ページ3:

only better because students are generally so reluctant to switch that they only
make changes when they're fairly confident. But recent studies point to a
different explanation: it's not so much changing your answer that improves your
(3)
score as considering whether you should change it.
7 We don't just hesitate to rethink our answers.
(4)
We hesitate at the very
idea of rethinking. Take an experiment where hundreds of college students
were randomly assigned to learn about the first-instinct fallacy. The speaker
taught them about the value of changing their minds and gave them advice about
when it made sense to do so. On their next two tests, they still weren't any
more likely to revise their answers.
8 Part of the problem is cognitive laziness. Some psychologists point out that
we're mental misers* often prefer the ease of hanging on to old views over
the difficulty of grappling with" new ones. Yet there are also deeper forces
behind our resistance to rethinking. Questioning ourselves makes the world
more unpredictable. It requires us to admit that, the facts may have changed,
that what was once right may now be wrong ②Reconsidering something we
believe deeply can threaten our identities, making it feel as if we're losing a part
of ourselves.
9 Rethinking isn't a struggle in every part of our lives. When it comes to our
possessions, we update with fervor*. We refresh our wardrobes when they go
out of style and renovate* our kitchens when they're no longer in vogue. When
it comes to our knowledge and opinions, though, we tend to stick to our guns.
Psychologists call this seizing and freezing. We favor the comfort of conviction
over the discomfort of doubt, and we let our beliefs get brittle* long before our
bones. We laugh at people who still use Windows 95, yet we still cling to
opinions that we formed in 1995. We listen to views that make us feel good,
instead of ideas that make us think hard.
10 At some point, you've probably heard that if you drop a frog in a pot of
scalding* hot water, it will immediately leap out. But if you drop the frog in
2
☆.
14) reason
(4) reason

ページ4:

lukewarm* water and gradually raise the temperature, the frog will die. It lacks
the ability to rethink the situation, and doesn't realize the threat until it's too late.
|| I did some research on this popular story recently. […]. It isn't true.
12 Tossed into the scalding pot, the frog will get burned badly and may or may
not escape. The frog_is actually better off in the slow-boiling pot: it will leap out
as soon as the water starts to get uncomfortably warm.
Once we hear the story
13 It's not the frogs who fail to reevaluate. It's us.
and accept it as true, we rarely bother to question it.
一度
出典:Adam Grant, Think Again: The Power of Knowing What You Don't Know
(New York: Viking, 2021), pp. 2-4. 一部改変。
(注) turbulent 激動の
fallacy 誤った考え
inherently 内在的に
misers けちな人
grappling with 取り組む
fervor 情熱
renovate 改装する
brittle 壊れやすい
scalding やけどするほど熱い
lukewarm なまぬるい
問1 下線部(1)を和訳しなさい。
賢くなればなるほど解決できる問題はより複雑になる。
問2 下線部(2)の結果わかったことを日本語で説明しなさい。
大多数の解答修正が誤答から正答への修正であったこと。
問3 下線部(3)を和訳しなさい。
スコアが上がるのは、解答を変えるからではなく、変えるべきかどうか
考えるからである。
- 3

ページ5:

問4 下線部(4)の理由として筆者が挙げている2つのことを日本語で簡潔に説明
しなさい。 1.人間は新しい考えを取り入れることよりも、考えに固執することを好むため
2.何かを再考することでアイデンティティが脅かされるため。
問5 下線部(5)のように筆者が言える理由を日本語で具体的に説明しなさい。
筆者が、カエルを鍋に入れて水温を徐々に上げていくと、カエルは
水温が不快になるほど高温になった段階で逃け出したから。
問6 下線部(6)を和訳しなさい。
一度その話を聞いて正しいものと受け入れたら、
わざわざそれを疑うことはめったにない。

ページ6:

