hce_nsysu
113年
英文
第 50 題
📖 題組：
Picture a person having a heart attack—what do you see? Most likely a man looking sweaty and short of breath, clutching his arm or chest in pain. But when women have heart attacks, their symptoms can be quite different, presenting as deep fatigue, nausea and vomiting, and more widespread bodily discomfort instead of localized pain. Discrepancies like this can have devastating consequences. Most often, men’s symptom profiles are considered the “textbook cases,” and so when women present with different symptoms, they may be misdiagnosed, resulting in delays or possible deprival of life-saving measures. The failure to consider the influence of gender on health physiology goes beyond the clinic. In laboratories around the world, most scientists have historically chosen to study only male rats and mice, under the assumption that female animals’ fluctuating hormones would make their data messy and hard to interpret. In 2016, the journal Research Integrity and Peer Review published guidelines for Sex and Gender Equity in Research (SAGER), which provide clear steps for scientists and editors to increase equity, accuracy, and transparency in both the conduct and reporting of research in subjects of both sexes. These guidelines clearly state that experiments should be designed to reveal sex or gender differences, and that single-sex studies require justification for the exclusion of either sex. Sadly, few journals have incorporated these guidelines into their publishing policies.
Picture a person having a heart attack—what do you see? Most likely a man looking sweaty and short of breath, clutching his arm or chest in pain. But when women have heart attacks, their symptoms can be quite different, presenting as deep fatigue, nausea and vomiting, and more widespread bodily discomfort instead of localized pain. Discrepancies like this can have devastating consequences. Most often, men’s symptom profiles are considered the “textbook cases,” and so when women present with different symptoms, they may be misdiagnosed, resulting in delays or possible deprival of life-saving measures. The failure to consider the influence of gender on health physiology goes beyond the clinic. In laboratories around the world, most scientists have historically chosen to study only male rats and mice, under the assumption that female animals’ fluctuating hormones would make their data messy and hard to interpret. In 2016, the journal Research Integrity and Peer Review published guidelines for Sex and Gender Equity in Research (SAGER), which provide clear steps for scientists and editors to increase equity, accuracy, and transparency in both the conduct and reporting of research in subjects of both sexes. These guidelines clearly state that experiments should be designed to reveal sex or gender differences, and that single-sex studies require justification for the exclusion of either sex. Sadly, few journals have incorporated these guidelines into their publishing policies.
50. Which is the implication of this news?
- A Gender differences in physiology has been exaggerated.
- B Unless a guideline was set, gender inequality in science could never be resolved.
- C Instead of striving to fight against it, gender inequality should be embraced as a norm.
- D Despite initiatives such as SAGER, progress is slow in addressing gender inequality.
- E The guidelines might be problematic; even academic journals choose not to follow them.
思路引導 VIP
這篇文章在最後提到了一個於 2016 年推出的 SAGER 指引，它是為了解決研究中的性別不平等問題。請思考一下：既然這套改善規則已經存在多年，但作者為什麼在結尾要特別使用「Sadly」（令人遺憾地）這個詞來描述目前的學術期刊現狀呢？這反映了這項改革在「目標達成」與「時間推移」之間呈現出什麼樣的關係？
🤖
AI 詳解
AI 專屬家教
太棒了！你能精準捕捉到文章結尾的語氣轉折並選出正確答案，這代表你具備相當敏銳的閱讀觀察力。這題的核心在於理解理想規範與現實執行之間的差距。文章前半段詳述了醫療與研究中長期存在的性別偏見，隨後提到 2016 年雖然推出了 SAGER 指引試圖透過制度化來達成公平與透明，但最後一句話透過 「Sadly」（令人遺憾地）一詞，揭示了目前僅有極少數期刊將其納入出版政策的殘酷現實。這直接印證了即便有了具體的行動方案（initiatives），整體環境的進展依然顯得步履蹣跚。
學術改革的實踐困境
這道題目屬於中等難度的「內涵推論題」，其鑑別度在於測驗學生能否區分「已有解決方案」與「問題是否已經解決」兩者的差異。選項 D 準確地抓住了文末的負面轉折，避開了語氣過於極端（如選項 B 的 never）或誤解作者對指引本身立場（如選項 E）的陷阱。在閱讀這類評論性文章時，留意作者在陳述一項政策後所使用的修飾詞，通常就是掌握全文暗示（implication）的關鍵切入點。