TOEFL-Mock-2

TOEFL iBT 模擬考 Mock 2 — 社會科學主題

難度：中等 Moderate 建議時間：約 2 小時完整練習 主題方向：社會科學（心理學、經濟學、社會學、人類學）

威威老師的話：Mock 2 聚焦社會科學，題目難度與 Mock 1 持平。社會科學類文章在 TOEFL 中非常常見，掌握這類文章的邏輯結構（現象→原因→影響→對策）對閱讀和聽力都很重要！

---

📖 READING Section

時間限制：35 分鐘 | 20 題 | 2 篇文章

---

Passage 1: The Psychology of Habit Formation

Directions: Read the passage below and answer the questions. You have 18 minutes for this passage.

Human beings are creatures of habit. From the moment we wake up to the moment we fall asleep, an estimated 40 to 45 percent of our daily actions are not the product of conscious deliberation but rather automatic routines triggered by contextual cues. Understanding how habits form — and how they can be changed — has become a central concern of behavioral psychology, with profound implications for health, productivity, and personal development.

The neurological basis of habit formation lies in a process that researchers call “chunking.” When we first perform a new action — driving a car, typing on a keyboard, or navigating a new route to work — the brain’s prefrontal cortex, responsible for conscious decision-making, is highly active. However, as the action is repeated, the brain gradually shifts the processing to the basal ganglia, a more primitive region associated with automatic behaviors. This transition frees up cognitive resources for other tasks, which explains why experienced drivers can carry on a conversation while navigating traffic — the act of driving has become a chunked routine requiring minimal conscious attention.

In his influential 2012 book The Power of Habit, journalist Charles Duhigg popularized a three-component model of habits known as the “habit loop,” based on research by neuroscientists at MIT. The loop consists of a cue, a routine, and a reward. The cue is a trigger that tells the brain to enter automatic mode — the smell of coffee in the morning, for instance, or the notification ping on a smartphone. The routine is the behavior itself, whether physical, mental, or emotional. The reward is what the brain receives after completing the routine — a caffeine boost, a dopamine hit from social validation — which reinforces the loop and makes the habit increasingly automatic.

Crucially, Duhigg’s model also identifies a fourth element: craving. Over time, the brain begins to anticipate the reward even before the routine begins, and this anticipation — the craving — drives the behavior more powerfully than the reward itself. Neurological studies have shown that dopamine, the neurotransmitter associated with pleasure and motivation, spikes not during the consumption of a reward but during its anticipation. This finding helps explain why habits are so difficult to break: the brain is wired to seek the anticipated reward, not the actual one.

The good news is that habits can be modified. Research suggests that it is far more effective to replace an existing habit loop than to attempt to eliminate one entirely. Alcoholics Anonymous, for instance, operates on this principle by replacing the routine of drinking with the routine of attending meetings and calling sponsors, while keeping the cue (stress, social pressure) and the reward (relief, social connection) largely intact. Understanding the architecture of habits thus offers a pathway not to effortless change, but to strategic, informed self-modification.

Glossary:

• chunking: 組塊化（大腦將重複動作自動化的過程）
• basal ganglia: 基底核
• dopamine: 多巴胺
• prefrontal cortex: 前額葉皮質

---

Questions 1–10: Passage 1

Question 1 — Factual Information According to paragraph 1, what percentage of daily actions are estimated to be automatic routines? (A) 20–25 percent (B) 30–35 percent (C) 40–45 percent (D) 60–65 percent

Question 2 — Vocabulary The word “profound” in paragraph 1 is closest in meaning to: (A) superficial (B) deep and significant (C) confusing (D) temporary

Question 3 — Factual Information According to paragraph 2, which brain region is responsible for conscious decision-making? (A) The basal ganglia (B) The cerebellum (C) The prefrontal cortex (D) The hippocampus

Question 4 — Inference What can be inferred from paragraph 3 about the “habit loop”? (A) It was originally discovered by Charles Duhigg (B) It describes a cycle that reinforces automatic behavior (C) It applies only to physical habits, not mental ones (D) The reward is the least important component

Question 5 — Rhetorical Purpose Why does the author mention the notification ping on a smartphone in paragraph 3? (A) To argue that technology is harmful to mental health (B) To provide an example of a cue that triggers a habitual response (C) To compare modern habits with traditional ones (D) To suggest that smartphone addiction is untreatable

Question 6 — Negative Factual Information All of the following are components of the habit loop model mentioned in the passage EXCEPT: (A) Cue (B) Routine (C) Reflection (D) Reward

Question 7 — Sentence Simplification Which of the following best expresses the essential information of the highlighted sentence in paragraph 2? “This transition frees up cognitive resources for other tasks, which explains why experienced drivers can carry on a conversation while navigating traffic — the act of driving has become a chunked routine requiring minimal conscious attention.” (A) Experienced drivers are worse at multitasking than beginners (B) Once a task becomes automatic, the brain can allocate attention to other activities (C) Driving is the only activity that can become an automatic routine (D) Talking while driving is recommended for brain development

Question 8 — Insert Text Look at the four squares [A], [B], [C], [D] that indicate where the following sentence could be added to paragraph 4.

“This explains why merely thinking about checking social media can trigger an almost irresistible urge to reach for your phone.”

Crucially, Duhigg’s model also identifies a fourth element: craving. [A] Over time, the brain begins to anticipate the reward even before the routine begins, and this anticipation — the craving — drives the behavior more powerfully than the reward itself. [B] Neurological studies have shown that dopamine, the neurotransmitter associated with pleasure and motivation, spikes not during the consumption of a reward but during its anticipation. [C] This finding helps explain why habits are so difficult to break: the brain is wired to seek the anticipated reward, not the actual one. [D]

Where would the sentence best fit? (A) A (B) B (C) C (D) D

Question 9 — Factual Information According to paragraph 5, what approach to changing habits does the author suggest is most effective? (A) Eliminating the cue entirely (B) Replacing the routine while keeping the cue and reward intact (C) Ignoring the habit until it disappears naturally (D) Increasing the reward to strengthen willpower

Question 10 — Prose Summary Directions: Select the THREE answer choices that express the most important ideas in the passage.

• (A) Habits form through a neurological process that shifts behavior from conscious control to automatic processing in the basal ganglia.
• (B) The habit loop consists of a cue, routine, reward, and craving, with craving driving the cycle through dopamine anticipation.
• (C) Charles Duhigg’s book sold millions of copies and influenced public understanding of neuroscience.
• (D) Alcoholics Anonymous demonstrates that behaviors can be eliminated entirely through willpower.
• (E) Habits can be modified most effectively by replacing the routine while preserving the existing cue and reward.
• (F) The basal ganglia is more important than the prefrontal cortex for all cognitive functions.

