Reading Practice Test 106

READING PASSAGE 1

You should spend about 20 minutes on Questions 1-13, which are based on Reading Passage 1 below.

Mungo Lady and Mungo Man

Controversies in Australian Prehistory

Fifty thousand years ago, a lush landscape greeted the first Australians moving towards the south-east of the continent. Temperatures were cooler than now. Megafauna – giant prehistoric animals such as marsupial lions and the rhinoceros-sized diprotodon – were abundant. Freshwater lakes in areas of western New South Wales (NSW) were brimming with fish. But change was coming. By 40,000 years ago, water levels had started to drop.

A study of the sediments and graves of Lake Mungo, a dry lake bed in western NSW, has uncovered the muddy layers deposited as the lake began to dry up. Forty thousand years ago, families took refuge at the lake from the encroaching desert, leaving artefacts such as stone tools, which researchers used to determine that the first wanderers came to the area between 46,000 and 50,000 years ago. By 20,000 years ago, the lake had become the dry, dusty hole it is today. This area was first examined by the University of Melbourne geologist Professor Jim Bowler in 1969. He was searching for ancient lakes and came across the remains of a woman who had been buried with some ceremony; she was given the name ‘Mungo Lady’. In 1974, he found a second set of remains, Mungo Man, buried 300 metres away. Bowler’s comprehensive study of different sediment layers has concluded that both graves are 40,000 years old.

This is much younger than the 62,000 years Mungo Man was attributed with in 1999 by a team led by Professor Alan Thorne, of the Australian National University. Thorne is the country’s leading opponent of the ‘Out of Africa’ theory – that modern humans spread around the globe from Africa about 100,000 years ago. The revision of Mungo Man’s age has refocused attention on academic disputes about mankind’s origins.

The arrival date of these early Australians is linked to another vexed question: the reason for the disappearance of the megafauna. Dr Tim Flannery, a proponent of the controversial theory that these animals were wiped out by the extreme hunting practices of humans, claims that the new Mungo dates support this view. For Bowler, however, these debates are speculative distractions. At 40,000 years old, he argues, Mungo Man and Mungo Lady remain Australia’s oldest human burials and the earliest evidence on Earth of cultural sophistication. ‘At Lake Mungo, we have a cameo of people reacting to environmental change. It is one of the great stories of the people of the world.’

Two rival groups of researchers have each attacked the techniques used by the other to ascertain the date of Mungo Man. In the 1999 study, Thorne’s team used three techniques to date Mungo Man – bone, tooth enamel and sand. Bowler has strongly challenged the results ever since. Dating human bones is ‘notoriously unreliable’, he says. In addition, the sand sample used by Thorne’s group was taken hundreds of metres from the burial site. Bowler has stated that it is not difficult ‘to realise that the age of sand is not the same as the age of the grave’. He says his team’s results are based on careful fieldwork, crosschecked between four laboratories, while Thorne’s team misinterpreted the evidence, “locked in a laboratory in Canberra’. Thorne counters that Bowler’s team used one dating technique, while his used three. Best practice is to have at least two methods producing the same result. A Thorne team member, Professor Rainer Grün, says the fact that the latest results were consistent between laboratories doesn’t mean they are correct. ‘We now have two data sets that are contradictory. I do not have a plausible explanation.’

Thorne recently made headlines with a study of Mungo Man’s DNA, which he claimed supported his idea that modern humans developed from archaic humans in several places around the world, rather than emerging from Africa a relatively short time ago. Now, however, Thorne says the age of Mungo Man is irrelevant. Recent fossil finds show that modern humans were in China 110,000 years ago. ‘So he has a long time to arrive in Australia. It doesn’t matter if he is 40,000 or 60,000 years old.’

In 2001, a member of Bowler’s team, Dr Richard Roberts of Wollongong University, along with Flannery, Director of the South Australian Museum, published research on the extinction of the megafauna. They dated 28 sites across the continent, arguing that their analysis showed that the megafauna died out suddenly 46,600 years ago. This conclusion has been challenged by other scientists, including Dr Judith Field of the University of Sydney and Dr Richard Fullager of the Australian Museum, who point to the presence of megafauna fossils at the 36,000-year-old Cuddie Springs site in NSW.

Flannery praises the Bowler team’s research as thorough and rigorous. He says the finding that humans arrived at Lake Mungo between 46,000 and 50,000 years ago supports the idea that that was a critical time in Australia’s history. There is no evidence of a dramatic climate change at that time, he says. ‘It’s my view that humans arrived and megafauna extinction took place in almost the same geological instant. Bowler, however, is sceptical of Flannery’s theory about the disappearance of the giant animals. He argues that climate change 40,000 years ago was more intense than has been previously realised and could have played an important role in their extinction.

