redli

ZHY79：
1）两个STUDY研究的地区不同
2）第一个SUTDY是只“犯罪率提高的比例”，而第二STUDY是“犯罪率”
3）第一个：73-75，电视新安装（一种变化），犯罪率提高（另一种变化），另same community就是指其他方面没有区别，所以两个变化有关系
4）第二个：73-75，犯罪率未变，比如90%，其中受电视影响的占60%，几年来一直未变，也就是说电视对犯罪始终保持高影响率。

zyh79

1.第一个指the aggression rate had increased by 160%
  第二个指no change in the aggression rate
  这应该都在说the aggression rate。
2。第二个：73-75，犯罪率未变，比如90%，其中受电视影响的占60%
   这个60%怎么来的，
   几年来一直未变，是指犯罪率没变还是指电视对犯罪影响率没变
咳，这题我还没转过来

ballet

解释不对吧，这道题的题眼在“CHILDREN”上，第一个调查是看到孩子的暴力倾向加大，第二个调查是那些老社区暴力倾向没有变化。

ballet

zyh理解没错，其实是调查的对象不一样，导致调查结果相互之间没有矛盾（是不是支持就说不上了）。

cook

NO, I don't great with ballet, sorry.

Redi is right . Summarize the two study which, actually both was made of children's behavior:

1. Conclusion: "TV plays an important role in generating aggressive behavior in children"
Premise: study showed that the aggression rate among children of this age had increased by 160%Children"

Pay attention to children: because a study is conducted shortly before broadcasts began there===> TV is very new to Children here.

2. Conclusion: is exact the question.
Premise: This study showed no change in the aggression rate from 1973 to 1975.
Pay attention to : Children is in the two communities that had had television for decades and same time we are told that "A similar study" , "covering same year 1973-1975".


So, Children new to TV----> changed 160% after two years 1973-1975.
    CHildren used to TV ----> unchanged after two years 1973-1975 ====> Actually this study is a contrast to above one.

Conclusion: "TV plays an important role in generating aggressive behavior in children"

We should very close to the difference between two contrasts.

tongxun

我支持cook的分析。

zyh79

根据对上述观点的理解，第二项研究的作用我觉得就是排除它因

bessette

但我还有一个疑问,为什么第二项研究要选two similar communities,因为按照zyh79的"排除他因"理论,那么 a similar study, covering the same years, was made in ONE similar community that had had television for decades.....,就足以排除他因啦!

请指正!

to tongxun,
考试是我为什么还选E,因为看过一遍题目,我印象最深的就是 no change in similar study
about ...similar communities..., 所以第一判断就是the second study weaken(disprove) the conclusion of the first study. 惭愧!!!!!

zyh79

bessette，
你的这个问题我也提出过，很令人费解，我总觉得题目对于第二个study的描述很怪。
后来我用这样的理由试图说服自己
“用两个相似地域作比较比用一个相似地域作比较更客观些”
但未说服成功。

bessette

to zyh79,

我估计你会用这个理由来解释的：）

现在我发觉在做CR的题时，如果你太在意细节就会被细节困惑住，但如果不注意细节又会忽略掉关键解题信息，这题我看第一遍选E，第二遍选D，看第三遍时已经分不清主次了。

in the end, 其实对两个相识地域的比较我觉得不是接这道题的关键,如果硬要给出个所以然,我同意你的观点.