What Robots Can-and Can't-Do for the Old and Lonely, Katie Engelhart, The New Yorker (c) Condé Nast
II 次の文章を読んで、 問1~8に答えなさい。 *が付いている表現には本文の後
に注があります。 また, 本文中 […] とあるのは原文を中略していることを示して
います。
It felt good to love again, in that big empty house. Virginia Kellner got the
cat last November, around her ninety-second birthday, and now it's always
nearby. It keeps her company as she moves, bent over her walker, from the
couch to the bathroom and back again. The walker has a pair of orange scissors
hanging from the handlebar, for opening mail. Virginia likes the pet's green
eyes. She likes that it's there in the morning, when she wakes up. Sometimes,
on days when she feels sad, she sits in her soft armchair and rests the cat on her
soft stomach and just lets it do its thing. Nuzzle*. Stretch. Vibrate. Virginia
knows that the cat is programmed to move this way; there is a motor somewhere,
controlling things. Still, she can almost forget. “It makes you feel like it's real,"
Virginia told me, the first time we spoke. “I mean, mentally, I know it's not."
But oh, it meowed again!"
2 She named the cat Jennie, for one of the nice ladies who work at the local
Department of the Aging in Cattaraugus County, a rural area in upstate* New
York, bordering Pennsylvania. It was Jennie (the person) who told her that
(2 the county was giving robot pets to old people like her. Did she want one?
She could have a dog or a cat. A Meals on Wheels* driver brought Virginia the
pet, along with her daily lunch delivery. He was so eager to show it to her that
he opened the box himself, instead of letting Virginia do it. The Joy for All
Companion pet was orange with a white chest and tapered* whiskers*. Nobody
mentioned that it was part of a statewide loneliness intervention. […]
reason
(3)
In 2018, New York State's Office for the Aging launched
distributing Joy for All robots to sixty state residents and then tracking them over
a pilot project,
time. Researchers used a six-point loneliness scale, which asks respondents to
agree or disagree with statements like "I experience a general sense of
5
(2)
・パイロット版

ページ7:

ペット
ロボットを配られた人々
emptiness." They concluded that seventy per cent of participants felt less lonely
after one year. The pets were not as sophisticated as other social robots being
designed for the so-called silver market or loneliness economy, but they were
cheaper, at about a hundred dollars apiece.
4
In April, 2020, a few weeks after New York aging departments shut down
their adult day programs and communal dining sites, the state placed a bulk
order for more than a thousand robot cats and dogs. The pets went quickly, and
caseworkers* started asking for more: "Can I get five cats?" […] People liked
the pets so much that the batteries ran out. Caseworkers joked that their
clients had loved them to death. [...]
(4)
ロボットがぬまで壊れるまでが
5 By April, 2021, [...] New York had given out twenty-two hundred and sixty
animatronic pets* and was waiting for a delivery of around a thousand more.
Other states, along with independent nursing homes* and hospice agencies*, had
also started robot programs, some paid for by pandemic-relief funding*. Today,
aging departments in twenty-one states have distributed more than twenty
thousand Joy for All pets as part of formal initiatives to help lonely older people.
Florida has bought the most: around eight and a half thousand, as of this May.
"You know, it sounds like a cute story, but it's so much more than that," Richard
Prudom, the secretary for the Florida Department of Elder Affairs, told me.
"These are not just cuddly" toys. They're not toys!"
6 Then what are they? Joy for All robots were, in fact, inspired by toys. In
(5)
2015, Ted Fischer, then the head of an innovation team at Hasbro, noticed that
some of the company's animatronic pets, designed for four-to-eight-year-old girls,
were being bought for grandparents. Fischer recruited product testers in their
seventies and eighties and brought them to Hasbro's FunLab, where engineers
watched them play from behind one-way glass". Researchers learned that older
people wanted the animals to be as realistic as possible. It mattered that the
cat's whiskers were tapered just so.
7
In 2018, Fischer and his team bought the Joy for All brand from Hasbro and
切れるまで
6

ページ8:

started a new company, Ageless Innovation. Over time, he grew certain that his
robots could give older people's lives “meaning." In 2020, a study in the Journals
of Gerontology seemed to support this; it found that elderly users who interacted
with the pets for sixty days reported greater optimism and “sense of purpose,"
and were sometimes less lonely. (This study, like many others, did not compare
the robot intervention with other interventions. It did not consider how robots
measured up to humans.) [...]
The English mathematician Alan Turing famously judged, in 1950, that (ª
machine can be said to possess "intelligence" when it can fool a human into
believing that it is not a machine. Producers of the latest companion robots
don't seem to care much about achieving Turing test-level authenticity. For a
robot to win the affinity* of a human, it doesn't have to seem real; real enough
will do. Researchers have found that humans will naturally attribute agency to
machines and, in turn, qualities like "intention" and "caring." Designers can
encourage the process along. Studies have shown that, if a person is required to
perform a nurturing task for her robot, she will become more attached to it.
Physically embodied robots, as opposed to disembodied* voices (like Siri or
Alexa), can be better at building trust. And a bit of unpredictable behavior can
give the impression that, inside a machine, somebody is home. Some social
robots appear to sulk* when they are ignored. ElliQ* can dip her lamp head in
shame when she misunderstands a request.
9
"What we have observed is that, actually, in a few days, you create a kind of
dependency," Marc Alba, whose company recently bought the rights to a social
robot called Jibo, said. (Jibo also looks like a cute lamp, and can connect to
medical devices.) Alba thinks that loneliness makes it easier for older people to
feel close to a robot: "Just conversation -not very profound, whatever
this sense of warmth, proximity*." This even applies to robots that make no
creates
claim to social function. One study found that lonely people are more likely to
form attachments to their Roomba vacuum cleaners. When the vacuums break,
-
-7-