Questions 1–8

Look at the following theories (Questions 1-8) and the list of researchers below.

Match each theory with the correct researcher(s), A-F.

Write the correct letter, A-F, in boxes 1-8 on your answer sheet.

NB   You may use any letter more than once.

1   Our human ancestors did not originate in only one area.

2   The extinction of the megafauna happened within a brief period.

3   The megafauna died out as a result of human activity.

4   The similarity of results does not always guarantee their validity.

5   How old Mungo Man is, is unimportant.

6   There is evidence to disprove the theory of mass megafauna extinction.

7   An extreme environmental change occurred at the time that humans first moved into the Lake Mungo area.

8   The earliest evidence of advanced human culture is found in Australia. 

List of Researchers

A   Jim Bowler

B   Alan Thorne

C   Tim Flannery

D   Rainer Grün

E   Richard Roberts and Tim Flannery

F   Judith Field and Richard Fullager

Questions 9–13

Do the following statements agree with the information given in Reading Passage 1?

In boxes 8–13 on your answer sheet, write

TRUE               if the statement agrees with the information

FALSE              if the statement contradicts the information

NOT GIVEN     if there is no information on this

9   Objects found in the Lake Mungo area were used to date the arrival of humans.

10   Ancient weapons were found in the Lake Mungo area.

11   Scientists agree about the age of Mungo Man.

12   Thorne’s research involved analysing more than one material.

13   Bowler has criticised the research methods used by Thorne.

READING PASSAGE 2

You should spend about 20 minutes on Questions 14–26, which are based on Reading Passage 2 below.

The attraction of video games

The world’s love of video games has much to do with people’s desires and motives

A

Video games, it is often claimed, are about wasting time. It is a misunderstanding that players and game makers have been trying to correct for many years. While movies and television are endlessly analysed in the media, games are often dismissed as irresponsible, unimportant by-products of the broader digital revolution.

But a growing number of experts disagree. This is, after all, an entertainment medium that worldwide makes $50 billion a year. Using ideas from psychology and sociology, theorists and designers suggest that our love of video games may actually have important things to tell us about our most basic desires and motivations.

Game design has become a big business and has led to the creation of a multitude of companies. ‘The industry attitude toward training has changed radically,’ says prominent game researcher Jesper Juul. ‘I recall hearing professionals claim that game design was a strange and unteachable art, but now this attitude has mostly faded.’ Designing video games is increasingly recognised as a valid field of university study throughout the world.

B

Central to an understanding of games is the theory that games are fun because they teach us in a way that our brains prefer, that is, through systems and puzzles. Raph Koster, designer of multiplayer fantasy games, points out that an effective learning environment is one in which failure is acceptable, even welcomed. Accordingly, Koster says that in games, the player enters into a situation where the rules of the real world don’t apply – and typically being judged on success and failure is part of the real world. When gaming, people feel free to try things and to learn, and not worry about what might happen.

Consistently, Koster says, the best games are the ones that provide us with interesting tools such as weapons or magic, and allow us to experiment with them. For example, in one early game, players are given the ability to jump, and can practise this for as long as they like, but to get to the next stage they need to master this ability so they can leap over an enemy and onto a platform.

‘Games allow us to create these little systems where learning is controlled really brilliantly,’ says Margaret Robertson, director at a London-based game design company. ‘Something we don’t talk about is that, actually, one of the strengths of games is the vague sense of disapproval that still surrounds them – they feel like something that’s forbidden!’ And that can, of course, be very exciting.

C

Another important element in the popularity of games is the player’s ability to determine what happens. Games tap into our need to have direction; this is very obvious in games where we shape the lives of virtual humans, but it’s becoming a vital element of action adventures too.

‘Games are increasingly complex systems,’ says Dan Pinchbeck, an experimental game designer. ‘There’s an emphasis on the pleasure of choosing and planning. We’ve moved quite dramatically away from the very first video games. These games mostly involved the player merely reacting to events. But games, then, became more about approaching a situation and making a plan depending on your preferred play style.’

D

Many studios design their games around reward systems. ‘A good game will have progression at the end of each level, but it will also provide surprise rewards halfway through,’ says Ben Weedon, a games studio consultant. ‘In a game, you’re essentially pressing the same buttons and doing the same things over and over again, so you need those occasional surprises to stay motivated.’

