Daniel Anderson, a famous psychologist, 阅读答案解析 ★★★
Daniel Anderson, a famous psychologist, 阅读答案解析
作者:佚名 文章来源:网络 点击数:1223 更新时间:2015-6-10 17:16:08
Daniel Anderson, a famous psychologist, believes it’s important to distinguish television’s influences on children from those of the family. We tend to blame TV, he says, for problems it doesn’t really cause, overlooking our own roles in shaping children’s minds.
One traditional belief about television is that it reduces a child’s ability to think and to understand the world. While watching TV, children do not merely absorb words and images (影像). Instead, they learn both explicit and hidden meanings from what they see. Actually, children learn early the psychology of characters in TV shows. Furthermore, as many teachers agree, children understand far more when parents watch TV with them, explaining new words and ideas. Yet, most parents use an educational program as a chance to park their kids in front of the set and do something in another room.
Another argument against television is that it replaces reading as a form of entertainment. But according to Anderson, the amount of time spent watching television is not related to reading ability. TV doesn’t take the place of reading for most children; it takes the place of similar sorts of recreation, such as listening to the radio and playing sports. Things like parents’ educational background have a stronger influence on a child’s reading. “A child’s reading ability is best predicted by how much a parent reads.” Anderson says.
Traditional wisdom also has it that heavy television-watching lowers IQ (智商) scores and affects school performance. But here, too, Anderson notes that no studies have proved it. In fact, research suggests that it’s the other way around. “If you’re smart young, you’ll watch less TV when you’re older,” Anderson says. Yet, people of lower IQ tend to be lifelong television viewers.
For years researchers have attempted to show that television is dangerous to children. However, by showing that television promotes none of the dangerous effects as conventionally believed, Anderson suggests that television cannot be condemned without considering other influences.
丹尼尔 · 安德森,著名心理学家、 阅读答案解析 ★ ★ ★丹尼尔 · 安德森,著名心理学家、 阅读答案解析作者:佚名文章来源:网络点击数:1223 更新时间:2015-6-10 17:16:08丹尼尔 · 安德森,一个著名的心理学家,认为它是重要的是区分那些家庭对儿童的电视的影响。我们往往怪电视,他说,它不会真的引起,俯瞰我们自己在塑造孩子们的心灵的角色的问题。关于电视的一个传统信念是,它减少了孩子的能力去思考,去了解世界。看电视时,孩子们不只是吸收文字和图像 (影像)。相反,他们学会从他们所看到的显式和隐含义。实际上,儿童学习早在电视节目中人物的心理。此外,许多教师也同意,孩子们理解得多当父母看电视与他们,解释新的话语和想法。然而,大多数父母使用教育程序作为一个机会公园出孩子和做一些事情在另一个房间。Another argument against television is that it replaces reading as a form of entertainment. But according to Anderson, the amount of time spent watching television is not related to reading ability. TV doesn’t take the place of reading for most children; it takes the place of similar sorts of recreation, such as listening to the radio and playing sports. Things like parents’ educational background have a stronger influence on a child’s reading. “A child’s reading ability is best predicted by how much a parent reads.” Anderson says.Traditional wisdom also has it that heavy television-watching lowers IQ (智商) scores and affects school performance. But here, too, Anderson notes that no studies have proved it. In fact, research suggests that it’s the other way around. “If you’re smart young, you’ll watch less TV when you’re older,” Anderson says. Yet, people of lower IQ tend to be lifelong television viewers.For years researchers have attempted to show that television is dangerous to children. However, by showing that television promotes none of the dangerous effects as conventionally believed, Anderson suggests that television cannot be condemned without considering other influences.
正在翻譯中..