---

Passage 2: The Rise of Behavioral Economics

Directions: Read the passage below and answer the questions. You have 17 minutes for this passage.

For much of the twentieth century, mainstream economics rested on the assumption that human beings are rational actors who consistently make decisions that maximize their utility, or personal benefit. This model of Homo economicus treated people as calculating machines, immune to emotion, cognitive limitations, and social influence. However, beginning in the 1970s, a new field called behavioral economics began to challenge these assumptions, demonstrating through empirical research that human decision-making frequently deviates from rational models in systematic and predictable ways.

The intellectual foundations of behavioral economics were laid by two Israeli psychologists, Daniel Kahneman and Amos Tversky. Their groundbreaking 1979 paper, “Prospect Theory,” showed that people do not evaluate gains and losses in absolute terms but relative to a reference point, and that losses loom larger than equivalent gains — a phenomenon they called “loss aversion.” In one famous experiment, participants were far more likely to reject a gamble that offered a 50 percent chance of winning $150anda50percentchanceoflosing$100, even though the expected value of the gamble was a positive $25.Thepainoflosing$100, they found, psychologically outweighed the pleasure of winning $150 by a ratio of approximately 2:1.

A second foundational concept is mental accounting, developed by economist Richard Thaler. Thaler observed that people treat money differently depending on its source, intended use, and the mental category to which it has been assigned — even though money is, by definition, fungible. For example, individuals may simultaneously carry credit card debt at 18 percent interest while maintaining a savings account earning 2 percent interest, a behavior that is clearly irrational from a standard economic perspective. The explanation is that the savings account is mentally categorized as “untouchable” emergency funds, while the credit card spending falls into a different mental account.

Behavioral economics has had enormous practical influence, particularly in the design of public policy. The concept of “nudging,” popularized by Thaler and legal scholar Cass Sunstein in their 2008 book Nudge, proposes that policymakers can improve decisions by altering the “choice architecture” — the environment in which people make choices — while preserving freedom of choice. A classic example is automatic enrollment in retirement savings plans: rather than requiring employees to opt in, companies automatically enroll them and allow them to opt out. This simple change, leveraging the behavioral tendency toward inertia and default acceptance, has dramatically increased retirement savings participation rates in countries where it has been implemented.

Critics of behavioral economics argue that the field offers piecemeal corrections to a fundamentally flawed model rather than a coherent alternative theory. Others worry that nudging, however well-intentioned, represents a form of paternalistic manipulation that undermines individual autonomy. Nevertheless, the field’s influence continues to grow. In 2017, Richard Thaler was awarded the Nobel Prize in Economics, and governments around the world — including the United Kingdom, Australia, and Singapore — have established “nudge units” to apply behavioral insights to policy challenges ranging from tax compliance to public health.

---

Questions 11–20: Passage 2

Question 11 — Factual Information According to paragraph 1, what assumption about human behavior did traditional economics rest on? (A) People are emotional and unpredictable (B) People act rationally to maximize personal benefit (C) People are primarily influenced by social norms (D) People make decisions randomly

Question 12 — Vocabulary The word “deviates” in paragraph 1 is closest in meaning to: (A) matches (B) follows (C) departs (D) confirms

Question 13 — Factual Information According to paragraph 2, what did the concept of “loss aversion” demonstrate? (A) People prefer gains over losses in all situations (B) Losses are psychologically about twice as powerful as equivalent gains (C) People always choose the option with the highest expected value (D) Money is not important in decision-making

Question 14 — Inference What can be inferred from paragraph 3 about the concept of “fungibility” of money? (A) People instinctively understand that money is fungible (B) Money is technically interchangeable, but people treat it as if it were not (C) Mental accounting proves that money is not actually fungible (D) Credit card debt is never a rational choice

Question 15 — Rhetorical Purpose Why does the author mention the “automatic enrollment” example in paragraph 4? (A) To argue that governments should force people to save for retirement (B) To illustrate how changing choice architecture can improve outcomes (C) To criticize companies for manipulating their employees (D) To prove that people prefer default options in all situations

Question 16 — Negative Factual Information All of the following are mentioned in the passage as contributions to behavioral economics EXCEPT: (A) Daniel Kahneman and Amos Tversky’s prospect theory (B) Richard Thaler’s concept of mental accounting (C) Adam Smith’s theory of the invisible hand (D) Thaler and Sunstein’s concept of nudging

Question 17 — Sentence Simplification Which of the following best expresses the essential information of the highlighted sentence in paragraph 3? “For example, individuals may simultaneously carry credit card debt at 18 percent interest while maintaining a savings account earning 2 percent interest, a behavior that is clearly irrational from a standard economic perspective.” (A) Having both savings and debt is always financially wise (B) Standard economics predicts people would use savings to pay off high-interest debt, but they often do not (C) Credit card debt at 18 percent is beneficial because it encourages saving (D) Savings accounts are more profitable than credit cards

Question 18 — Insert Text Look at the four squares [A], [B], [C], [D] that indicate where the following sentence could be added to paragraph 5.

“Despite these objections, the practical successes of behavioral economics are difficult to dismiss.”

Critics of behavioral economics argue that the field offers piecemeal corrections to a fundamentally flawed model rather than a coherent alternative theory. [A] Others worry that nudging, however well-intentioned, represents a form of paternalistic manipulation that undermines individual autonomy. [B] Nevertheless, the field’s influence continues to grow. [C] In 2017, Richard Thaler was awarded the Nobel Prize in Economics, and governments around the world — including the United Kingdom, Australia, and Singapore — have established “nudge units” to apply behavioral insights to policy challenges ranging from tax compliance to public health. [D]

Where would the sentence best fit? (A) A (B) B (C) C (D) D

Question 19 — Factual Information According to paragraph 2, what was the expected value of the gamble in Kahneman and Tversky’s experiment? (A) Negative $25(B)Positive$25 (C) Positive $50(D)Negative$50

Question 20 — Prose Summary Directions: Select the THREE answer choices that express the most important ideas in the passage.

