WEEK 10. PSYCHOLOGY PASSAGE 1
You should spend about 20 minutes on Questions 27-40 which are based on Reading Passage 3 below.
THE PSYCHOLOGY OF INNOVATION
Why are so few companies truly innovative?
Innovation is key to business survival, and companies put substantial resources into inspiring employees to
develop new ideas. There are, nevertheless, people working in luxurious, state-of-the-art centres designed to
stimulate innovation who find that their environment doesn’t make them feel at all creative. And there are
those who don’t have a budget, or much space, but who innovate successfully.
For Robert B. Cialdini, Professor of Psychology at Arizona State University, one reason that companies don’t
succeed as often as they should is that innovation starts with recruitment. Research shows that the fit between
an employee’s values and a company’s values makes a difference to what contribution they make and whether,
two years after they join, they’re still at the company. Studies at Harvard Business School show that, although
some individuals may be more creative than others, almost every individual can be creative in the right circumstances.
One of the most famous photographs in the story of rock’n’roll emphasises Ciaidini’s views. The 1956 picture
of singers Elvis Presley, Carl Perkins, Johnny Cash and Jerry Lee Lewis jamming at a piano in Sun Studios in
Memphis tells a hidden story. Sun’s ‘million-dollar quartet’ could have been a quintet. Missing from the picture
is Roy Orbison’ a greater natural singer than Lewis, Perkins or Cash. Sam Phillips, who owned Sun, wanted to
revolutionise popular music with songs that fused black and white music, and country and blues. Presley, Cash,
Perkins and Lewis instinctively understood Phillips’s ambition and believed in it. Orbison wasn’t inspired by the
goal, and only ever achieved one hit with the Sun label.
The value fit matters, says Cialdini, because innovation is, in part, a process of change, and under that pressure
we, as a species, behave differently, ‘When things change, we are hard-wired to play it safe.’ Managers should
therefore adopt an approach that appears counterintuitive -they should explain what stands to be lost if the
company fails to seize a particular opportunity. Studies show that we invariably take more gambles when
threatened with a loss than when offered a reward.
Managing innovation is a delicate art. It’s easy for a company to be pulled in conflicting directions as the
marketing, product development, and finance departments each get different feedback from different sets of
people. And without a system which ensures collaborative exchanges within the company, it’s also easy for
small ‘pockets of innovation’ to disappear. Innovation is a contact sport. You can’t brief people just by saying,
‘We’re going in this direction and I’m going to take you with me.’
Cialdini believes that this ‘follow-the-leader syndrome, is dangerous, not least because it encourages bosses to
go it alone. ‘It’s been scientifically proven that three people will be better than one at solving problems, even if
that one person is the smartest person in the field.’ To prove his point, Cialdini cites an interview with
molecular biologist James Watson. Watson, together with Francis Crick, discovered the structure of DNA, the
genetic information carrier of all living organisms. ‘When asked how they had cracked the code ahead of an
array of highly accomplished rival investigators, he said something that stunned me. He said he and Crick had
succeeded because they were aware that they weren’t the most intelligent of the scientists pursuing the
answer. The smartest scientist was called Rosalind Franklin who, Watson said, “was so intelligent she rarely sought advice”.’
Teamwork taps into one of the basic drivers of human behaviour. ‘The principle of social proof is so pervasive
that we don’t even recognise it,’ says Cialdini. ‘If your project is being resisted, for example, by a group of 1
veteran employees, ask another old-timer to speak up for it.’ Cialdini is not alone in advocating this strategy.
Research shows that peer power, used horizontally not vertically, is much more powerful than any boss’s speech.
Writing, visualising and prototyping can stimulate the flow of new ideas. Cialdini cites scores of research
papers and historical events that prove that even something as simple as writing deepens every individual’s
engagement in the project. It is, he says, the reason why all those competitions on breakfast cereal packets
encouraged us to write in saying, in no more than 10 words: ‘I like Kellogg’s Com Flakes because… .’ The very
act of writing makes us more likely to believe it.
Authority doesn’t have to inhibit innovation but it often does. The wrong kind of leadership will lead to what
Cialdini calls ‘captainitis, the regrettable tendency of team members to opt out of team responsibilities that are
properly theirs’. He calls it captainitis because, he says, ‘crew members of multipilot aircraft exhibit a
sometimes deadly passivity when the flight captain makes a clearly wrong-headed decision’. This behaviour is
not, he says, unique to air travel, but can happen in any workplace where the leader is overbearing.
At the other end of the scale is the 1980s Memphis design collective, a group of young designers for whom
‘the only rule was that there were no rule’. This environment encouraged a free interchange of ideas, which led
to more creativity with form, function, colour and materials that revolutionised attitudes to furniture design.
