According to a study led by Nottingham Trent University in Britain, the average person looks at their device _______ a day, browsing the Internet or using apps.
According to a study led by Nottingham Trent University in Britain, the average person looks at their device _______ a day, browsing the Internet or using apps.
Q2: How did the couple meet? A: A) At Kensington Palace. B: B) At Nottingham Cottage. C: C) During a dinner. D: D) Through a blind date.
Q2: How did the couple meet? A: A) At Kensington Palace. B: B) At Nottingham Cottage. C: C) During a dinner. D: D) Through a blind date.
Which of the following night flowering plants open slowly every night just at sunset A: Evening Primrose. B: Moonflowers. C: Angel's Trumpet. D: Nottingham Catchfly, Night-flowering Catchfly, and White Champion.
Which of the following night flowering plants open slowly every night just at sunset A: Evening Primrose. B: Moonflowers. C: Angel's Trumpet. D: Nottingham Catchfly, Night-flowering Catchfly, and White Champion.
判断下列文献各属于哪种文献类型（如期刊论文、图书、学位论文、会议录或会议论文、标准、科技报告、专利等）。（1）为 ______ （2）为 ______ （1）[4] CRAWFPRD W, GORMAN M. Future libraries: dreams, madness, & reality[M]. Chicago: American Library Association, 1995: 17-21.（2）[1] Ediz, 1. G. Numerical simulation of methane flow though strata adjacent to a working longwall coal face. Ph. D. Dissertation, University of Nottingham, UK, 1991.
判断下列文献各属于哪种文献类型（如期刊论文、图书、学位论文、会议录或会议论文、标准、科技报告、专利等）。（1）为 ______ （2）为 ______ （1）[4] CRAWFPRD W, GORMAN M. Future libraries: dreams, madness, & reality[M]. Chicago: American Library Association, 1995: 17-21.（2）[1] Ediz, 1. G. Numerical simulation of methane flow though strata adjacent to a working longwall coal face. Ph. D. Dissertation, University of Nottingham, UK, 1991.
Gregory Currie, a professor of philosophy at the University of Nottingham, recently argued in The New York Times that we ought not to claim that literature improves us as people, because there is no “compelling evidence that suggests that people are morally or socially better for reading Tolstoy” or other great books. Actually, there is such evidence. Raymond Mar, a psychologist at York University in Canada, and Keith Oatley, a professor of cognitive psychology at the University of Toronto, reported in studies published in 2006 and 2009 that individuals who often read fiction appear to be better able to understand other people, empathize (起共鸣) with them and view the world from their perspective. This link persisted even after the researchers factored in the possibility that more empathetic individuals might choose to read more novels. Recent research in cognitive science, psychology and neuroscience has demonstrated that deep reading of books is a distinctive experience, very different from the information-driven reading we do on the Web. Although deep reading does not, strictly speaking, require a conventional book, the built-in limits of the printed page are uniquely conducive to the deep reading experience. A book’s lack of hyperlinks allowing the reader to remain fully immersed in the narrative, without having to make such decisions as whether to click on a link or not. That immersion is supported by the way the brain handles language rich in sensory detail and emotional and moral complexity, by creating a mental representation that draws on the same brain regions that would be active if the scene were unfolding in real life. The emotional situations and moral dilemmas that are the stuff of literature are also vigorous exercise for the brain, propelling us inside the heads of fictional characters and even increasing our real-life capacity for empathy. This is not reading as many young people are coming to know it. Their reading, mostly done onscreen, is pragmatic (实际的) and instrumental. If we allow our children to believe reading onscreen is all there is, we will have deprived them of an enjoyable and enlightening experience that will enlarge them as people. Instead molding our education around young people’s attachment to digital devices and onscreen habits, we need to show them some place they’ve never been, a place only deep reading can take them.
Gregory Currie, a professor of philosophy at the University of Nottingham, recently argued in The New York Times that we ought not to claim that literature improves us as people, because there is no “compelling evidence that suggests that people are morally or socially better for reading Tolstoy” or other great books. Actually, there is such evidence. Raymond Mar, a psychologist at York University in Canada, and Keith Oatley, a professor of cognitive psychology at the University of Toronto, reported in studies published in 2006 and 2009 that individuals who often read fiction appear to be better able to understand other people, empathize (起共鸣) with them and view the world from their perspective. This link persisted even after the researchers factored in the possibility that more empathetic individuals might choose to read more novels. Recent research in cognitive science, psychology and neuroscience has demonstrated that deep reading of books is a distinctive experience, very different from the information-driven reading we do on the Web. Although deep reading does not, strictly speaking, require a conventional book, the built-in limits of the printed page are uniquely conducive to the deep reading experience. A book’s lack of hyperlinks allowing the reader to remain fully immersed in the narrative, without having to make such decisions as whether to click on a link or not. That immersion is supported by the way the brain handles language rich in sensory detail and emotional and moral complexity, by creating a mental representation that draws on the same brain regions that would be active if the scene were unfolding in real life. The emotional situations and moral dilemmas that are the stuff of literature are also vigorous exercise for the brain, propelling us inside the heads of fictional characters and even increasing our real-life capacity for empathy. This is not reading as many young people are coming to know it. Their reading, mostly done onscreen, is pragmatic (实际的) and instrumental. If we allow our children to believe reading onscreen is all there is, we will have deprived them of an enjoyable and enlightening experience that will enlarge them as people. Instead molding our education around young people’s attachment to digital devices and onscreen habits, we need to show them some place they’ve never been, a place only deep reading can take them.