His （) of the accident seemed most convincing.

Western juries have traditionally found eyewitness testimony to be the most convincing evidence in criminal trials. Seeing is believing, as the saying goes. In numerous cases, when witnesses pointed to the defendant, his or her fate was sealed. But how reliable is eyewitness testimony? Recent cases have suggested that despite our best intentions, we may unwittingly distort what we perceive.

Artists and psychologists have long known that "seeing" is not a simple matter of recording visual input. People perceive the exterior world through a complex matrix of cultural expectations, personality traits, moods and life experiences. For example, researchers tested the cultural influence on perception by showing a set of optical illusions to various groups, and found that different groups responded in divergent ways. Accustomed to and inundated by perpendicular structures, Western Europeans succumbed easily to illusions based on rectangular lines. On the other hand, the Zulu people of South Africa, whose environment had been comprised almost entirely of circular forms (round houses, doors, etc.) did not fall prey to those linear illusions.

Cultural expectations also influence the selectivity of our seeing. The amount of visual information that exists far exceeds our ability to process it, so we must filter that sensory input into recognizable images. In looking at a face, we do not see elongated ovals set in complex shadows and shading, we see eyes. And that filtering process is informed by what we perceive to be significant, which is influenced by cultural norms. Some cultures may emphasize differences in hair color or texture, others the shape of a nose or mouth, others the set of the eyes.

But it is not only group expectations that color what we see, personality and mood fluctuation can also alter our perceptions. Orderly minds who shun ambiguity will see an off- center image as firmly fixed in the center. The same photograph of four young men allows for shifting interpretations based on our current feeling: a mood of happiness reveals boys enjoying a relaxing day, while anxiety changes the picture to students worrying about exams.

In addition, numerous more prosaic factors affect our ability to record an image accurately. Duration of the encounter, proximity to the subject, lighting, and angle all affect our ability to see, and even stress may further undermine the accuracy of our perceptions.

What will this mean for criminal trials? Juries have often been reluctant to convict without eyewitness identification. Blood samples, fingerprints, and the like do not resonate as deeply with juries as does direct testimony, and frequently require understanding of complex scientific technicalities. But as confidence in eyewitness testimony wanes, such circumstantial evidence may someday replace visual identification as the lynchpin of criminal trials.

According to the author, eyewitness testimony is ______ .

A．always a reliable evidence

B．the most convincing evidence

C．sometimes a distortion of people's perception

D．a simple recording of visual input

Western juries have traditionally found eyewitness testimony to be the most convincing evidence in criminal trials. Seeing is believing, as the saying goes. In numerous cases, when witnesses pointed to the defendant, his or her fate was sealed. But how reliable is eyewitness testimony? Recent cases have suggested that despite our best intentions, we may unwittingly distort what we perceive.

Artists and psychologists have long known that "seeing" is not a simple matter of recording visual input. People perceive the exterior world through a complex matrix of cultural expectations, personality traits, moods and life experiences. For example, researchers tested the cultural influence on perception by showing a set of optical illusions to various groups, and found that different groups responded in divergent ways. Accustomed to and inundated by perpendicular structures, Western Europeans succumbed easily to illusions based on rectangular lines. On the other hand, the Zulu people of South Africa, whose environment had been comprised almost entirely of circular forms (round houses, doors, etc.) did not fall prey to those linear illusions.

Cultural expectations also influence the selectivity of our seeing. The amount of visual information that exists far exceeds our ability to process it, so we must filter that sensory input into recognizable images. In looking at a face, we do not see elongated ovals set in complex shadows and shading, we see eyes. And that filtering process is informed by what we perceive to be significant, which is influenced by cultural norms. Some cultures may emphasize differences in hair color or texture, others the shape of a nose or mouth, others the set of the eyes.

But it is not only group expectations that color what we see, personality and mood fluctuation can also alter our perceptions. Orderly minds who shun ambiguity will see an off- center image as firmly fixed in the center. The same photograph of four young men allows for shifting interpretations based on our current feeling: a mood of happiness reveals boys enjoying a relaxing day, while anxiety changes the picture to students worrying about exams.

In addition, numerous more prosaic factors affect our ability to record an image accurately. Duration of the encounter, proximity to the subject, lighting, and angle all affect our ability to see, and even stress may further undermine the accuracy of our perceptions.

What will this mean for criminal trials? Juries have often been reluctant to convict without eyewitness identification. Blood samples, fingerprints, and the like do not resonate as deeply with juries as does direct testimony, and frequently require understanding of complex scientific technicalities. But as confidence in eyewitness testimony wanes, such circumstantial evidence may someday replace visual identification as the lynchpin of criminal trials.

According to the author, eyewitness testimony is ______ .

A．always a reliable evidence

B．the most convincing evidence

C．sometimes a distortion of people's perception

D．a simple recording of visual input

IMPUDENT:

A．thoughtful

B．convincing

C．developed

D．methodical

E．deferential

IMPUDENT:

A．thoughtful

B．convincing

C．developed

D．methodical

E．deferential

IMPUDENT:

A．thoughtful

B．convincing

C．developed

D．methodical

E．deferential

The most convincing evidence for the importance of adult influence on a child's intelligence comes from a study of "at risk" children. Ramey and Frances Campbell of the University of North Carolina【1】with children born into poverty-line households. The children entered the study by four months【2】age. During the study, one group spent the day in a center where teachers used games and songs to【3】the infants. Another group had no such 4 , but they were given nutritional supplements in【5】 .

During preschool years the children in the early-education group showed IQ advantages of 10 to 20 points. The highest-risk children showed the【6】gains, and at age 15 they had higher reading and math scores.

What【7】for these gains? Ramey and other scientists say early childhood experiences【8】brain growth.

An infant is born【9】billions of brain cells called neurons. Some are wired to other cells before birth to regulate the【10】of life, such as heartbeat and breathing. Others are waiting to be wired to【11】him or her interpret and respond to the outside world. Experience dictates the hookups. As the child【12】, cells reach out and set up pathways to other cells needed to determine a【13】. For instance, the neurons in the eye send branches to the【14】cortex, which interprets【15】eye sees and, via other branches,【16】the person to react to what is seen. Each time an experience is repeated, the【17】are strengthened.

The first two years of life are an explosion of brain【18】and connections. By age two the【19】has more than 300 trillion connections. At the same time, cells that aren't being connected or used are being【20】.

(1)

A．worked

B．stayed

C．studied

D．talked