Détails explicites
Reliez la personne, l’heure, le lieu ou la quantité à l’événement exact.
The doors open at eight. The class starts at nine.
B2
Un article de vulgarisation scientifique
À propos de cette leçon
Un article de vulgarisation scientifique · B2. Reliez la personne, l’heure, le lieu ou la quantité à l’événement exact.
Lis le document original en anglais et appuie tes réponses sur des indices. Le niveau est un repère éditorial, pas un résultat certifié.
8 questions
Retrouvez-le dans Ma collection après enregistrement.
Imagine a research team investigating whether a short break in a cooler room helps people concentrate. In this fictional study, sixty office volunteers completed a proofreading task, took a ten-minute break, and then completed a different version of the task. Half spent the break in a cool room; the others remained in the usual office. The cool-room group made fewer errors afterwards, on average. It would be tempting to conclude that lower temperatures caused the improvement. The researchers, however, had changed more than temperature. The cool room was also quieter, and participants had to walk along a corridor to reach it. Either silence or movement might have contributed. Moreover, people knew which room they were in, so their expectations could have influenced their effort. Random assignment reduced some differences between the groups, but it could not remove these features of the design. The team then ran a smaller follow-up in which both groups walked the same distance and sat in equally quiet rooms. The difference in errors became much smaller. That finding weakened the original temperature explanation, although it did not establish that temperature had no effect. A small follow-up may miss a modest effect that a larger experiment could detect. The useful lesson is not that the first study was worthless. It identified an interesting pattern and helped shape a more precise question. The problem would arise if an employer used the first result to justify expensive cooling equipment while ignoring the uncertainty. Before recommending a policy, the team wants a larger trial across several workplaces and a measure of comfort as well as accuracy. A room that improves a short test but makes workers uncomfortable all afternoon may offer little practical benefit.
Quelques repères
Raisons · Déductions à partir d’indices
Retenez la raison donnée ; une cause plausible mais extérieure au texte ne suffit pas. Combinez les indices réels sans ajouter un fait non étayé.
We meet inside because it is raining.
Point de vue et appréciation · Appliquer le raisonnement
Repérez appréciations et réserves ; un fait positif ne signifie pas une approbation sans limites. Reliez l’action au raisonnement présenté et à ses limites.
The writer likes the idea but asks for one change.
Support de cours
Imagine a research team investigating whether a short break in a cooler room helps people concentrate. In this fictional study, sixty office volunteers completed a proofreading task, took a ten-minute break, and then completed a different version of the task. Half spent the break in a cool room; the others remained in the usual office. The cool-room group made fewer errors afterwards, on average. It would be tempting to conclude that lower temperatures caused the improvement. The researchers, however, had changed more than temperature. The cool room was also quieter, and participants had to walk along a corridor to reach it. Either silence or movement might have contributed. Moreover, people knew which room they were in, so their expectations could have influenced their effort. Random assignment reduced some differences between the groups, but it could not remove these features of the design. The team then ran a smaller follow-up in which both groups walked the same distance and sat in equally quiet rooms. The difference in errors became much smaller. That finding weakened the original temperature explanation, although it did not establish that temperature had no effect. A small follow-up may miss a modest effect that a larger experiment could detect. The useful lesson is not that the first study was worthless. It identified an interesting pattern and helped shape a more precise question. The problem would arise if an employer used the first result to justify expensive cooling equipment while ignoring the uncertainty. Before recommending a policy, the team wants a larger trial across several workplaces and a measure of comfort as well as accuracy. A room that improves a short test but makes workers uncomfortable all afternoon may offer little practical benefit.
01 / 8D01Retrouvez-le dans Ma collection après enregistrement.
When a cooler room is not the whole answer
What did the first cool-room group do better on average?
Votre parcours
01
Étape 1 · Échauffement
0/2Échauffement
02
Étape 2 · Développer la compétence
0/1Détails explicites
Reliez la personne, l’heure, le lieu ou la quantité à l’événement exact.
The doors open at eight. The class starts at nine.03
Étape 3 · Développer la compétence
0/1Point de vue et appréciation · Appliquer le raisonnement
Repérez appréciations et réserves ; un fait positif ne signifie pas une approbation sans limites. Reliez l’action au raisonnement présenté et à ses limites.
The writer likes the idea but asks for one change.04
Étape 4 · Entraînement associé
0/2Entraînement associé
05
Étape 5 · Défi du texte
0/2Défi du texte
Révisions de cette unité
0Apprenez de vos erreurs.
Conservez la première réponse, vérifiez le passage et essayez une autre question. Une réussite sur le même document ne prouve pas le transfert à un nouveau texte.
Pas encore de notes. Essayez un court échauffement.
Carte de la leçon
B2Un article de vulgarisation scientifique
Points de la leçon
Détails explicites
Reliez la personne, l’heure, le lieu ou la quantité à l’événement exact.