E

Games have constantly evolved over the years and continue to do so right up to the present. Now, incorporating a narrative structure into a game is becoming increasingly important. Many games have adopted Hollywood’s three-act structure, which is designed to maintain our loyalty to a particular game. As in many films, a short final act is often used to give a sense of acceleration towards a preferably startling climax. Opening levels of games are also short, because this flatters us into thinking we’re making good progress, whereas the middle levels are more extensive.

F

Games even tap into our friendships. The rise of multiplayer gaming means that gaming increasingly involves social interaction. And other businesses are taking notice and using this as an element in advertising their brands. Then there’s the new concept of ‘gamification’, in which websites and smartphone apps are being designed like games, with high scores and achievement points to keep customers entertained. Research estimates that businesses spent more than $100 million worldwide on gamification projects last year, a figure predicted to rise to $1.6 billion in the next four years.

So, in fact, games aren’t just an insignificant fad, as some people might suggest. They fulfill intrinsic human needs, whether we are conscious of it or not. The loop of learning control and rewards is at the heart of something very important, and very attractive.

Questions 14–19

Reading Passage 2 has six sections, A-F.

Choose the correct heading for each section from the list of headings below.

Write the correct number, i-vii, in boxes 14-19 on your answer sheet.

List of Headings

i   Being able to experiment without consequences

ii   Why stories are included in games

iii   The key role of the unexpected for game players

iv   Transferring features of games to other types of products

v   The age group that games most appeal to

vi   The development of video game design industry

vii   Players’ ability to control what occurs in games

14   Section A

15   Section B

16   Section C

17   Section D

18   Section E

19   Section F

Questions 20–23

Look at the following statements (Questions 20-23) and the list of experts below.

Match each statement with the correct expert, A-E.

Write the correct letter, A-E, in boxes 20-23 on your answer sheet.

NB   You may use any letter more than once.

20   Players’ involvement in games often includes thinking ahead.

21   The inclusion of unanticipated elements keeps players interested.

22   It’s now accepted that creating video games is a skill that can be learned.

23   Early games were much simpler than more recent ones

List of experts

A   Jesper Juul

B   Raph Koster

C   Margaret Robertson

D   Dan Pinchbeck

E   Ben Weedon

Questions 24-26

Complete the sentences below.

Choose ONE WORD ONLY from the passage for each answer.

Write your answers in boxes 24-26 on your answer sheet.

24   Koster believes that games remove people’s fear of ……….

25   Robertson’s view is that games feel exciting partly because of the ………. that is associated with them.

26   Narrative games are often structured so that the first and last parts are both ……….

READING PASSAGE 3

You should spend about 20 minutes on Questions 27–40, which are based on Reading Passage 3 below.

Blind to Change

How much of the world around you do you really see?

Picture the following and prepare to be amazed. You’re walking across a college campus when a stranger asks you for directions. While you’re talking to him, two men pass between you carrying a wooden door. You feel a moment’s irritation, but you carry on describing the route. When you’ve finished, you’re told you’ve just taken part in a psychology experiment. ‘Did you notice anything after the two men passed with the door?’ the stranger asks. ‘No,’ you reply uneasily. He explains that the man who initially approached you walked off behind the door, leaving him in his place. The first man now rejoins you. Comparing them, you notice that they are of different height and build and are dressed very differently.

Daniel Simons of Harvard University found that 50% of participants missed the substitution because of what is called ‘change blindness’. When considered with a large number of recent experimental results, this phenomenon suggests we ‘see’ far less than we think we do. Rather than logging every detail of the visual scene, says Simons, we are actually highly selective. Our impression of seeing everything is just that. In fact, we extract a few details and rely on memory, or even our imagination, for the rest.

Until recently, scientists believed that vision involved creating images within the brain. By forming detailed internal representations of our surroundings and comparing them over time, we could detect any alterations. However, in his book Consciousness Explained, philosopher Daniel Dennett argued that our brains only store a few key details about the world, which is why we can function effectively.

According to Dennett, creating elaborate images in short-term memory would consume valuable cognitive resources. Instead, we record what has changed and assume everything else remains unchanged. As a result, we inevitably overlook some details. Experiments had demonstrated that we tend to ignore elements in our visual field that seem unimportant, such as a repeated word or line in a text. But even Dennett didn’t fully realize just how little we actually ‘see.’

A year later, John Grimes from the University of Illinois drew attention by showing that people who were presented with computer-generated images of natural scenes failed to notice changes made while their eyes were, for example, scanning the scene or blinking. Dennett was pleased: “In hindsight, I wish I had been bolder, as the effects are more pronounced than I originally claimed.”

