[responsivevoice_button voice="UK English Female" buttontext="Listen to Post"]

年中無休の家庭教師 毎日学習会

慶應義塾大学SFC 総合政策学部 英語 1996年 大問一 内容一致問題

1:1 on a daily basis everyone comes into contact with persuasive forces.
1:2 Whether it is with friends, family members, or co-workers, elements of persuasion can be found in almost any social interaction.
1:3 Although most people would argue that they are responsible for their attitudes and beliefs, social scientific theory and research has (1)(1. yielded 2. assumed 3. declared) a large body of evidence that does not support this notion.
1:3 ほとんどの人は、自分の態度や信念については自分に責任があると主張するだろうが、社会科学の理論と研究によって、この考えを支持しない多くの証拠が挙げられている。
1:4 Within the United States and other developed nations, the media present powerful persuasive forces in the form of consumer advertising, political campaigning, and the dissemination of general news and information that, by and large, play a crucial role in the development of opinions, beliefs, and attitudes of individuals and groups.
1:4 アメリカ合衆国や他の先進諸国では、メディアが消費者への広告、政治運動、一般的なニュースや情報の普及という形で、強い説得力を示しており、それが個人および集団の意見、信念、態度の形成において、概して重要な役割を果たしている。

[1] Social scientific theory and research does not support the idea that people are responsible for their attitudes and beliefs because
1. they have no control over the news and information disseminated by the media.
2. friends, family, and coworkers exert the most important influence on our beliefs and attitudes.
3. they are under the strong influence of persuasive forces, including the media.

解答 [1]3

3:3 Specifically, when receiver factors are taken into account one message may be a clear example of persuasive communication to a specific audience or individual, while presented to another it may simply (2)(1. devalue 2. impair 3. validate) existing beliefs and opinions and thus fail to present a clear distinction of persuasion.

[2] We cannot arrive at a satisfactory definition of persuasive communication without considering receiver factors because
1. the same message may or may not be persuasive depending on the receivers beliefs and opinions.
2. the receiver sometimes fails to make a clear distinction between coercion and persuasion.
3. the persuader may fail to bring about some form of attitude change on the part of the receiver.

解答 [2]1

6:1 Credible communicators are looked upon as experts.
6:1 「信頼できる伝達者」は専門家と見なされる。
6:2 That is, they display a degree of competence in their field and are commonly viewed as knowledgeable and experienced.
6:2 つまり、彼らは自分の分野においてある程度の能力を示し、知識があり経験があると一般に見られているのである。
6:3 Furthermore, receiver judgments of competence are significantly influenced by the communicator’s level of training, occupation, and experience.
6:3 さらに受け手側が能力を判断する際には、伝達者の訓練、職業、経験の程度に影響されるのである。
6:4 This value judgment made on the part of the receiver is important in whether the message is accepted or rejected.
6:5 If the receiver believes the communicator has (6)( 1. disposed 2. displayed 3. dismissed) a high degree of competence, then it is much more likely that the message being conveyed will have an impact.
6:5 もし受け手が、伝達者がかなりの程度の能力を示していると信じるならば、伝えられているメッセージが影響を与える可能性ははるかに大きくなるだろう。
6:6 In addition to this, a communicator’s degree of trustworthiness is also (7) (1. assessed 2. assured 3. accorded) by the receiver.
6:6 これに加えて、伝達者の信頼度もまた、受け手によって測られうる。
6:7 If a communicator is viewed as being truthful then the message will seem much more reliable and acceptable.
6:7 もし伝達者が信頼できると見なされれば、そのメッセージははるかに信頼でき受け入れられうるものになる。
6:8 On the other hand, if a persuasive message is remembered but not its source, then the influence of a communicator of high credibility may have a diminishing effect over time.
6:9 However, low credibility communicators may receive a beneficial gain in this situation which would result in having a more persuasive response to their message after a period of time has passed.