The doors open at eight. The class starts at nine.Raisons · Déductions à partir d’indices
Retenez la raison donnée ; une cause plausible mais extérieure au texte ne suffit pas. Combinez les indices réels sans ajouter un fait non étayé.
We meet inside because it is raining.Point de vue et appréciation · Appliquer le raisonnement
Repérez appréciations et réserves ; un fait positif ne signifie pas une approbation sans limites. Reliez l’action au raisonnement présenté et à ses limites.
The writer likes the idea but asks for one change.Questions et réponses
Ouvrir une réponse enregistre une aide pour cette question.
When a cooler room is not the whole answer
What did the first cool-room group do better on average?
- Improved on every individual task without making errors.
- Made fewer proofreading errors afterwards.
- Reported greater comfort during the rest of the working day.
- Completed the proofreading task more quickly afterwards.
Réponse et explication
Made fewer proofreading errors afterwards.
La réponse étayée est « Made fewer proofreading errors afterwards. ». Indice : « The cool-room group made fewer errors afterwards, on average. ». Comparez l’autre proposition : « Improved on every individual task without making errors. ». Cela transforme un constat nuancé en une affirmation sans exception. Examinez le passage « on average » en tenant compte de la question et de l’affirmation « Improved on every individual task without making errors. ». Comparez l’autre proposition : « Completed the proofreading task more quickly afterwards. ». Cela remplace le résultat mesuré ou rapporté par un autre. Examinez le passage « made fewer errors afterwards » en tenant compte de la question et de l’affirmation « Completed the proofreading task more quickly afterwards. ».
When a cooler room is not the whole answer
Why was temperature not the only possible explanation?
- The groups spent their breaks in equally quiet rooms.
- Participants were unaware of which condition they had entered.
- The researchers compared comfort rather than proofreading accuracy.
- Noise and movement also differed between the groups.
Réponse et explication
Noise and movement also differed between the groups.
La réponse étayée est « Noise and movement also differed between the groups. ». Indice : « The cool room was also quieter, and participants had to walk along a corridor to reach it. ». Comparez l’autre proposition : « The groups spent their breaks in equally quiet rooms. ». Cela confond deux étapes : la situation initiale et une vérification ou décision ultérieure. Examinez le passage « The cool room was also quieter » en tenant compte de la question et de l’affirmation « The groups spent their breaks in equally quiet rooms. ». Comparez l’autre proposition : « Participants were unaware of which condition they had entered. ». Cela inverse la relation indiquée dans le document. Examinez le passage « people knew which room they were in » en tenant compte de la question et de l’affirmation « Participants were unaware of which condition they had entered. ».
When a cooler room is not the whole answer
What did random assignment fail to remove?
- The unequal proportion of volunteers assigned to each room.
- The sample-size difference between the original study and its follow-up.
- Differences built into the experimental conditions.
- A difference in the scheduled length of the two breaks.
Réponse et explication
Differences built into the experimental conditions.
La réponse étayée est « Differences built into the experimental conditions. ». Indice : « it could not remove these features of the design. ». Comparez l’autre proposition : « The unequal proportion of volunteers assigned to each room. ». Cela inverse la relation indiquée dans le document. Examinez le passage « Half spent the break in a cool room; the others remained in the usual office. » en tenant compte de la question et de l’affirmation « The unequal proportion of volunteers assigned to each room. ». Comparez l’autre proposition : « A difference in the scheduled length of the two breaks. ». Cela ajoute un détail absent du document ; sa plausibilité ne constitue pas une preuve. Examinez le passage « took a ten-minute break » en tenant compte de la question et de l’affirmation « A difference in the scheduled length of the two breaks. ».
When a cooler room is not the whole answer
How does the writer assess the first study?
- Its larger sample makes its temperature explanation stronger than the better-controlled follow-up.
- Its limitations mean the pattern is too unreliable to guide further questions.
- Useful for refining a question, but insufficient for policy.
- Its practical promise is sufficient grounds to invest before another trial.
Réponse et explication
Useful for refining a question, but insufficient for policy.
La réponse étayée est « Useful for refining a question, but insufficient for policy. ». Indice : « It identified an interesting pattern and helped shape a more precise question. ». Comparez l’autre proposition : « Its limitations mean the pattern is too unreliable to guide further questions. ». Cela utilise une limite pour rejeter tout l’apport, au lieu de distinguer son utilité de ses limites. Examinez le passage « helped shape a more precise question » en tenant compte de la question et de l’affirmation « Its limitations mean the pattern is too unreliable to guide further questions. ». Comparez l’autre proposition : « Its practical promise is sufficient grounds to invest before another trial. ». Cela recommande d’agir avant de disposer des preuves ou garanties supplémentaires demandées. Examinez le passage « Before recommending a policy, the team wants a larger trial » en tenant compte de la question et de l’affirmation « Its practical promise is sufficient grounds to invest before another trial. ».
