Detalhes explícitos
Relacione a pessoa, horário, lugar ou quantidade ao acontecimento correto.
The doors open at eight. The class starts at nine.
B2
Uma reportagem científica
Sobre esta lição
Uma reportagem científica · B2. Relacione a pessoa, horário, lugar ou quantidade ao acontecimento correto.
Leia o material original em inglês e responda com evidências. O nível é uma referência editorial, não um resultado certificado.
8 questões
Salve para encontrar em Minha coleção.
LeituraB2
When a cooler room is not the whole answer
Leia o material original em inglês e responda com evidências. O nível é uma referência editorial, não um resultado certificado.
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.
Um pouco de clareza
Razões · Inferências a partir de pistas
Use a razão apresentada; uma razão externa apenas plausível não basta. Combine as pistas reais sem acrescentar fatos sem apoio.
We meet inside because it is raining.
Posição e avaliação · Aplicar o argumento
Observe avaliações e ressalvas; um fato positivo não significa aprovação irrestrita. Relacione a ação ao argumento apresentado e aos seus limites.
The writer likes the idea but asks for one change.
Material de estudo
LeituraB2
When a cooler room is not the whole answer
Leia o material original em inglês e responda com evidências. O nível é uma referência editorial, não um resultado certificado.
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 / 8D01Salve para encontrar em Minha coleção.
When a cooler room is not the whole answer
What did the first cool-room group do better on average?
Seu caminho de aprendizagem
01
Etapa 1 · Aquecimento
0/2Aquecimento
02
Etapa 2 · Praticar a habilidade
0/1Detalhes explícitos
Relacione a pessoa, horário, lugar ou quantidade ao acontecimento correto.
The doors open at eight. The class starts at nine.03
Etapa 3 · Praticar a habilidade
0/1Posição e avaliação · Aplicar o argumento
Observe avaliações e ressalvas; um fato positivo não significa aprovação irrestrita. Relacione a ação ao argumento apresentado e aos seus limites.
The writer likes the idea but asks for one change.04
Etapa 4 · Prática relacionada
0/2Prática relacionada
05
Etapa 5 · Desafio do texto
0/2Desafio do texto
Revisões desta unidade
0Transforme erros em aprendizado.
Mantenha a primeira resposta, confira a evidência e tente outra questão. Acertar no mesmo material não comprova transferência para outro texto.
Ainda não há revisões. Faça um aquecimento curto.
Mapa da aula
B2Uma reportagem científica
Pontos da aula
Detalhes explícitos
Relacione a pessoa, horário, lugar ou quantidade ao acontecimento correto.
The doors open at eight. The class starts at nine.Razões · Inferências a partir de pistas
Use a razão apresentada; uma razão externa apenas plausível não basta. Combine as pistas reais sem acrescentar fatos sem apoio.
We meet inside because it is raining.Posição e avaliação · Aplicar o argumento
Observe avaliações e ressalvas; um fato positivo não significa aprovação irrestrita. Relacione a ação ao argumento apresentado e aos seus limites.
The writer likes the idea but asks for one change.Perguntas e respostas
Abrir uma resposta registra ajuda para essa questão.
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.
Resposta e explicação
Made fewer proofreading errors afterwards.
A resposta sustentada é “Made fewer proofreading errors afterwards.”. Evidência: “The cool-room group made fewer errors afterwards, on average.”. Compare a alternativa “Improved on every individual task without making errors.”. Isso transforma uma constatação limitada numa afirmação sem exceções. Confira o trecho “on average” à luz da pergunta e da afirmação “Improved on every individual task without making errors.”. Compare a alternativa “Completed the proofreading task more quickly afterwards.”. Isso troca o resultado medido ou relatado por outro diferente. Confira o trecho “made fewer errors afterwards” à luz da pergunta e da afirmação “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.
Resposta e explicação
Noise and movement also differed between the groups.
A resposta sustentada é “Noise and movement also differed between the groups.”. Evidência: “The cool room was also quieter, and participants had to walk along a corridor to reach it.”. Compare a alternativa “The groups spent their breaks in equally quiet rooms.”. Isso confunde duas etapas: a situação inicial e uma verificação ou decisão posterior. Confira o trecho “The cool room was also quieter” à luz da pergunta e da afirmação “The groups spent their breaks in equally quiet rooms.”. Compare a alternativa “Participants were unaware of which condition they had entered.”. Isso inverte a relação apresentada no texto. Confira o trecho “people knew which room they were in” à luz da pergunta e da afirmação “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.
Resposta e explicação
Differences built into the experimental conditions.
