We’re fairly good at judging people based on first impressions, thin slices of experience ranging from a glimpse of a photo to a five-minute interaction, and deliberation can be not only extraneous but intrusive. In one study of the ability she dubbed “thin slicing”, the late psychologist Nalini Ambady asked participants to watch silent 10-second video clips of professors and to rate the instructor’s overall effectiveness. Their ratings correlated strongly with students’ end-of-semester ratings. Another set of participants had to count backward from 1,000 by nines as they watched the clips, occupying their conscious working memory. Their ratings were just as accurate, demonstrating the intuitive nature of the social processing.

Critically, another group was asked to spend a minute writing down reasons for their judgment, before giving the rating. Accuracy dropped dramatically. Ambady suspected that deliberation focused them on vivid but misleading cues, such as certain gestures or utterances, rather than letting the complex interplay of subtle signals form a holistic impression. She found similar interference when participants watched 15-second clips of pairs of people and judged whether they were strangers, friends, or dating partners.

Other research shows we’re better at detecting deception from thin slices when we rely on intuition instead of reflection. “It’s as if you’re driving a stick shift,” says Judith Hall, a psychologist at Northeastern University, “and if you start thinking about it too much, you can’t remember what you’re doing. But if you go on automatic pilot, you’re fine. Much of our social life is like that.”

Thinking too much can also harm our ability to form preferences. College students’ ratings of strawberry jams and college courses aligned better with experts’ opinions when the students weren’t asked to analyze their rationale. And people made car-buying decisions that were both objectively better and more personally satisfying when asked to focus on their feelings rather than on details, but only if the decision was complex—when they had a lot of information to process.

Intuition’s special powers are unleashed only in certain circumstances. In one study, participants completed a battery of eight tasks, including four that tapped reflective thinking (discerning rules, comprehending vocabulary) and four that tapped intuition and creativity (generating new products or figures of speech). Then they rated the degree to which they had used intuition (“gut feelings”, “hunches”, “my heart”). Use of their gut hurt their performance on the first four tasks, as expected, and helped them on the rest. Sometimes the heart is smarter than the head.

1.Nalini Ambady’s study deals with _________.

A the power of people’s memory

B the reliability of first impressions

C instructor student interaction

D people’s ability to influence others

解析：选B。B 细节理解题。根据Nalini Ambaby定位到第一、二段，首段首句提出我们很擅长用第一印象评判他人，第二句就提出相关研究。根据as accurate和Accuracy dropped dramatically等关键信息并综合上下文可知，安巴迪的研究应该是关于“第一印象的可靠性”的。故选B。

2.In Ambady’s study, rating accuracy dropped when participants _________.

A focused on specific details

B gave the rating in limited time

C watched shorter video clips

D discussed with one another

解析：选A。A 细节理解题。根据accuracy dropped和Ambaby定位到第二段，根据第三句可知深思熟虑使他们专注于生动但具有误导性的线索（细节），而不是专注于整体印象。A项“关注于具体的细节”是对原文的总结概括。故选A。

3.Judith Hall mentions driving to show that _________.

A reflection can be distracting

B memory can be selective

C social skills must be cultivated

D deception is difficult to detect

解析：选A。A 目的意图题。根据Judith Hall定位到第三段，首句提出当我们依靠直觉而不是反思时，更能从薄片式信息中检测出欺骗；接下来以开手动挡为例，说明当我们开始想太多时，就不记得自己在做什么了，意思就是反思可能会影响注意力。故选A。

4.When you are making complex decisions, it is advisable to _________.

A collect enough data

B list your preferences

C seek expert advice

D follow your feelings

解析：选D。D 细节理解题。根据complex decisions定位到第四段，根据最后一句可知当人们被要求关注感受而不是细节时，他们做出的决定更令人满意（前提是这个决策很复杂）。故选D。

5.What can we learn from the last paragraph?

A Generating new products takes time.

B Intuition may affect reflective tasks.

C Vocabulary comprehension needs creativity.

D Objective thinking may boost inventiveness.

解析：选B。B 推理判断题。根据the last paragraph定位到第五段，可知直觉的力量只有在特殊情况下才会起作用，研究表明直觉影响了他们在前四项任务（反思型任务）中的表现，但对后四项任务（直觉与创造力型任务）却有帮助，即直觉可能会影响反思型任务。故选B。