A child may lean against a doorpost with his or her arms folded. To the onlooker, it may look like a benign posture—however, there may be a victimized child who understands that this is the bully’s "shorthand" code of conveying the message: "Hand me your lunch as you walk by me, or else."
Bullying may be expressed in many forms. Boys are generally targeted more than girls. Boys tend to use physical aggression when they bully .by hitting, kicking, and fighting. Girls, on the other hand, more often use exclusionary techniques to bully—a form of aggression often referred to as relational aggression. Girls often start rumors, form cliques to keep certain people out, and ignore other children in attempts to show dominance over another child.
Many children who are victimized fit into one of two types: the passive victim, and the provocative victim. While people often feel bad about passive victims, provocative victims often elicit less compassion from others. Sometimes it appears that the provocative victim has "brought on" his or her own fate—but does any child deserve to be the target of repeated physical or verbal aggression Why might so-called provocative victims actively participate in being the target of bullying: For example, are their provocative gestures simply a clumsy way of attempting to interact with others One feels compassion for the inhibited child because he is reserved; a social misfortune in our society, but an aggressive child is given none of this.
The dynamics of the bully/victim relationship need to be understood in a larger context (Pepler, Craig & O’Connell, 1999). It is not only the bully and the victim that is involved in a system of interaction: The bullying context includes multiple levels of the child’s social environment. The bully may enlist the help of "henchmen" (those who assist the bully, but often do not have the initiative or leadership to initiate bullying). Also, bystanders (whether actively encouraging the bullying act or passively standing by) play a role in maintaining the pattern of bullying. Even the students who habitually flee the site of a bullying act play a role in maintaining the bully/victim interaction.
In handling the situation, it is important not to focus only on the one or two students that are directly involved, but on the playground and school as a whole. Studies have shown that in order to break down the stability of peer bullying you must initiate change on many levels: Not only in teaching the bullied child how to assert himself or herself and to deflect attacks, but also to raise awareness about the problem of bullying and encourage the school community at large to take a united stance against bullying.
Which one of the following is true about provocative victims

A:Provocative victims are the victims who ask for trouble themselves and deserve what they get. B:Provocative victims do what they do to avoid interacting with others. C:Provocative victims are just trying to be get some attention and communication. D:Provocative victims are used to those repeated physical or verbal aggression.

A child may lean against a doorpost with his or her arms folded. To the onlooker, it may look like a benign posture—however, there may be a victimized child who understands that this is the bully’s "shorthand" code of conveying the message: "Hand me your lunch as you walk by me, or else."
Bullying may be expressed in many forms. Boys are generally targeted more than girls. Boys tend to use physical aggression when they bully .by hitting, kicking, and fighting. Girls, on the other hand, more often use exclusionary techniques to bully—a form of aggression often referred to as relational aggression. Girls often start rumors, form cliques to keep certain people out, and ignore other children in attempts to show dominance over another child.
Many children who are victimized fit into one of two types: the passive victim, and the provocative victim. While people often feel bad about passive victims, provocative victims often elicit less compassion from others. Sometimes it appears that the provocative victim has "brought on" his or her own fate—but does any child deserve to be the target of repeated physical or verbal aggression Why might so-called provocative victims actively participate in being the target of bullying: For example, are their provocative gestures simply a clumsy way of attempting to interact with others One feels compassion for the inhibited child because he is reserved; a social misfortune in our society, but an aggressive child is given none of this.
The dynamics of the bully/victim relationship need to be understood in a larger context (Pepler, Craig & O’Connell, 1999). It is not only the bully and the victim that is involved in a system of interaction: The bullying context includes multiple levels of the child’s social environment. The bully may enlist the help of "henchmen" (those who assist the bully, but often do not have the initiative or leadership to initiate bullying). Also, bystanders (whether actively encouraging the bullying act or passively standing by) play a role in maintaining the pattern of bullying. Even the students who habitually flee the site of a bullying act play a role in maintaining the bully/victim interaction.
In handling the situation, it is important not to focus only on the one or two students that are directly involved, but on the playground and school as a whole. Studies have shown that in order to break down the stability of peer bullying you must initiate change on many levels: Not only in teaching the bullied child how to assert himself or herself and to deflect attacks, but also to raise awareness about the problem of bullying and encourage the school community at large to take a united stance against bullying

A:Provocative victims are the victims who ask for trouble themselves and deserve what they get. B:Provocative victims do what they do to avoid interacting with others. C:Provocative victims are just trying to be get some attention and communication. D:Provocative victims are used to those repeated physical or verbal aggression.