• (A) Behavioral economics challenges the traditional assumption of rational economic actors by showing that human decisions deviate systematically from rational models.
• (B) Prospect theory demonstrated that people are more sensitive to losses than to equivalent gains, a bias known as loss aversion.
• (C) Richard Thaler’s mental accounting theory shows people categorize money differently based on its source, leading to economically irrational behavior.
• (D) Behavioral economics has been universally accepted without any criticism from the academic community.
• (E) The concept of nudging has been applied in public policy worldwide by altering choice architecture to improve decisions.
• (F) Daniel Kahneman and Amos Tversky were economists at the University of Chicago.

---

🎧 LISTENING Section

時間限制：36 分鐘 | 28 題

---

Lecture 1: Sociology — The Bystander Effect

Narrator: Listen to part of a lecture in a sociology class.

Professor: In 1964, a young woman named Kitty Genovese was attacked and murdered outside her apartment building in New York City. Initial reports claimed that 38 witnesses heard her screams, yet no one intervened or even called the police until it was too late. This tragic case captured national attention and prompted social psychologists to ask a disturbing question: why do people fail to help when others are present?

The answer, as research over the following decades revealed, is a phenomenon known as the bystander effect. In a classic series of experiments conducted by John Darley and Bibb Latané in the late 1960s, participants were placed in a room alone — or so they thought — and exposed to what appeared to be an emergency: smoke filling the room, or the sound of someone falling and crying out for help. When participants believed they were the only person present, about 85 percent of them took action within minutes. However, when they believed others were also present, the rate of intervention dropped dramatically — in some conditions to as low as 31 percent — and response times slowed significantly.

Darley and Latané identified two key psychological processes underlying this effect. The first is diffusion of responsibility: when multiple people are present, each individual feels less personally accountable for taking action. Everyone assumes someone else will handle it. The second is pluralistic ignorance: people look to others for cues about how to interpret an ambiguous situation. If no one else appears concerned, each person concludes the situation must not be serious. So you get this tragic feedback loop where everyone is looking at everyone else, and no one does anything because no one else is doing anything.

Now, what’s particularly interesting is that the bystander effect is not just a historical curiosity — it persists in modern contexts, including online environments. Cyberbullying researchers have observed similar patterns: when many users witness harassment online, individual bystanders are less likely to speak up or report the behavior. The digital equivalent of “someone else will handle it” is alive and well.

Importantly though, the bystander effect isn’t inevitable. Research also shows that people who have learned about the phenomenon are significantly more likely to overcome it. Simply knowing about diffusion of responsibility makes you less susceptible to it. If you’re ever in an emergency and need help, the recommendation from the research is clear: don’t call out generally to a crowd — single out an individual, make eye contact, and give a specific instruction. That breaks through both the diffusion of responsibility and pluralistic ignorance.

---

Questions 21–26: Lecture 1

Question 21 — Gist What is the professor mainly discussing? (A) The history of crime in New York City (B) The psychological mechanisms that explain why people fail to help in emergencies (C) The biography of Kitty Genovese (D) How to improve emergency response times in cities

Question 22 — Detail According to the professor, what percentage of participants took action when they believed they were alone? (A) About 31 percent (B) About 50 percent (C) About 85 percent (D) About 100 percent

Question 23 — Detail What are the two psychological processes identified by Darley and Latané? (A) Conformity and obedience (B) Diffusion of responsibility and pluralistic ignorance (C) Cognitive dissonance and confirmation bias (D) Classical conditioning and operant conditioning

Question 24 — Function Why does the professor mention cyberbullying? (A) To argue that the internet has eliminated the bystander effect (B) To show that the bystander effect also applies in digital environments (C) To criticize social media platforms for encouraging harassment (D) To suggest that online harassment is more serious than physical attacks

Question 25 — Attitude What is the professor’s attitude toward the possibility of overcoming the bystander effect? (A) Pessimistic — she believes it is an unavoidable human trait (B) Optimistic — she emphasizes that awareness and specific knowledge can help (C) Neutral — she offers no personal opinion (D) Uncertain — she says the research is inconclusive

Question 26 — Inference What can be inferred about the initial reports of the Kitty Genovese case? (A) They were completely fabricated (B) They may have been exaggerated, but they catalyzed important research (C) They proved that New Yorkers are uniquely indifferent (D) They had no lasting impact on psychology

---

Lecture 2: Anthropology — Cultural Universals and Variation

Narrator: Listen to part of a lecture in an anthropology class.

Professor: One of the foundational questions in cultural anthropology is this: to what extent are human behaviors and social structures universal across all cultures, and to what extent are they culturally constructed? The tension between cultural universals and cultural variation has shaped the field for over a century.

Let’s start with universals. Anthropologist Donald Brown, in his 1991 book Human Universals, compiled a list of hundreds of traits and behaviors found in every known human society. These include language with grammar, kinship systems, gift-giving, music, dance, rituals for death, food taboos, concepts of fairness, and incest avoidance. The existence of these universals suggests that beneath the surface diversity of human cultures, there are deep structures shaped by our shared biology and cognitive architecture. For instance, every culture has a concept of color categories regardless of how many color terms exist in the language, and these categories follow a predictable hierarchy: if a language has only two color terms, they will be black and white (or dark and light); if three, the third will be red; and so on.

Now, the variation side of the equation is equally compelling. Consider something as seemingly fundamental as the concept of the self. In Western cultures, particularly in the United States, people tend to view the self as independent, bounded, and autonomous — what psychologists call an independent self-construal. In many East Asian cultures, by contrast, the self is understood as fundamentally interconnected with others — an interdependent self-construal. These differences in self-concept have profound downstream effects on cognition, motivation, and social behavior. For example, when asked to describe themselves, Americans tend to list personal attributes — “I am kind,” “I am creative” — while Japanese participants are more likely to reference social roles and relationships — “I am a daughter,” “I am a member of the basketball team.”

The most productive contemporary approach in anthropology doesn’t see universals and variation as mutually exclusive but as complementary. Universals provide the basic toolkit — the range of possibilities constrained by biology and cognition. Culture specifies which tools are emphasized, how they are combined, and what meaning they carry. The color spectrum exists in nature, but where one culture draws the line between “blue” and “green” is a product of linguistic and cultural history. Understanding this interplay — rather than arguing for one side or the other — is where the most interesting work happens today.