When a cooler room is not the whole answer
What changed in the follow-up design?
- The two groups worked in the same room rather than separate rooms.
- Walking distance and room quietness were matched.
- Both groups tested newly installed cooling equipment at work.
- The team compared participants across several different workplaces.
Réponse et explication
Walking distance and room quietness were matched.
La réponse étayée est « Walking distance and room quietness were matched. ». Indice : « both groups walked the same distance and sat in equally quiet rooms. ». Comparez l’autre proposition : « The two groups worked in the same room rather than separate rooms. ». Cela ajoute un détail absent du document ; sa plausibilité ne constitue pas une preuve. Examinez le passage « sat in equally quiet rooms » en tenant compte de la question et de l’affirmation « The two groups worked in the same room rather than separate rooms. ». Comparez l’autre proposition : « Both groups tested newly installed cooling equipment at work. ». Cela confond deux étapes : la situation initiale et une vérification ou décision ultérieure. Examinez le passage « justify expensive cooling equipment while ignoring the uncertainty » en tenant compte de la question et de l’affirmation « Both groups tested newly installed cooling equipment at work. ».
When a cooler room is not the whole answer
What does the smaller difference in the follow-up imply?
- The follow-up settles the question without needing a larger experiment.
- The original temperature explanation became less convincing.
- The smaller difference shows that temperature can be ruled out as a cause.
- The follow-up establishes silence as the cause of the original improvement.
Réponse et explication
The original temperature explanation became less convincing.
La réponse étayée est « The original temperature explanation became less convincing. ». Indice : « That finding weakened the original temperature explanation ». Comparez l’autre proposition : « The smaller difference shows that temperature can be ruled out as a cause. ». Cela attribue aux preuves une certitude ou une portée plus grande que ce qu’elles permettent. Examinez le passage « it did not establish that temperature had no effect » en tenant compte de la question et de l’affirmation « The smaller difference shows that temperature can be ruled out as a cause. ». Comparez l’autre proposition : « The follow-up establishes silence as the cause of the original improvement. ». Cela transforme une association observée en une conclusion causale non établie. Examinez le passage « Either silence or movement might have contributed. » en tenant compte de la question et de l’affirmation « The follow-up establishes silence as the cause of the original improvement. ».
When a cooler room is not the whole answer
Why does the team want to measure comfort?
- To confirm the discomfort already reported by the first cool-room group.
- To use workers’ opinions instead of measuring their accuracy.
- To find out whether discomfort explains all the original proofreading errors.
- Short-term accuracy may not mean practical benefit all afternoon.
Réponse et explication
Short-term accuracy may not mean practical benefit all afternoon.
La réponse étayée est « Short-term accuracy may not mean practical benefit all afternoon. ». Indice : « A room that improves a short test but makes workers uncomfortable all afternoon may offer little practical benefit. ». Comparez l’autre proposition : « To find out whether discomfort explains all the original proofreading errors. ». La mesure du confort vise à savoir si le gain de précision reste utile pendant un après-midi. Le texte ne propose pas d’expliquer toutes les erreurs initiales par l’inconfort. Examinez le passage « a measure of comfort as well as accuracy » en tenant compte de la question et de l’affirmation « To find out whether discomfort explains all the original proofreading errors. ». Comparez l’autre proposition : « To confirm the discomfort already reported by the first cool-room group. ». Cela présente une vérification future comme un résultat déjà établi. Examinez le passage « wants a larger trial » en tenant compte de la question et de l’affirmation « To confirm the discomfort already reported by the first cool-room group. ».
When a cooler room is not the whole answer
Which policy response would the article support?
- Base the investment decision on proofreading accuracy without measuring comfort.
- Abandon the temperature question because the follow-up found a smaller effect.
- Seek broader evidence before investing in cooling equipment.
- Invest in cooling first and check its wider workplace benefits afterwards.
Réponse et explication
Seek broader evidence before investing in cooling equipment.
La réponse étayée est « Seek broader evidence before investing in cooling equipment. ». Indice : « Before recommending a policy, the team wants a larger trial across several workplaces ». Comparez l’autre proposition : « Invest in cooling first and check its wider workplace benefits afterwards. ». Cela recommande d’agir avant de disposer des preuves ou garanties supplémentaires demandées. Examinez le passage « Before recommending a policy, the team wants a larger trial » en tenant compte de la question et de l’affirmation « Invest in cooling first and check its wider workplace benefits afterwards. ». Comparez l’autre proposition : « Abandon the temperature question because the follow-up found a smaller effect. ». Cela utilise une limite pour rejeter tout l’apport, au lieu de distinguer son utilité de ses limites. Examinez le passage « it did not establish that temperature had no effect » en tenant compte de la question et de l’affirmation « Abandon the temperature question because the follow-up found a smaller effect. ».