Subsequently, it was discovered that our eyes don’t even need to be moving to be deceived. A typical laboratory experiment might display an image on a computer screen, like a couple dining on a terrace. The image would briefly disappear, replaced by a blank screen, then reappear with a significant change, such as a raised railing behind the couple. Many people search the screen for up to a minute before spotting the alteration, and some never see it.

This is disconcerting. However, ‘change blindness’ is somewhat artificial because, in real-life scenarios, a visible motion usually signals a change. Yet, not always. As Simons points out, “We all know the experience of missing a traffic signal change because we briefly looked away. ‘Inattentional blindness’ refers to not noticing a feature of a scene when you aren’t paying attention to it.”

Last year, Simons showed people a video of a basketball game and asked them to count the passes made by one of the teams. After 45 seconds, a man in a gorilla suit slowly walked behind the players. Forty percent didn’t notice him. When the tape was replayed, and they were simply told to watch it, they easily saw the gorilla. Some even doubted it was the same video.

Now, consider if the viewers had been driving a car, and the man in the gorilla suit had been a pedestrian. Some estimates suggest that nearly half of all fatal motor vehicle accidents in the US result from driver error, including attention lapses. It’s more than just academic interest that has spurred research into these cognitive errors.

These errors prompt critical questions: How can we reconcile such significant lapses with our subjective experience of continuously perceiving a rich visual environment? Last year, Stephen Kosslyn from Harvard University demonstrated that imagining a scene activates parts of the visual cortex similarly to actually seeing it. He argues that this supports the idea that we only absorb the information we consider important and mentally fill in the gaps where details are less crucial. “The illusion that we see ‘everything’ is partly due to filling in gaps with memory,” he says. “These memories can be shaped by beliefs and expectations.”

Ronald Rensink from the University of British Columbia in Canada believes our perception of a detailed visual world comes from constructing internal representations. He suggests that the brain first creates a temporary layout of the visual scene, and then our attention enhances the resolution of the scene. “What attention does,” he explains, “is stabilize these representations so they form distinct objects. Once attention shifts, they revert to an unstable, unresolved state.”

While Rensink or Kosslyn propose that internal images or memory play some role, others argue that we can perceive visual richness without storing any of that richness in our brains. Kevin O’Regan, an experimental psychologist, contends that our brains do not store a visual image of the world. Instead, we rely on the external visual environment as different parts of a scene become relevant.

According to O’Regan, our sense of controlling what we see is also an illusion. “We believe that when something flickers outside the window, we choose to look,” says Susan Blackmore from the University of the West of England, who supports O’Regan’s view. “In reality,” she explains, “our change detection mechanisms automatically drag our attention to various stimuli.”

Questions 27–30

Look at the following people (Questions 27-30) and the list of claims below.

Match each person with the correct claim, A-G.

Write the correct letter, A-G, in boxes 27-30 on your answer sheet.

27   Daniel Dennett

28   John Grimes

29   Stephen Kosslyn

30   Kevin O’Regan

List of Claims

A   People overlook changes that happen during eye movements.

B   At times, we fail to notice something because we choose to deceive ourselves.

C   Retaining every image and memory would hinder our ability to function effectively.

D   Sometimes, people overlook the significance of a crucial figure in a scene.

E   We misunderstand what we see because we rely on our imagination.

F   We don’t have complete control over what captures our attention.

G   Imagining a scene and physically being there impact our visual processes in similar ways.

Questions 31-35

Do the following statements agree with the information given in Reading Passage 3?

In boxes 31-35 on your answer sheet, write

TRUE               if the statement agrees with the information

FALSE             if the statement contradicts the information

NOT GIVEN   if there is no information on this

31   One expert expressed regret for having underemphasized his argument in a publication.

32   We overlook insignificant items that come into our view.

33   Research into cognitive errors might potentially save lives.

34   The aging process increases the need to fill in gaps in our visual perception.

35   Our eyes are only at risk of being deceived when they are in motion.

Questions 36–40

Complete each sentence with the correct ending, A-G, below.

Write the correct letter, A-G, in boxes 36-40 on your answer sheet.

36   Concentrating on a particular aspect of an activity or scene

37   The fact that we make visual errors

38   The part of the picture that we fail to see clearly

39   The idea that we see everything in our visual field

40   Research into the nature of human vision

Lists of Endings

A   is not backed by scientific evidence.

B   is provided by memory.

C   has been especially fruitful in recent times.

D   causes us to overlook other details.

E   has sparked significant public debate.

F   is challenging for us to accept.

G   helps us see the overall picture more clearly

Answer Reading Test 106