---

Questions 27–32: Lecture 2

Question 27 — Gist What is the main focus of the lecture? (A) A comparison of Western and Asian educational systems (B) The debate between cultural universals and cultural variation in anthropology (C) The biography of Donald Brown (D) How language influences color perception

Question 28 — Detail According to the professor, what universal trait did Donald Brown identify as present in every known human society? (A) Democracy (B) Written language (C) Gift-giving (D) Monogamous marriage

Question 29 — Detail According to the lecture, what are the first three color terms that appear in languages, in order? (A) Red, blue, green (B) Black/white, then red (C) Black, white, blue (D) Red, yellow, blue

Question 30 — Function Why does the professor discuss how Americans and Japanese people describe themselves? (A) To argue that Americans have better self-awareness (B) To illustrate how self-construal differs between independent and interdependent cultures (C) To criticize Japanese culture for lacking individuality (D) To prove that language does not affect self-concept

Question 31 — Organization How does the professor structure the lecture? (A) Chronologically through the history of anthropology (B) By presenting evidence for universals, evidence for variation, then a synthesis (C) By comparing three different anthropologists’ theories (D) By describing a series of experiments conducted in different cultures

Question 32 — Inference What can be inferred about the professor’s view of contemporary anthropology? (A) She believes the universalist position has been definitively proven (B) She favors an integrated approach that sees universals and variation as complementary (C) She thinks cultural variation is the only legitimate area of study (D) She recommends abandoning the search for universals entirely

---

Lecture 3: Economics — The Sharing Economy

Narrator: Listen to part of a lecture in an economics class.

Professor: Over the past fifteen years, we’ve witnessed the emergence of what’s commonly called the “sharing economy” — a model where individuals rent or share assets, from spare bedrooms to cars to power tools, through digital platforms. Companies like Airbnb, Uber, and TaskRabbit have become household names. But this phenomenon raises fascinating economic questions about efficiency, labor, and regulation.

From an efficiency standpoint, the sharing economy seems like an economist’s dream. It transforms underutilized assets into productive capital. The average car sits idle roughly 95 percent of the time. A spare bedroom that would otherwise be empty generates income. This represents a massive reduction in what economists call deadweight loss — the gap between potential and actual economic value. By reducing transaction costs through digital matching, these platforms bring us closer to the theoretical ideal of perfect information in markets.

But — and this is a significant “but” — the sharing economy also creates what we might call “regulatory arbitrage.” Traditional hotels must comply with safety codes, accessibility requirements, zoning laws, and tax obligations that Airbnb hosts can often avoid. Taxi drivers face licensing requirements, insurance mandates, and fare regulations that Uber drivers circumvent. The platforms argue they are merely “connecting” independent contractors with customers, not providing the underlying service. This distinction allows them to externalize costs — insurance, benefits, vehicle maintenance — onto workers while capturing a significant portion of the transaction value.

This brings us to the labor market implications, which are deeply controversial. Are sharing-economy workers “independent contractors” enjoying flexibility and entrepreneurship, or are they employees in all but name, deprived of protections like minimum wage, workers’ compensation, and collective bargaining rights? The legal landscape is evolving. California’s Assembly Bill 5, passed in 2019, sought to reclassify many gig workers as employees, though a subsequent ballot measure, Proposition 22, created exemptions for app-based transportation and delivery companies. Other jurisdictions are watching these developments closely.

What economic analysis tells us is that the sharing economy is neither inherently good nor bad. Its value depends on the institutional framework in which it operates. Well-designed regulation could preserve the efficiency gains while ensuring fair competition with traditional providers and adequate protections for workers. The question isn’t whether platforms like these should exist, but under what rules.

---

Questions 33–38: Lecture 3

Question 33 — Gist What is the professor mainly discussing? (A) How to start a successful sharing-economy business (B) The economic efficiency, regulatory challenges, and labor implications of the sharing economy (C) A history of transportation from taxis to ride-sharing apps (D) Why the sharing economy should be banned

Question 34 — Detail According to the professor, what percentage of time does the average car sit idle? (A) About 50 percent (B) About 75 percent (C) About 95 percent (D) About 30 percent

Question 35 — Detail What is “deadweight loss” as mentioned in the lecture? (A) The cost of shipping goods purchased online (B) The gap between potential economic value and actual economic value (C) The tax revenue lost when transactions go unreported (D) The weight of physical goods that cannot be shared digitally

Question 36 — Function Why does the professor discuss California’s Assembly Bill 5 and Proposition 22? (A) To illustrate the evolving legal landscape regarding worker classification (B) To argue that all gig workers should be classified as independent contractors (C) To praise California’s regulatory approach as a model for other states (D) To compare California’s economy with other states’

Question 37 — Attitude What is the professor’s overall assessment of the sharing economy? (A) Entirely positive — it represents the future of all commerce (B) Entirely negative — it exploits workers and should be abolished (C) Balanced — its value depends on the regulatory framework (D) Disinterested — the professor offers no assessment

Question 38 — Inference What can be inferred about the term “regulatory arbitrage”? (A) It refers to platforms exploiting gaps between regulations applied to different business models (B) It describes a formal legal process for resolving disputes (C) It is a term invented by sharing-economy companies to defend their practices (D) It applies only to international transactions

---

Conversation 1: Academic Advising — Course Selection

Narrator: Listen to a conversation between a student and her academic advisor.

Advisor: Hi, Elena. Thanks for coming in. Your registration window opens next week, right?

Student: Yes, on Tuesday. And I’m honestly a bit stressed about it. I need to decide on my elective for next semester, and I’m torn between two courses.

Advisor: Okay. Tell me about the options.

Student: Well, one is “Introduction to Microeconomics.” I’ve heard it’s really useful for understanding, like, how markets work, and it would strengthen my quantitative skills. The other is “Introduction to Social Anthropology,” which sounds fascinating — it’s about how different cultures construct meaning and organize their societies. My major is psychology, so either could be relevant.

Advisor: Both are solid choices. Let me ask this: when you think about your career path after graduation, what kind of work appeals to you?

Student: I think I want to go into user experience research — you know, studying how people interact with technology and helping design better products. That’s why I’m leaning toward psychology as my main focus.

Advisor: Okay, that’s helpful context. For UX research, anthropology actually offers tremendous value. Ethnographic methods — observing people in their natural environments, understanding cultural context — are directly applicable. Many tech companies employ anthropologists for exactly this reason. Microeconomics is useful too, but if I were mapping your specific path, I’d lean toward anthropology.

Student: That’s really interesting. I hadn’t thought about anthropology in terms of research methods.

Advisor: Exactly. Plus, you mentioned you find the content fascinating — intrinsic interest shouldn’t be underestimated. Students who are genuinely curious about a subject consistently perform better and get more out of it.

Student: That makes a lot of sense. I think I’ll go with anthropology, then. Thanks for helping me think this through.

Advisor: My pleasure. Let’s make sure you have a backup in case the anthropology section fills up.

