing safety goggles for a "simple" experiment or tasting a substance out of ② curiosity. Chemical reactions, however, do not distinguish between a professional laboratory and a classroom; a small amount of the wrong substance splashed into an eye can cause ③ permanent damage within seconds, regardless of how basic the experiment seemed. Teachers repeatedly emphasize reading each instruction before touching any material, since even a familiar-looking chemical can behave ④ unpredictably when combined with something new. Most laboratory accidents, researchers note, do not happen during advanced or unusual experiments but during routine ones that students have performed many times before, precisely because familiarity breeds ⑤ caution rather than carelessness.

Why do people often overvalue objects they have partly built themselves, even when the finished product is objectively inferior to something they could have simply purchased? This puzzle, which researchers named after a furniture retailer famous for selling items that require home assembly, challenges the standard economic assumption that value is determined solely by an object's inherent qualities. In a series of experiments, participants who assembled a plain storage box were willing to pay nearly as much for their own imperfect creation as they were for a professionally built version, despite being fully aware of its flaws. Labor, it seems, functions as a kind of psychological investment: once effort has been poured into a task, _______________. This tendency helps explain why consumers often prefer products that demand some degree of personal assembly, even when a comparable finished item is available at a lower price and requires no time investment whatsoever.

In a classic experiment inspired by Keynes's beauty contest analogy, participants choose a number between zero and one hundred, and the winner is whoever selects the number closest to two-thirds of the average of all guesses submitted. A perfectly rational player, assuming every other participant reasons with unlimited depth, would conclude the equilibrium number is zero. In practice, however, actual guesses rarely converge on zero; most participants stop reasoning after a round or two of imagining what others might guess, producing _______________. This gap between theoretical equilibrium and observed behavior reveals that human reasoning is bounded.

Every spring, our school holds an art exhibition in the main hallway, and this year I finally submitted a painting of my own. (A) On the morning the paintings went up, I walked past dozens of styles, from careful realistic portraits to messy, colorful abstractions, and none of them looked like mine. Instead of feeling embarrassed, I found myself curious about why each artist had made certain choices. (B) Standing in that crowded hallway, I finally understood that the exhibition's real purpose was not to rank the paintings, but to let students discover how many different perspectives could exist in a single shared space. (C) For weeks, I compared my work to my classmates' drawings and felt sure that mine was not good enough to hang beside theirs. My art teacher noticed my hesitation and said something I did not expect: an exhibition is not a contest to find the single best picture, but a chance to show how differently people see the same world.

**주어진 문장**: As a result, industries adopting these methods often discover that their overall production costs decline over time, even though the initial transition requires investment. Traditional industrial systems have relied on a linear model of production, in which raw materials are extracted, transformed into goods, and eventually discarded as waste. ① This approach treats natural resources as if unlimited and disposal as if costless. ② A circular economy proposes an alternative framework in which materials are kept in continuous use through reuse, repair, and recycling, thereby reducing the extraction of virgin resources. Central to this model is the notion that waste, rather than being an inevitable byproduct, can be redesigned as a resource for another process, much as fallen leaves nourish the trees that shed them. ③ For example, manufacturers design products so that components can be disassembled and reused in new items once their original function ends. Some companies also lease equipment instead of selling it outright, retaining responsibility for refurbishment. ④ Because such practices lessen dependence on finite raw materials, they reduce the environmental damage caused by mining. ⑤ Consequently, the circular economy is increasingly regarded as a viable economic strategy that conserves resources for future generations. ① ② ③ ④ ⑤