A resposta sustentada é “Differences built into the experimental conditions.”. Evidência: “it could not remove these features of the design.”. Compare a alternativa “The unequal proportion of volunteers assigned to each room.”. Isso inverte a relação apresentada no texto. Confira o trecho “Half spent the break in a cool room; the others remained in the usual office.” à luz da pergunta e da afirmação “The unequal proportion of volunteers assigned to each room.”. Compare a alternativa “A difference in the scheduled length of the two breaks.”. Isso acrescenta um detalhe que o relato não fornece; ser plausível não equivale a ter apoio no texto. Confira o trecho “took a ten-minute break” à luz da pergunta e da afirmação “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.
Resposta e explicação
Useful for refining a question, but insufficient for policy.
A resposta sustentada é “Useful for refining a question, but insufficient for policy.”. Evidência: “It identified an interesting pattern and helped shape a more precise question.”. Compare a alternativa “Its limitations mean the pattern is too unreliable to guide further questions.”. Isso usa uma limitação para descartar toda a contribuição, em vez de separar sua utilidade de seus limites. Confira o trecho “helped shape a more precise question” à luz da pergunta e da afirmação “Its limitations mean the pattern is too unreliable to guide further questions.”. Compare a alternativa “Its practical promise is sufficient grounds to invest before another trial.”. Isso recomenda agir antes de obter as evidências ou salvaguardas adicionais solicitadas. Confira o trecho “Before recommending a policy, the team wants a larger trial” à luz da pergunta e da afirmação “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.
Resposta e explicação
Walking distance and room quietness were matched.
A resposta sustentada é “Walking distance and room quietness were matched.”. Evidência: “both groups walked the same distance and sat in equally quiet rooms.”. Compare a alternativa “The two groups worked in the same room rather than separate rooms.”. Isso acrescenta um detalhe que o relato não fornece; ser plausível não equivale a ter apoio no texto. Confira o trecho “sat in equally quiet rooms” à luz da pergunta e da afirmação “The two groups worked in the same room rather than separate rooms.”. Compare a alternativa “Both groups tested newly installed cooling equipment at work.”. Isso confunde duas etapas: a situação inicial e uma verificação ou decisão posterior. Confira o trecho “justify expensive cooling equipment while ignoring the uncertainty” à luz da pergunta e da afirmação “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.
Resposta e explicação
The original temperature explanation became less convincing.
A resposta sustentada é “The original temperature explanation became less convincing.”. Evidência: “That finding weakened the original temperature explanation”. Compare a alternativa “The smaller difference shows that temperature can be ruled out as a cause.”. Isso atribui à evidência mais certeza ou alcance do que ela permite. Confira o trecho “it did not establish that temperature had no effect” à luz da pergunta e da afirmação “The smaller difference shows that temperature can be ruled out as a cause.”. Compare a alternativa “The follow-up establishes silence as the cause of the original improvement.”. Isso transforma uma associação observada numa conclusão causal não demonstrada. Confira o trecho “Either silence or movement might have contributed.” à luz da pergunta e da afirmação “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.
Resposta e explicação
Short-term accuracy may not mean practical benefit all afternoon.
A resposta sustentada é “Short-term accuracy may not mean practical benefit all afternoon.”. Evidência: “A room that improves a short test but makes workers uncomfortable all afternoon may offer little practical benefit.”. Compare a alternativa “To find out whether discomfort explains all the original proofreading errors.”. A verificação de conforto busca saber se a maior precisão tem utilidade prática durante a tarde. O texto não propõe explicar todos os erros originais pelo desconforto. Confira o trecho “a measure of comfort as well as accuracy” à luz da pergunta e da afirmação “To find out whether discomfort explains all the original proofreading errors.”. Compare a alternativa “To confirm the discomfort already reported by the first cool-room group.”. Isso apresenta uma verificação futura como resultado já estabelecido. Confira o trecho “wants a larger trial” à luz da pergunta e da afirmação “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.
Resposta e explicação
Seek broader evidence before investing in cooling equipment.
A resposta sustentada é “Seek broader evidence before investing in cooling equipment.”. Evidência: “Before recommending a policy, the team wants a larger trial across several workplaces”. Compare a alternativa “Invest in cooling first and check its wider workplace benefits afterwards.”. Isso recomenda agir antes de obter as evidências ou salvaguardas adicionais solicitadas. Confira o trecho “Before recommending a policy, the team wants a larger trial” à luz da pergunta e da afirmação “Invest in cooling first and check its wider workplace benefits afterwards.”. Compare a alternativa “Abandon the temperature question because the follow-up found a smaller effect.”. Isso usa uma limitação para descartar toda a contribuição, em vez de separar sua utilidade de seus limites. Confira o trecho “it did not establish that temperature had no effect” à luz da pergunta e da afirmação “Abandon the temperature question because the follow-up found a smaller effect.”.