---

Questions 39–43: Conversation 1

Question 39 — Gist Why does the student visit the academic advisor? (A) To request a change of major (B) To get help deciding between two elective courses (C) To complain about a current professor (D) To discuss her graduation requirements

Question 40 — Detail What is the student’s major? (A) Economics (B) Anthropology (C) Psychology (D) Computer science

Question 41 — Detail What career path does the student express interest in? (A) Clinical psychology (B) User experience research (C) Financial analysis (D) Academic teaching

Question 42 — Function Why does the advisor say: “intrinsic interest shouldn’t be underestimated”? (A) To argue that students should always choose the easiest courses (B) To emphasize that genuine curiosity about a subject improves engagement and performance (C) To criticize the student for not being interested in economics (D) To suggest that all courses are equally interesting

Question 43 — Attitude How does the student feel at the end of the conversation? (A) More confused than before (B) Confident in her decision to choose anthropology (C) Determined to take both courses at once (D) Disappointed with the advisor’s recommendation

---

Conversation 2: Library Services — Research Workshop

Narrator: Listen to a conversation between a student and a librarian.

Librarian: Hi there. Are you here for the research skills workshop?

Student: Actually, I saw the sign, but I’m not signed up. I was just wondering — can you tell me what the workshop covers? I’m starting my senior thesis and I feel like my research skills could use an upgrade.

Librarian: Absolutely, and that’s exactly who the workshop is designed for. It runs about 90 minutes, and we cover three main areas. The first is advanced database searching — how to construct Boolean search strings, use subject headings instead of just keywords, and filter results efficiently. Most students only use about 10 percent of what the library’s databases can actually do.

Student: Yeah, I’m probably in that category. I mostly just type keywords into the search bar and hope for the best.

Librarian: That’s very common. The second part covers source evaluation — how to assess the credibility of a source beyond just checking if it’s peer-reviewed. We talk about citation analysis, author affiliation, methodology scrutiny, and publication bias. Critical evaluation has become even more important with the rise of preprint servers and predatory journals.

Student: I’ve heard the term “predatory journals.” Those are the ones that charge authors to publish but don’t do real peer review, right?

Librarian: Exactly. And the third component is citation management. We’ll demonstrate tools like Zotero and Mendeley so you can organize your sources, generate bibliographies automatically, and insert citations as you write. It saves an enormous amount of time.

Student: That sounds incredibly useful. When’s the next session?

Librarian: This Thursday at 3 PM in Room 204. You can register online, or I can add you right now.

Student: Please add me. I’ll definitely be there.

---

Questions 44–48: Conversation 2

Question 44 — Gist Why does the student approach the librarian? (A) To check out a book for his thesis (B) To inquire about the content of a research skills workshop (C) To complain about library hours (D) To request access to a restricted database

Question 45 — Detail What is the student’s academic situation? (A) He is a freshman choosing a major (B) He is starting his senior thesis (C) He is a graduate student preparing for comprehensive exams (D) He is a transfer student new to the university

Question 46 — Detail According to the librarian, which of the following is NOT one of the three areas covered in the workshop? (A) Advanced database searching (B) Source evaluation (C) Academic writing style and grammar (D) Citation management tools

Question 47 — Function Why does the librarian say: “Most students only use about 10 percent of what the library’s databases can actually do”? (A) To criticize the library’s database system (B) To illustrate why the workshop on advanced searching is valuable (C) To suggest students should use fewer databases (D) To encourage students to avoid database searching entirely

Question 48 — Inference What can be inferred about the student’s current research skills? (A) He is an expert at Boolean search techniques (B) He relies primarily on basic keyword searches (C) He has extensive experience with citation management software (D) He prefers print sources to digital databases

---

🗣️ SPEAKING Section

時間限制：約 16 分鐘 | 4 題

---

Task 1: Independent Speaking — Agree/Disagree

Directions: You will have 15 seconds to prepare and 45 seconds to speak.

Question: Do you agree or disagree with the following statement? “University students should be required to take courses outside their major field of study.” Use specific reasons and examples to support your answer.

Model Response (45 seconds):

I strongly agree that university students should be required to take courses outside their major. My first reason is that exposure to different disciplines develops critical thinking in ways that a single field cannot. As a psychology major, I took an anthropology course that fundamentally changed how I think about human behavior — it taught me to consider cultural context in ways my psychology courses hadn’t emphasized. Second, in today’s job market, the most interesting work happens at the intersections of fields. Someone designing user interfaces needs both computer science and psychology. Someone working on climate policy needs both environmental science and economics. When universities require breadth, they’re not forcing students to waste time on irrelevant subjects — they’re giving them the intellectual tools to connect ideas across boundaries. The most innovative thinkers, from Steve Jobs to Nobel laureates, consistently credit cross-disciplinary exposure as essential to their breakthroughs. A narrow education is ultimately a limited one.

---

Task 2: Campus Situation — Integrated

Directions: Read the passage (45 sec), then listen (60-90 sec). Prepare: 30 sec. Speak: 60 sec.

Reading Passage (45 seconds):

Proposal: Eliminate the First-Year Language Requirement

A group of students has submitted a formal proposal to eliminate the university’s requirement that all first-year students complete two semesters of a foreign language. The proposal argues that the requirement places an unnecessary burden on students in STEM majors, who already face demanding course loads. Furthermore, the students contend that two semesters of language study is insufficient to achieve meaningful proficiency, making the requirement a “waste of time and credits.” The proposal suggests replacing the requirement with an optional “cultural competency” seminar.

Listening — Conversation:

Narrator: Now listen to two students discussing the proposal.

Man: So what do you think about this language requirement proposal?

Woman: I think it’s short-sighted, honestly. I get that STEM students have tough schedules, but I majored in computer science and my Spanish classes ended up being some of the most valuable courses I took.

Man: Really? How so?

Woman: Well, for one thing, learning another language changes how you think about your own. I became much more aware of grammar and sentence structure, which actually helped me write cleaner code — it sounds weird, but logical structures in language and in programming share similarities. More practically, my company now has clients in Latin America, and even my basic Spanish has opened doors for me professionally.

Man: That makes sense. And what about the argument that two semesters isn’t enough?

Woman: That argument misses the point. The goal isn’t fluency — it’s exposure. Two semesters gives you enough of a foundation that you can continue learning if you choose to. Plus, you learn about the cultures where the language is spoken, which is valuable in itself. A one-day “cultural competency” seminar could never replace that.

Question: The woman expresses her opinion about the proposal to eliminate the language requirement. State her opinion and explain the reasons she gives for holding that opinion.

