A couple of years ago a group of management scholars from Yale and the University of Pittsburgh tried to discover if there was a link between a company’s success and the personality of its boss. (46)To work out what that personality was, they asked senior managers to score their bosses for such traits as an ability to communicate an exciting vision of the future or to stand as a good model for others to follow. When the data were analyzed, the researchers found no evidence of a connection between how well a firm was doing and what its boss was like. As far as they could tell, a company could not be judged by its chief executive any better than a book could be judged by its cover.
(47)A few years before this, however, a team of psychologists from Tufts University, led by Nalini Ambady, discovered that when people watched two-second-long film-clips of professors lecturing, they were pretty good at determining how able a teacher each professor actually was.
Now, Dr Ambady and her colleague, Nicholas Rule, have taken things a step further. (48)They have shown that even a still photograph can convey a lot of information about competence—and that it can do so in a way which suggests the assessments of all those senior managers were nonsense.
Dr Ambady and Mr. Rule showed 100 undergraduates the faces of the chief executives of the top 25 and the bottom 25 companies in the Fortune 1,000 list. Half the students were asked how good they thought the person they were looking at would be at leading a company and half were asked to rate five personality traits on the basis of the photograph. (49) These traits were competence, dominance, likability, facial maturity (in other words, did the individual have an adult-looking face or a baby-face) and trustworthiness.
And Dr Ambady and Mr. Rule were surprised by just how accurate the students’ observations were. The results of their study, which are about to be published in Psychological Science, show that both the students’ assessments of the leadership potential of the bosses and their ratings for the traits of competence, dominance and facial maturity were significantly related to a company’s profits.
(50)Sadly, the characteristics of likability and trustworthiness appear to have no link to company profits, suggesting that when it comes to business success, being warm and fuzzy does not matter much (though these traits are not harmful).
参考答案：[译文] 然而，几年前，由纳利尼·阿姆巴迪率领的一群来自塔福特大学的心理学家让人们看一些教授两秒钟的教学电影片断，发现人们非常善于判断每个教授的实际教学能力。
解析： 本句结构比较复杂。此题除了考查了过去分词短语led by Nalini Ambady作定语，修饰前面的主语a team of psychologists from Tufts University。同时还考查了discovered引导的宾语从句当中when引导的条件从句，而其后还有how引导的宾语从句。
[词汇] pretty在不同的上下文中，意思不同。此处是副词修饰good，表示“非常”的意思。psychologists是“心理学家”的意思。这类学科专业名称为考研常考词汇，希望大家牢记。
| 可接受的翻译 | 不可接受的翻译 |
| a team of：一群(一些)心理学家 | 一队，一组 |
| led by：由……所带领 | 被……带领 |
| determining：判断；判定 | 决定 |
例1：但是几年之前，一些由纳利尼·阿姆巴迪率领的来自塔福特大学的心理学家发现：当人们看一些教授时长两秒的讲课电影片断时，他们非常善于判断每个教授的实际教学能力。
例2：但是几年前，一些来自塔福特大学的心理学家——他们是由纳利尼·阿姆巴迪率领的——发现了当人们看上两秒的教授上课的电影片断，他们就非常善于决定一个教授事实上是多么能干的一个老师。
例3：几年前，但是，一些由纳利尼·阿姆巴迪带领的来自塔福特大学的心理学家们，他们是由纳利尼·阿姆巴迪率领的，发现了当人们看两秒的教授上课的电影，他们就漂亮地决定了一个老师事实上的教学实力。
例4：但几年前，一些专家发现当人们看教授的电影时，他们就很好的决定了教授有多能干。
例5：但几年前，一队被纳利尼·阿姆巴迪带领的塔福特大学的人，看电影里教授讲课时，他们就很好的知道老师是好教授。