2024. Reading Is An Intelligent Sport.
Our mission is to make everything about sentences.
 Please stay here and make your dreams.
지문 분석결과
fico가 지문 학습에 필요한 것들을 구성하여 학습 효율성을 제공해 드립니다.
노트나 질문을 통해 자신만의 지문 노트를 만들어 관리해 보세요.
ADAGIO+ ADVANCED 1학년 2학기 기말고사 ① ADAGIO+ ADVANCED 1학년 2학기 기말고사 ①
ADAGIO+ ADVANCED 1학년 2학기 기말고사 ①
ADAGIO+ ADVANCED 1학년 2학기 기말고사 ①
Day 20 - #5
print
지문 전체 문장
문장을 클릭하면 해당 문장의 구문 분석 내용을 보여줍니다.
Day 20 - #5
In 2000, James Kuklinski of the University of Illinois led an influential experiment in which more than 1,000 Illinois residents were asked questions about welfare. More than half indicated that they were confident that their answers were correct but in fact, only three percent of the people got more than half of the questions right. Perhaps more disturbingly, the ones who were the most confident they were right were generally the ones who knew the least about the topic. Kuklinski calls this sort of response the "I know I'm right" syndrome. "It implies not only that most people will resist correcting their factual beliefs," he wrote, "but also that the very people who most need to correct them will be least likely to do so." How can we have things so wrong and be so sure that we're right? Part of the answer lies in the way our brains are wired. Generally, people tend to seek consistency. There is a substantial body of psychological research showing that people tend to interpret information with an eye toward reinforcing their preexisting views. If we believe something about the world, we are more likely to passively accept as truth any information that confirms our beliefs, and actively dismiss information that doesn't. This is known as "motivated reasoning." Whether or not the consistent information is accurate, we might accept it as fact, as confirmation of our beliefs. This makes us more confident in said beliefs, and even less likely to entertain facts that contradict them.
지문 노트목록 지문단위의 해석이나 의미 등 내용에 대한 설명입니다.
지문에 대한 질문목록 이 지문과 관련된 질문이 있다면 이곳에서 등록해 보세요. (예를들면, 이 지문과 관련된 문제 풀이가 궁금할 때)
지문에 사용된 특정 문장에 대한 궁금증은 해당 문장의 헬프fico쌤에 등록하는 것이 좋습니다.
등록된 질문이 없습니다.
fico 문장 분석
이 지문에 대해 AI는 다음과 같은 문장들로 구분하였습니다.
문장 구분과 분석의 정확성을 높이려면 'fico 정확성을 높이려면'을 참고하세요
list_alt해석 목록
여러 AI의 해석들을 제공해 드립니다.
inventory_2단어 목록 ● 단어 목록에 OpenVocas로 등록된 구가 있습니다.
문장에서 등장하는 단어를 fico가 대신 검색하여 제공해 드립니다. 단어를 눌러서 발음을 들어보세요.
해당 문장에서 fico AI가 설정한 난이도 이상의 단어를 찾지 못했습니다.
sticky_note_2노트 메모
학습에 필요한 나만의 메모를 남겨보세요.
tips_and_updates인덱스 핑거
현재 문장과 유사한 구조를 가지거나 보충 학습할 수 있는 예문들을 추천합니다.
원문과 유사한 fico score 및 구문 구조를 갖는 문장이 없을 경우 검색되지 않을 수 있습니다.
해당 문장에서 fico AI가 설정한 난이도 이상의 단어를 찾지 못했습니다.
듣기
상세한 구문 분석을 보고 싶은 문장을 선택하세요.
1 In 2000, James Kuklinski of the University of Illinois led an influential experiment in which more than 1,000 Illinois residents were asked questions about welfare. 2 More than half indicated that they were confident that their answers were correct but in fact, only three percent of the people got more than half of the questions right. 3 Perhaps more disturbingly, the ones who were the most confident they were right were generally the ones who knew the least about the topic. 4 Kuklinski calls this sort of response the "I know I'm right" syndrome. 5 "It implies not only that most people will resist correcting their factual beliefs," he wrote, "but also that the very people who most need to correct them will be least likely to do so." 6 How can we have things so wrong and be so sure that we're right? 7 Part of the answer lies in the way our brains are wired. 8 Generally, people tend to seek consistency. 9 There is a substantial body of psychological research showing that people tend to interpret information with an eye toward reinforcing their preexisting views. 10 If we believe something about the world, we are more likely to passively accept as truth any information that confirms our beliefs, and actively dismiss information that doesn't. 11 This is known as "motivated reasoning." 12 Whether or not the consistent information is accurate, we might accept it as fact, as confirmation of our beliefs. 13 This makes us more confident in said beliefs, and even less likely to entertain facts that contradict them.