Model Response (60 seconds):

The woman disagrees strongly with the proposal to eliminate the first-year language requirement, and she provides several reasons. First, she argues from personal experience. As a computer science major — precisely the kind of student the proposal claims to help — she found her Spanish courses to be some of the most valuable in her education. Learning a second language made her more aware of grammar and logical structure in her own language, which she says actually improved her ability to write clean code. Second, she cites professional benefits, noting that her company has clients in Latin America and even her basic Spanish has created career opportunities. Third, she addresses the proposal’s argument that two semesters is insufficient by reframing the goal: the purpose isn’t fluency but exposure and foundation-building. Two semesters provides enough base knowledge for continued learning. Finally, she argues that language courses inherently include cultural education, which a single cultural competency seminar could never replicate. The combination of cognitive, professional, and cultural benefits makes the requirement worth preserving.

---

Task 3: Academic — Integrated

Directions: Read passage (45 sec), then listen to lecture (60-90 sec). Prepare: 30 sec. Speak: 60 sec.

Reading Passage (45 seconds):

Social Loafing

Social loafing is a psychological phenomenon in which individuals exert less effort when working collectively in a group than when working alone. First identified by French agricultural engineer Max Ringelmann in 1913, who observed that people pulling on a rope in a tug-of-war exerted less force as more people joined the effort, social loafing has been documented across a wide range of collaborative tasks. Researchers attribute this phenomenon to two main causes: reduced accountability, as individual contributions become less identifiable in group settings; and the perception that one’s own effort is dispensable — the belief that others will compensate for any reduction in personal output.

Listening — Lecture:

Narrator: Now listen to part of a lecture on this topic.

Professor: Social loafing is one of those concepts that students immediately recognize because they’ve all experienced it — usually during group projects. But let me give you a more systematic research example that shows how and when it occurs.

In a well-known 1979 study by Latané, Williams, and Harkins, participants were asked to clap or shout as loudly as they could. They did this both individually and in groups of varying sizes — two, four, or six people. The researchers precisely measured the sound pressure level produced in each condition. What they found was striking: the average individual output decreased as group size increased. When participants worked in pairs, each person produced only about 71 percent of their individual capacity. In groups of four, it dropped to about 51 percent. And in groups of six, to about 40 percent. So the larger the group, the less effort each individual contributed.

But here’s what’s particularly instructive: the researchers then introduced a twist. In a second experiment, they told participants that each person’s individual output would be identified and measured — even within the group setting. When individual accountability was introduced, social loafing essentially disappeared. People worked nearly as hard in groups as they did alone. This strongly supported the idea that reduced identifiability, not just being in a group, was the key mechanism.

This has practical implications that go beyond the classroom. In corporate settings, managers can mitigate social loafing by making individual contributions visible and evaluated. In academic settings, we should design group projects so that each member’s work is identifiable. The phenomenon is real, but it’s not inevitable.

Question: Using the examples from the lecture, explain the concept of social loafing and how it can be reduced.

Model Response (60 seconds):

The lecture uses a research experiment to explain social loafing, which the reading defines as the tendency for individuals to exert less effort when working in groups due to reduced accountability and a sense that individual effort is dispensable. In the study, participants were asked to clap or shout as loudly as possible, first alone and then in groups of two, four, and six. The researchers found that individual output declined dramatically as group size increased: people working in pairs produced about 71 percent of their capacity, those in groups of four fell to about 51 percent, and those in groups of six produced only about 40 percent. So the more people present, the less each individual contributes — a clear demonstration of social loafing. The critical finding, however, came from the second experiment. When the researchers told participants that each person’s individual output would be separately identified and measured, even within the group context, social loafing was eliminated. People worked just as hard in groups as they did alone. This confirmed that reduced identifiability is the key mechanism. The practical lesson is that social loafing can be mitigated by making individual contributions visible — whether in classrooms by designing group projects with individual accountability, or in workplaces where managers evaluate each team member’s output separately.

---

Task 4: Academic Lecture Summary

Directions: Listen to a lecture (90-120 sec). Prepare: 20 sec. Speak: 60 sec.

Listening — Lecture:

Narrator: Listen to part of a lecture from a business class.

Professor: Okay, so you’ve probably all encountered the concept of a “moat” in business strategy. The term was popularized by Warren Buffett, and it refers to a company’s ability to maintain competitive advantages over its rivals — advantages that protect its market share and profits, much like a moat protected a medieval castle.

Today I want to talk about one specific type of moat that’s particularly powerful in the modern economy: network effects. A network effect occurs when a product or service becomes more valuable to each user as more people use it. The classic example is the telephone. One telephone is useless. Two telephones have some value — you can call one person. But when millions of people have telephones, the network becomes enormously valuable because you can reach almost anyone.

Network effects create what economists call increasing returns. Most businesses face decreasing returns — the more you produce, the harder and more expensive it becomes to acquire the next customer. But with network effects, each new user makes the platform more attractive to the next potential user, creating a self-reinforcing cycle. Facebook is the textbook example. When Facebook started, it was just one social network among many. But as more of your friends joined, it became more valuable to you. That attracted more users, which made it even more valuable, and so on. Competitors found it nearly impossible to catch up because they faced a chicken-and-egg problem: users wouldn’t join until their friends were there, but friends wouldn’t join until users were there.

However, network effects aren’t invincible. They can be disrupted by technological shifts — think about how smartphones changed the game for mobile apps — or by platforms that solve a fundamentally different problem in a better way. MySpace had powerful network effects until it didn’t. The key is whether the network effect is based on a single feature or a deep integration into users’ lives. The stickier and more embedded the platform, the harder the network effect is to disrupt.

So in strategic analysis, when you identify a company with strong network effects, you’re looking at a potentially powerful moat. But you also need to ask: what could change that? What technological or behavioral shift could cause users to coordinate a move to a different platform? Because no moat is truly permanent.

Question: Using points and examples from the lecture, explain the concept of network effects as a competitive moat and discuss their limitations.

Model Response (60 seconds):

The professor explains network effects as a type of competitive moat — a sustainable advantage that protects a company’s market position. A network effect means a product becomes more valuable as more people use it. The classic example is the telephone: one phone is useless, but when millions of people have phones, the network has immense value because you can call almost anyone. Network effects create increasing returns, where each new user makes the platform more attractive to the next potential user in a self-reinforcing cycle. The professor uses Facebook as the textbook example: as more friends joined, the platform became more valuable, attracting still more users, while competitors couldn’t overcome the chicken-and-egg problem of needing users to attract users. However, the professor emphasizes that network effects are not invincible. They can be disrupted by technological shifts — like how smartphones reshaped mobile applications — or by platforms that solve problems fundamentally better. MySpace had powerful network effects until it lost them. The durability of a network-effect moat depends on how deeply embedded the platform is in users’ lives. The professor concludes that while network effects create powerful moats, strategists must also consider what could disrupt them, because no moat is permanent.

