2010考研真题完形填空原文及译文.docVIP

2010考研英语英语知识运用部分原文以及译文 万学海文 　　2010年的考研英语英语知识运用部分，使用了2009年6月6日 Economist 《经济学人》杂志上的一篇文章，文章主要内容，是对社会学上一个经典的理论：霍桑效应的批判和反思。文章难度适中。命题专家在出题的时候也进行了一定程度的改写。下面是题源的原文及译文。 　　质疑霍桑效应照明的作用 　　Questioning the Hawthorne effect 　　原文： 　　WHEN America’s National Research Council sent two engineers to supervise a series of industrial experiments at a large telephone-parts factory called the Hawthorne Plant near Chicago in 1924, it hoped they would learn how shop-floor lighting affected workers’ productivity. Instead, the studies ended up giving their name to the “Hawthorne effect”, the extremely influential idea that the very act of being experimented upon changes subjects’ behaviour. 　　The idea arose because of the perplexing behaviour of the women who assembled relays and wound coils of wire in the Hawthorne plant. According to accounts of the experiments, their hourly output rose when lighting was increased, but also when it was dimmed. It did not matter what was done; so long as something was changed, productivity rose. An awareness that they were being experimented upon seemed to be enough to alter workers’ behaviour by itself. 　　The data from the illumination experiments had never been rigorously analysed and were believed lost. But Steven Levitt and John List, two economists at the University of Chicago, discovered that the data had survived the decades in two archives in Milwaukee and Boston, and decided to subject them to econometric analysis. The Hawthorne experiments had another surprise in store for them. Contrary to the descriptions in the literature, they found no systematic evidence that levels of productivity in the factory rose whenever changes in lighting were implemented. 　　It turns out that idiosyncrasies in the way the experiments were conducted may have led to misleading interpretations of what happened. For example, lighting was always changed on a Sunday, when the plant was closed. When it reopened on Monday, output duly rose compared with Saturday, the last worki