Many theorists believe the ideal boss should lead from behind, taking pride in collective accomplishment and
giving credit where it is due. Cialdini says: ‘Leaders should encourage everyone to contribute and
simultaneously assure all concerned that every recommendation is important to making the right decision and
will be given full attention.’ The frustrating thing about innovation is that there are many approaches, but no
magic formula. However, a manager who wants to create a truly innovative culture can make their job a lot
easier by recognising these psychological realities. Questions 27-30
Choose the correct letter, A, B, C or D.
Write the correct letter in boxes 27-30 on your answer sheet.
27 The example of the ‘million-dollar quartet’ underlines the writer’s point about A recognising talent. B working as a team.
C having a shared objective.
D being an effective leader.
28 James Watson suggests that he and Francis Crick won the race to discover the DNA code because they
A were conscious of their own limitations.
B brought complementary skills to their partnership.
C were determined to outperform their brighter rivals.
D encouraged each other to realise their joint ambition.
29 The writer mentions competitions on breakfast cereal packets as an example of how to
A inspire creative thinking.
B generate concise writing.
C promote loyalty to a group.
D strengthen commitment to an idea.
30 In the last paragraph, the writer suggests that it is important for employees to
A be aware of their company’s goals.
B feel that their contributions are valued.
C have respect for their co-workers achiev ‟ ements.
D understand why certain management decisions are made. 2 Questions 31-35
Complete each sentence with the correct ending, A-G, below.
Write the correct letter, A-G, in boxes 31-35 on your answer sheet
31 Employees whose values match those of their employers are more likely to
32 At times of change, people tend to
33 If people are aware of what they might lose, they will often
34 People working under a dominant boss are liable to
35 Employees working in organisations with few rules are more likely to A take chances. B share their ideas. C become competitive. D get promotion. E avoid risk. F ignore their duties. G remain in their jobs. Questions 36-40
Do the following statements agree with the claims of the writer in Reading Passage 3?
In boxes 36-40 on your answer sheet, write
YES if the statement agrees with the claims of the writer
NO if the statement contradicts the claims of the writer
NOT GIVEN if it is impossible to say what the writer thinks about this.
36 The physical surroundings in which a person works play a key role in determining their creativity.
37 Most people have the potential to be creative.
38 Teams work best when their members are of equally matched intelligence.
39 It is easier for smaller companies to be innovative.
40 A manager’s approval of an idea is more persuasive than that of a colleague. PASSAGE 2 MIND READERS
It may one day be possible to eavesdrop on another person’s inner voice.
As you begin to read this article and your eyes follow the words across the page, you may be aware of a voice
in your head silently muttering along. The very same thing happens when we write: a private, internal
narrative shapes the words before we commit them to text.
What if it were possible to tap into this inner voice? Thinking of words does, after all, create characteristic
electrical signals in our brains, and decoding them could make it possible to piece together someone’s
thoughts. Such an ability would have phenomenal prospects, not least for people unable to communicate as a
result of brain damage. But it would also carry profoundly worrisome implications for the future of privacy. not least: đ c bi ặ t, n ệ hấất là
The first scribbled records of electrical activity in the human brain were made in 1924 by a German doctor
called Hans Berger using his new invention - the electroencephalogram (EEG). This uses electrodes placed on
the skull to read the output of the brain's billions of nerve cells or neurons. By the mid-1990s, the ability to
translate the brain's activity into readable signals had advanced so far that people could move computer
cursors using only the electrical fields created by their thoughts. 3
The electrical impulses such innovations tap into are produced in a part of the brain called the motor cortex,
which is responsible for muscle movement. To move a cursor on a screen, you do not think 'move left’ in
natural language. Instead, you imagine a specific motion like hitting a ball with a tennis racket. Training the
machine to realise which electrical signals correspond to your imagined movements, however, is time
consuming and difficult. And while this method works well for directing objects on a screen, its drawbacks
become apparent when you try using it to communicate. At best, you can use the cursor to select letters
displayed on an on-screen keyboard. Even a practised mind would be lucky to write 15 words per minute with
that approach. Speaking, we can manage 150.
Matching the speed at which we can think and talk would lead to devices that could instantly translate the
electrical signals of someone’s inner voice into sound produced by a speech synthesiser. To do this, it is
necessary to focus only on the signals coming from the brain areas that govern speech. However, real mind
reading requires some way to intercept those signals before they hit the motor cortex.
The translation of thoughts to language in the brain is an incredibly complex and largely mysterious process,
but this much is known: before they end up in the motor cortex, thoughts destined to become spoken words
pass through two ‘staging areas’ associated with the perception and expression of speech.
The first is called Wernicke’s area, which deals with semantics - in this case, ideas based in meaning, which can
include images, smells or emotional memories. Damage to Wernicke’s area can result in the loss of semantic
associations: words can’t make sense when they are decoupled from their meaning. Suffer a stroke in that
region, for example, and you will have trouble understanding not just what others are telling you, but what you yourself are thinking.