---

✍️ WRITING Section

時間限制：29 分鐘 | 2 題

---

Task 1: Integrated Writing

Directions: Read passage (3 min), listen to lecture, then write (~150-225 words, 20 min).

Reading Passage (3 minutes):

The four-day workweek — reducing the standard work schedule from five days to four while maintaining the same salary and expected output — has gained increasing attention from policymakers, business leaders, and labor advocates. Proponents argue that this model offers substantial benefits for workers, employers, and society.

First, the four-day workweek promises significant improvements in employee well-being. With an additional day off each week, workers would have more time for family, leisure, rest, and personal pursuits. Studies suggest that chronic overwork contributes to stress, burnout, and a range of physical and mental health problems. An extra day of recovery each week could substantially reduce these negative health outcomes and improve overall life satisfaction.

Second, as a counterintuitive benefit, a shorter workweek may increase rather than decrease productivity. The reasoning is that workers, knowing they have less time to complete their tasks, would eliminate inefficiencies, reduce time spent on non-essential activities like excessive meetings and social media, and focus more intensely during working hours. Several pilot programs in countries including Iceland and New Zealand have reported productivity levels that held steady or even improved under a four-day schedule.

Third, the four-day workweek would deliver environmental benefits. With one fewer commuting day per week, carbon emissions from transportation would decline. Reduced office energy consumption — lighting, heating, air conditioning — would further lower the carbon footprint of the workforce. In an era of climate crisis, any policy that reduces emissions merits consideration.

Listening — Lecture:

Narrator: Now listen to part of a lecture on the same topic.

Professor: The four-day workweek sounds appealing, and I understand the enthusiasm. But when we look more carefully at the evidence, the picture becomes considerably more complicated than proponents suggest.

Let’s start with the productivity claim. The pilot programs that are often cited — Iceland, New Zealand — involved relatively small, self-selected samples of workers and organizations. These were companies and employees who volunteered for the experiment, which means they were likely already more motivated and better organized than average. When you try to scale this model across an entire economy, you encounter very different conditions. Many jobs — in healthcare, education, retail, emergency services — cannot simply be compressed into fewer days without reducing the quality or availability of service.

On the question of well-being, the assumption that a three-day weekend improves mental health may be overly simplistic. What the research actually shows is that compressed schedules often increase daily stress levels because workers are expected to maintain the same output in less time. The remaining four workdays become longer and more intense. Several studies have documented elevated cortisol levels and reports of exhaustion among workers on compressed schedules. The net well-being effect isn’t clearly positive.

The environmental argument also needs scrutiny. Yes, commuting emissions would decline — but what do workers do with their extra day off? If they use it to take leisure trips, run additional errands, or engage in consumer activities, the net environmental impact could be neutral or even negative. One study from the UK found that a four-day week increased leisure-related travel on the non-work day, largely offsetting the reduction in commuting emissions.

I’m not saying the four-day week is a bad idea. I’m saying the evidence for its benefits is weaker and more context-dependent than advocates acknowledge.

Question: Summarize the points made in the lecture, explaining how they cast doubt on the specific benefits of the four-day workweek discussed in the reading passage.

Model Essay (~250 words):

The reading passage presents three major benefits of the four-day workweek: increased productivity, improved employee well-being, and environmental gains from reduced commuting. The lecturer challenges each of these claimed benefits, arguing the evidence is weaker and more context-dependent than commonly portrayed.

On productivity, the reading cites pilot programs in Iceland and New Zealand where output held steady or improved. The lecturer counters that these results are not generalizable because the pilots involved small, self-selected groups — companies and workers who volunteered and were likely already more motivated than average. Scaling this model across entire economies would include sectors like healthcare and emergency services where output cannot be compressed into fewer days without reducing service quality.

Regarding well-being, the reading predicts that an extra day off would reduce stress and burnout. The lecturer presents a more nuanced picture: compressed schedules often intensify daily work, as employees must maintain output in fewer hours. This has been associated in some studies with elevated stress hormones and exhaustion, suggesting the net well-being effect is not clearly positive.

On environmental benefits, the reading emphasizes reduced commuting emissions and office energy use. The lecturer acknowledges the commuting reduction but points out that workers may use their extra free day for leisure travel and consumer activities, which can generate emissions that offset the savings. A UK study reportedly found that leisure-related travel on the non-work day largely canceled out the commuting reduction.

In sum, while not rejecting the four-day week outright, the lecturer argues that its purported benefits — higher productivity, better well-being, and environmental gains — are not supported by robust, generalizable evidence.

---

Task 2: Academic Discussion

Directions: Read the discussion. Write a contribution (~120 words).

Discussion:

Professor Hudson: For our discussion on education policy, I’d like you to consider the role of standardized testing. Countries like Finland have largely moved away from standardized exams in favor of teacher-designed assessments and project-based evaluation, while countries like South Korea and Singapore maintain rigorous national examination systems. Both approaches have produced strong educational outcomes by international measures. In your view, does standardized testing improve or undermine the quality of education? Use specific arguments to support your position.

Jake (Student): I believe standardized testing is more harmful than helpful. The pressure to perform well on these exams creates an environment where teachers “teach to the test” rather than fostering genuine understanding and curiosity. I experienced this firsthand in high school — entire months were dedicated to test preparation instead of deeper learning. Standardized tests also disadvantage students from lower-income backgrounds who cannot afford expensive test preparation courses. Finally, the exams typically measure a narrow range of skills — mostly memorization and formula application — while ignoring creativity, collaboration, and critical thinking, which are increasingly valued in the modern workplace.

Amara (Student): I have to disagree with Jake. Standardized tests, when designed well, serve an essential function: they provide an objective, comparable measure of student achievement across different schools and regions. Without them, how do we know if a student from a rural school is being held to the same standards as one from a wealthy suburban district? Standardized tests also identify achievement gaps that might otherwise remain invisible, allowing policymakers to direct resources where they are most needed. The problem isn’t testing itself but poor test design and over-reliance on test scores as the sole measure of success. We need better tests, not no tests.