ページ9:

1 Shod () Twee lleno ne bi erit o odna bas-ne elad
some owners do not want a replacement Roomba; they want their Roomba
fixed.
(8)
出典:Katie Engelhart, “What Robots Can—and Can't Do for the Old and
Lonely," New Yorker (May 24, 2021) 抜枠のうえ,一部改変。
(注) nuzzle 鼻をすり寄せる
upstate 州北部の
ask brown
Meals on Wheels 高齢者への食事宅配サービス団体
tapered 先細になった
wont gay fed
whiskers ひげ
caseworkers 社会福祉士
animatronic pets ロボットのペット
de the adult guillot
nursing homes 老人ホーム
hospice agencies ホスピス施設
pandemic-relief funding 全世界的流行病救済資金
cuddly 抱きしめたくなるような
one-way glass マジックミラー
affinity 親近感
it in tengd
placed b
disembodied 体をもたない
bly of alsa indonguing anywhe
16.03 bla
sulk すねる
ElliQ 高齢者向けのランプ型対話ロボット
proximity 近さ
問1 下線部(1)を,指示語の指示対象と省略された内容を明示した英語に書き換
えなさい。 The cat is not real
問2 下線部(2)が行われていた趣旨を日本語で答えなさい。
地域の高齢者が孤独を感じているという問題に介入すること。
8
-

ページ10:

問3 下線部(3)の結果を日本語で説明しなさい。
ペットのロボットを配布された、参加者の70%が1年後には
孤独を感じなくなったということ。
問4 下線部(4)が具体的にどのような状況を表しているのかを日本語で説明しな
さい。高齢者がロボットが壊れるまでそれらを愛し続けたということ。
問5 下線部(5)のきっかけとなったことを日本語で説明しなさい。
Ted Fischerが、4~8歳の女児向けに作られたロボットのペットが
祖父母のために購入されていることに気づいたこと。
問6 下線部(6)が指す部分を本文から英語で抜き出しなさい。
that his robots could give older people's lives "meaning
問7 下線部(7)を和訳しなさい。
機械は、人間をだましてそれが機械でないと信じさせることが
できるとき、「知能」を持っていると言われる。
問8 下線部(8)のような反応をするのはどのような人たちで、なぜそのようなこ
とをするのかを日本語で説明しなさい。
孤独な人々が、掃除の機能を持つものとしてではなく、
ずっと壊れるまで使ってきたルンバに愛着を持っているため。
-9-
A
builds tous

ページ11:

III 次の 1~10 の上下の英文が同様の意味になるように,空欄に入る3~5語の
英語表現を書きなさい。ただし、太字で書かれた単語をそのままの形で含めるこ
と。
The manager probably wouldn't mind Matt leaving work early today.
objection
The manager probably wouldn't have any objection to Matt leaving work
early today.
1. No one took much notice of David's awful lies.
attention
No one
David's awful lies.
paid much attention to
2. I regret not trying harder at university.
wish
I
harder at university.
wish I had tried
3. You must do precisely what the police officer instructs you.
carry
You must
instructions precisely.
carry out the police officer's
4. Abebi is walking too quickly for me to keep pace with her.
名詞構文型にしておく
enough
Abebi
is not
for me to keep pace with her.
walking slowly enough.
5. I used to find living alone strange, but it is no longer strange for me.
used
I used to find living alone strange, but now I'm
→慣れた
used to it
- 10
-

ページ12:

6. I was almost asleep when the alarm rang.
about
I was
asleep when the alarm rang.
about to fall
7. "Do you know when the trial begins?" (Rudy asked him.
if
Rudy asked him
time the trial began.
if he know what
8. I won't organize the meeting unless you arrange the schedule.
long
I'll organize the meeting
arrange the schedule.
as long as you
9. When did Gina leave her job?
→どのくらい時間が経ったか
since
~814)
How long is it
her job?
since Gina left
10. Volunteering for the mission was not required.
You
obliged
for the mission.
were not obliged to volunteer.
- -11-