6:10 This is a phenomenon known as the sleeper effect that occurs under circumstances in which the receiver remembers the message but not reasons that may (8)(1. discount 2. support 3. discourage)it.
6:10 これは、「仮眠効果」と呼ばれる現象で、受け手がメッセージは覚えているが、それを支持する理由を覚えていない状況で起こるものである。
6:11 For example, a receiver may remember factual information from a message but forget about the credibility of the communicator and other source factors which we normally rely upon to judge information.
6:12 (9)(1. Thus 2. On the contrary 3. In addition), practical issues that may influence the credibility of communicators include their rate of delivery and the degree of confidence in their tone.
6:12 その上、伝達者の信頼性に影響を与えるであろう現実的な問題には、話し方の速さと口調における自信の度合いが含まれる。
6:13 A communicator is viewed as more credible if his or her speech contains no hesitations and is delivered at a rapid pace.

[3] Communicators with low credibility may benefit from a situation in which the receiver
1. remembers factual information as well as source factors.
2. remembers the source while forgetting about the message.
3. remembers the message itself while forgetting about the source.

解答 [3]3

7:1 A related source factor which is closely linked to credibility involves the receivers’ liking of the communicator.
7:2 Although the effects of liking tend to be weaker than those of credibility factors, they still play a dominant role in persuasibility.
7:3 There are two general rules to this source factor; one of these rules is that when a receiver is highly involved in an issue, influences such as liking are greatly reduced.
7:3 この出所要素には2つの一般的なルールがある。これらのルールのひとつは受け手がある問題に深く関わっていると、好みなどの影響は非常に少なくなるということである。
7:4 In this case, receivers tend to actively process the message and pay less attention to peripheral cues such as liking.
7:4 このような場合、受け手はメッセージを積極的に処理する傾向があり、好みなどの周辺的な手がかりにはあまり注意を払わないのである。
7:5 On the other hand, if a receiver is not highly involved inthe issue then he or she is more likely to rely on (10)( 1. simplistic 2. controversial 3. obnoxious) cues such as liking to develop opinions about the message.

7:6 In some cases disliked communicators are more effective than liked communicators.
7:7 This has been shown to occur when other characteristics of the communicator, such as credibility factors, produce a compensation effect.
7:7 これが起こるのは、信頼性の要素など伝達者の他の特徴が補償効果を引き起こす時である。

7:8 Furthermore, disliked communicators are more persuasive in cases where the receiver has paid more attention to the message content than to the communicator’s personal characteristics.
7:8 さらに、嫌いな伝達者は、受け手が伝達者の個人的特徴よりもメッセージの内容に多くの注意を払ったような場合にも、より説得力が増す。

[4] In the process of forming opinions about the message, receivers tend to rely on their liking of the communicator when they
1. play a dominant role in persuasibility.
2. are not highly involved in the issue.
3. are highly educated and motivated.

解答 [4]2

[5]According to the article, disliked communicators may be more effective than liked communicators when the credibility of the communicators
1. is sufficient to override the receivers dislike.
2. has been established by objective authority.
3. is overridden by the receivers dislike.


10:1 Moreover, emotional appeals have been found to be quite effective, especially when they are incorporated with factual information.
10:1 さらに、感情的な訴えが非常に効果的であるとわかっているのは、特に事実に基づく情報と合わさった時にである。

10:2 For example, the American Lung Association’s antismoking campaign and the driver education programs in high schools that show horrible traffic accidents both share a common element of fear with the (13)(1. intention 2. pretension3. contention) to persuade.
10:2例えば、American Lung Associationの禁煙運動と、高校における運転教育プログラムで恐ろしい交通事故を見せることは、説得の意図に加えて、恐怖という共通の要素を共有しているのである。
10:3 Research suggests that fearful and emotional appeals that are successful in producing greater fear will, in fact, strengthen the message’s effectiveness.
10:4 The degree of fear appeals in a message and the amount of fear (14)(1. established 2. erased 3. evoked) in an audience are prime determinants of successful persuasion.
10:4 あるメッセージにおける恐怖に満ちた訴えの程度と、聴衆の中に引き起こされる恐怖の量によって、説得が成功したかどうかが一番に決まるのである。
10:5 However, if a message contains an extremely high degree of fear it may persuade an audience but it might also (15)(1. attract 2. detract from 3. diversify) the message content, producing an opposite effect.
10:5 しかしながら、メッセージが極端に強度な恐怖を含む場合は、その恐怖は聴衆を説得するかもしれないが、同時にメッセージの内容を損ない、逆効果を生み出すかもしれない。
11:1 It has been found that the amount of fear experienced in any given audience is variable and complex.
11:2 Even in carefully controlled experimental designs the (16)(1. infringement 2. deduction 3. inducement) of fear is variable across individuals.
11:3 In general, research shows that fearful persuasive appeals may or may not be effective.