Your Response (~120 words):

Model Response:

Both Jake and Amara make compelling points, but I see the issue as one of balance and purpose rather than a binary choice. Standardized testing provides valuable data for system-wide accountability — Amara is correct that without it, achievement gaps can remain hidden and unaddressed. However, Jake’s concern about “teaching to the test” is equally valid. The solution, in my view, lies in reducing the stakes. When test scores determine school funding, teacher evaluations, and student graduation, the distortions Jake describes become inevitable. Countries that use testing most effectively — including Singapore, which Amara mentioned — treat exams as diagnostic tools rather than high-stakes judgments. They combine standardized measures with classroom-based assessment, teacher observation, and project work. This hybrid model preserves the objectivity that Amara values while creating space for the creativity and critical thinking Jake advocates. The question is not whether to test, but how much weight to give those results.

---

🔐 此內容需要解鎖碼才能查看。輸入解鎖碼 →

## 📋 Answer Key

READING Section Answers

Question	Answer	Explanation
1	C	Paragraph 1: “40 to 45 percent of our daily actions.”
2	B	”Profound” means deep and significant; profound implications = deep consequences.
3	C	Paragraph 2: “the brain’s prefrontal cortex, responsible for conscious decision-making.”
4	B	The habit loop (cue-routine-reward) describes a self-reinforcing cycle of automatic behavior.
5	B	The notification ping exemplifies a cue that triggers the routine of checking the phone.
6	C	”Reflection” is NOT in the model. The components are cue, routine, reward, and craving.
7	B	Once chunked, a task uses minimal conscious attention, freeing resources for other activities.
8	D	The inserted sentence connects dopamine anticipation to the urge to check social media; fits at [D] after the craving/craving discussion.
9	B	Paragraph 5: “more effective to replace an existing habit loop than to attempt to eliminate one entirely.”
10	A, B, E	These capture: automatic processing (A), habit loop (B), and modification by replacement (E). C, D, F are details or incorrect.
11	B	Paragraph 1: “rational actors who consistently make decisions that maximize their utility.”
12	C	”Deviates” means departs or diverges from the rational model.
13	B	Paragraph 2: “losses loom larger than equivalent gains…by a ratio of approximately 2:1.”
14	B	Money is theoretically fungible, but mental accounting shows people treat it as non-fungible.
15	B	The automatic enrollment example illustrates how choice architecture changes improve outcomes.
16	C	Adam Smith’s invisible hand is classical economics, not behavioral economics.
17	B	The key is the irrationality: people won’t use low-interest savings to pay off high-interest debt.
18	B	The sentence bridges criticism and the “Nevertheless” transition, fitting at [B] before “the field’s influence continues to grow.”
19	B	Paragraph 2: expected value was “a positive $25.”
20	A, B, C/E	Best combination: challenge to rational model (A), loss aversion (B), and policy/nudge applications (E). Mental accounting (C) also acceptable.

LISTENING Section Answers

Question	Answer	Explanation
21	B	Lecture focuses on why people fail to help (bystander effect, diffusion of responsibility, pluralistic ignorance).
22	C	Professor: “about 85 percent of them took action within minutes.”
23	B	Professor explicitly names “diffusion of responsibility” and “pluralistic ignorance.”
24	B	Cyberbullying is used to show “the bystander effect persists in modern contexts, including online.”
25	B	Professor says learning about the effect makes you “less susceptible” and gives practical recommendations.
26	B	The professor frames it as a case that catalyzed research, without confirming every detail.
27	B	The lecture’s central framework is the tension between cultural universals and variation.
28	C	Gift-giving is explicitly listed among the universals Brown identified.
29	B	Professor: “if a language has only two color terms, they will be black and white…if three, the third will be red.”
30	B	The comparison illustrates independent vs. interdependent self-construal.
31	B	Structure: evidence for universals, evidence for variation, synthesis of both.
32	B	Professor says “the most productive contemporary approach” integrates both perspectives.
33	B	Covers efficiency gains, regulatory arbitrage, and labor implications.
34	C	Professor: “The average car sits idle roughly 95 percent of the time.”
35	B	Professor defines it as “the gap between potential and actual economic value.”
36	A	California examples used to illustrate “the legal landscape is evolving.”
37	C	Professor: “neither inherently good nor bad. Its value depends on the institutional framework.”
38	A	The context shows it means exploiting regulatory differences between platform and traditional business models.
39	B	Student: “I’m torn between two courses.”
40	C	Student: “My major is psychology.”
41	B	Student: “I want to go into user experience research.”
42	B	Advisor emphasizes that genuine curiosity leads to better performance.
43	B	Student: “I think I’ll go with anthropology, then.”
44	B	Student asks: “can you tell me what the workshop covers?“
45	B	Student: “I’m starting my senior thesis.”
46	C	Three areas: database searching, source evaluation, citation management. Academic writing NOT included.
47	B	The statement illustrates the gap the workshop can fill.
48	B	Student admits: “I mostly just type keywords into the search bar and hope for the best.”

---

📊 Score Conversion Guide

Reading (Raw Score → Scaled Score)

Raw (out of 20)	Scaled (0–30)
20	30
18–19	28–29
16–17	26–27
14–15	24–25
12–13	21–23
10–11	18–20
8–9	15–17
6–7	12–14
0–5	0–11

Listening (Raw Score → Scaled Score)

Raw (out of 28)	Scaled (0–30)
28	30
26–27	28–29
23–25	26–27
20–22	23–25
17–19	20–22
13–16	16–19
9–12	12–15
5–8	8–11
0–4	0–7

---

✅ 自我評量清單 Self-Evaluation Checklist

• Reading: 答對 ___ / 20 (目標: 16+)
• Listening: 答對 ___ / 28 (目標: 22+)
• Speaking Task 1: 是否清楚表達同意/不同意並舉出兩個具體例子？
• Speaking Task 2: 是否摘要了女學生的觀點及兩項以上的理由？
• Speaking Task 3: 是否連結了 social loafing 的定義與聽力實驗結果？
• Speaking Task 4: 是否說明了 network effect 的機制、例子與限制？
• Writing Task 1: 是否對應了閱讀的三個論點和聽力的反駁？
• Writing Task 2: 是否回應了教授問題、參考了同學觀點、並提出自己的論述？
• 時間管理: 每個 section 是否在規定時間內完成？

威威老師小提醒： 社會科學類文章常使用「理論 → 實驗/例子 → 應用」的結構。練習時多注意這個模式，對閱讀和寫作都有幫助！

---

Mock 2 結束。你做得很好！