The second is called Broca’s area, agreed to be the brain’s speech-processing centre. Here, semantics are
translated into phonetics and ultimately, word components. From here, the assembled sentences take a quick
trip to the motor cortex, which activates the muscles that will turn the desired words into speech.
Injure Broca’s area, and though you might know what you want to say, you just can’t send those impulses.
When you listen to your inner voice, two things are happening. You ‘hear’ yourself producing language in
Wernicke’s area as you construct it in Broca’s area. The key to mind reading seems to lie in these two areas.
The work of Bradley Greger in 2010 broke new ground by marking the first-ever excursion beyond the motor
cortex into the brain’s language centres. His team used electrodes placed inside the skull to detect the
electrical signatures of whole words, such as 'yes’, ’no’, ’hot’, ‘cold’, 'thirsty', ‘hungry’, etc. Promising as it is. This
approach requires a new signal to be learned for each new word. English contains a quarter of a million distinct
words. And though this was the first instance of monitoring Wernicke’s area, it still relied largely on the facial motor cortex.
Greger decided there might be another way. The building blocks of language are called phonemes, and the
English language has about 40 of them - the ‘kuh’ sound in ‘school’, for example, the ’Sh' in ‘shy’. Every English
word contains some subset of these components. Decode the brain signals that correspond to the phonemes,
and you would have a system to unlock any word at the moment someone thinks it.
In 2011, Eric Leuthardt and his colleague Gerwin Schalk positioned electrodes over the language regions of
four fully conscious people and were able to detect the phonemes ’oo’, ‘ah’, ‘eh’ and ‘ee’. What they also
discovered was that spoken phonemes activated both the language areas and the motor cortex, while
imagined speech - that inner voice - boosted the activity of neurons in Wernike’s area. Leuthardt had
effectively read his subjects' minds. ‘I would call it brain reading,’ he says. To arrive at whole words, Leuthardt’s
next step is to expand his library of sounds and to find out how the production of phonemes translates across different languages. 4
For now, the research is primarily aimed at improving the lives of people with locked-in syndrome, but the
ability to explore the brain’s language centres could revolutionise other fields. The consequences of these
findings could ripple out to more general audiences who might like to use extreme hands-free mobile
communication technologies that can be manipulated by inner voice alone. For linguists, it could provide
previously unobtainable insight into the neural origins and structures of language. Knowing what someone is
thinking without needing words at all would be functionally indistinguishable from telepathy. Questions 27-32
Do the following statements agree with the claims of the writer in the Reading Passage?
In boxes 27-32 on your answer sheet, write -
YES if the statement agrees with the claims of the writer
NO if the statement contradicts the claims of the writer
NOT GIVEN if it is impossible to say what the writer thinks about this
27. Our inner voice can sometimes distract us when we are reading or writing.
28. The possibility of reading minds has both positive and negative implications.
29. Little progress was made in understanding electrical activity in the brain between 1924 and the mid-1990s.
30. Machines can be readily trained to interpret electrical signals from the brain that correspond to movements on a keyboard.
31. Much has been written about the potential use of speech synthesisers with paralysed patients.
32. It has been proven that the perception and expression of speech occur in different parts of the brain. Questions 33-36
Complete each sentence with the correct ending, A-G.
33. In Wernicke’s area, our thoughts
34. It is only in Broca’s area that ideas we wish to express
35. The muscles that articulate our sentences
36. The words and sentences that we speak
A. receive impulses from the motor cortex.
B. pass directly to the motor cortex.
C. are processed into language. D. require a listener.
E. consist of decoded phonemes.
F. are largely non-verbal.
G. match the sounds that they make. Questions 37-40
Choose the correct letter, A, B, C or . D
Write your answers in boxes 37-40 on your answer sheet. 5
37. What does the underlined phrase 'broke new ground’ in line 44 mean?
A. built on the work of others
B. produced unusual or unexpected results
C. proved earlier theories on the subject to be false
D. achieved something that had not been done before
38. What was most significant about Leuthardt and Schalk's work?
A. They succeeded in grouping certain phonemes into words.
B. They linked the production of certain phonemes to recognisable brain activity.
C. Their methods worked for speakers of languages other than English.
D. Their subjects were awake during the course of their experiments.
39. What does the writer conclude about mind reading?
A. It could become a form of entertainment.
B. It may contribute to studies on language acquisition.
C. Most people are keenly awaiting the possibility of doing it.
D. Mobile technologies may become unreliable because of it.
40. What is the main purpose of the writer of this passage?
A. to give an account of the developments in mind-reading research
B. to show how scientists’ attitudes towards mind reading have changed
C. to explain why mind-reading research should be given more funding
D. to fully explore the arguments for and against mind reading 6