12:1 When presenting an argument one must consider whether opposing arguments should or should not be addressed.
12:2 As a general rule, presenting two-sided arguments is more effective because the audience tends to believe that the communicator is offering objective and unbiased information.

12:3 Moreover, well-informed and well-educated audiences are more (17)(1. receptive 2. subordinate 3. liable) to two-sided appeals as opposed to one-sided arguments.
12:3 さらに、知識と教養のある聴衆は、一面だけの議論に対して両面からの訴えを受け入れやすいのである。
12:4 Although there are instances in which recognizing opposing arguments may obscure the communicator’s message and fail to sway people’s opinions, the vantage point is still more robust with a two-sided appeal.
12:5 However, in instances where the audience is in full agreement with the message of the communicator a one-sided appeal is more effective.
12:5 しかし、聴衆が伝達者のメッセージにまったく同意している場合には、一面だけの訴えの方が効果的である。

12:6 Speculation (18)(1. makes 2. has 3. leaves) it that factors which influence people’s persuasibility to one­ as opposed to two-sided arguments are dependent upon their educational level and their acquaintance with the issue.
13:1 Persuasive communicators commonly have an idea of how much they wish to modify a given audiences attitudes and opinions.
13:2 Some communicators may defend a position strongly discrepant to that held by the audience, while others may possibly advocate a position which is only somewhat discrepant from the audiences initial opinion.
13:3 Overall, research shows that with both excessive and (19)(1. conservative 2. liberal 3. radical) usage of discrepancy a communicators effectiveness is diminished.
13:4 The instance where discrepancy (20)(1. sustains 2. affords 3. works) best is when the message of the communicator is only slightly different from the opinions held by the audience.
13:4 (意見の)相違が最も効果的に機能する例は、伝達者のメッセージが聴衆のもつ意見とほんの少しだけ異なる時である。

13:5 As one would guess, moderate levels of discrepancy work best when the message is delivered by a credible communicator.
13:6 In some cases, messages with extreme levels of discrepancy seem to have positive results when given by a credible communicator.
13:7 Additionally, when a receiver maintains a high degree of involvement with a message the communicators range of discrepancy is greatly reduced.
13:7 その上、受け入れ側がメッセージとかなりの程度の関わりを維持している時には、伝達者のもつ相違の許容範囲は大いに狭まるのである。
13:8 As may already be apparent, a receiver who has a personal acquaintance with an issue may become more intolerant of strongly discrepant points of view.
13:8 すでに明らかなように、問題を個人的に知っている受け手は大きく違った意見にはより不寛容となるであろう。

[6] Messages containing fearful or emotional appeals tend to be more persuasive when they
1. contain factual information.
2. are addressed to well-educated people.
3. are addressed to highly motivated audiences.

解答 [6]1

[7] A message containing fearful persuasive appeals
1. never fails to be effective.
2. may or may not be effective.
3. does not usually produce any effect.

解答 [7]2

[8] According to the article, presenting two-sided arguments
1. often confuses even those people who are highly educated and highly involved in the issue.
2. is always more persuasive than presenting one-sided arguments.
3. is not always more persuasive than presenting one-sided arguments.

解答 [8]3

[9] As used by the authors of this article, the word “discrepancy” refers to
1. the difference between the communicators argument and the receivers belief.
2. the difference between elements of fear and emotion and elements of reason in the argument.
3. the difference in educational levels.

解答 [9]1

[10] Receivers become less tolerant of discrepancy when
1. they are personally involved with the issue in question.
2. the message is delivered by a credible communicator.
3. they try to change the opinion of the communicator.

解答 [10]1

copyright 2016/Everyday school