The willingness of doctors at several major medical centers to apologize .to patients for harmful errors is a promising step toward improving the rather disappointing quality of a medical system that kills tens of thousands of innocent patients a year inadvertently.
For years, experts have lamented that medical malpractice litigation is an inefficient way to deter lethal or damaging medical errors. What they noticed, simply put it, is that most victims of malpractice never sue, and there is some evidence that many patients who do sue were not harmed by a physician’s error but instead suffered an adverse medical outcome that could not have been prevented. The details of what went wrong are often kept secret as part of a settlement agreement.
What is needed, many specialists agree, is a system that quickly brings an error to light so that further errors can be headed off and that compensates victims promptly and fairly. Many doctors, unfortunately, have been afraid that admitting and describing their errors would only invite a costly lawsuit.
Now, as described by Kevin Sack in The Times, a handful of prominent academic medical centers have adopted a new policy of promptly disclosing errors, offering earnest apologies and providing fair compensation. It appears to satisfy many patients, reduce legal costs and the litigation burden and, in some instances, helps reduce malpractice premiums. Here are some examples from colleges of the United States: at the University of Illinois, of 37 cases where the hospital acknowledged a preventable error and apologized, only one patient filed suit; at the University of Michigan Health System, existing claims and lawsuits dropped from 262 in August 2001 to 83 in August 2007, and legal costs fell by two-thirds.
To encourage greater candor, more than 30 states have enacted laws making apologies for medical errors inadmissible in court. That sounds like a sensible step that should be adopted by other states or become federal law. Such laws could help bring more errors to light. Patients who have been harmed by negligent doctors can still sue for malpractice, using other evidence to make their case.
Admitting errors is only the first step toward reforming the health care system so that far fewer mistakes are made. But reforms can be more effective if doctors are candid about how they went astray. Patients seem far less angry when they receive an. honest explanation, an apology and prompt, fair compensation for the harm they have suffered.

A:exposure to the media B:describing their mistakes in details C:compensating victims promptly and fairly D:involvement in an expensive civil case

Nearly three in 10 men have experienced violence at the hands of an intimate partner during their lifetimes, according to one of the few studies to look (1) domestic violence and health among men.
"Many men actually do experience domestic violence, although we don’t hear about it (2) , " Dr. Robert J. Reid of the University of Washington in Seattle, one of the study’s authors, told Reuters Health. "They often don’t tell (3) we don’t ask. We want to get the message out to men who (4) experience domestic violence that they are not alone and there are resources available to (5) . "
The researchers asked study participants about physical abuse and non-physical (6) , such as threats that made them (7) for their safety, controlling behavior (for example, being told who they could associate with and where they could go), and constant name-calling.
Among men 18 to 54 years old, 14.2 percent said they had experienced intimate partner (8) in the past five years, while 6.1 percent reported domestic violence in the previous year.
Rates were lower for men 55 and (9) , with 5.3 percent reporting violence in the past five years and 2.4 percent having experienced it in the past 12 months.
Overall, 30.5 percent of men younger than 55 and 26.5 percent of older men said they had been victims of (10) violence at some point in their lives. About half of the violence the men (11) was physical.
However, the physical violence men reported wasn’t as harsh as (12) suffered by women in a previous study; 20 percent to 40 percent of the men rated it as severe, compared to 61 percent of (13) .
Men who reported experiencing domestic violence had more emotional and mental health problems (14) those who had not, especially older men, the (15) found.

A:victims B:participants C:researchers D:partners

It came as something of a surprise when Diana, Princess of Wales, made a trip to Angola in 1997, to support the Red Cross’s campaign for a total ban on all anti-personnel landmines. Within hours of arriving in Angola, television screens around the world were filled with images of her comforting victims injured in explosions caused by landmines. "I knew the statistics," she said, "But putting a face to those figures brought the reality home to me: like when I met Sandra, a 13-year-old girl who had lost her leg, and people like her. "
The Princess concluded with a simple message: "We must stop landmines. " And she used every opportunity during her visit to repeat this message.
But, back in London, her views were not shared by some members of the British government, which refused to support a ban on these weapons. Angry politicians launched an attack on the Princess in the press. They described her as "very ill-informed" and a "loose cannon" (乱放炮的人).
The Princess responded by brushing aside the criticisms: "This is a distraction (干扰) we do not need. All I’m trying to do is help. "
Opposition parties, the media and the public immediately voiced their support for the Princess. To make matters worse for the government, it soon emerged that the Princess’s trip had been approved by the Foreign Office, and that she was in fact very well-informed about both the situation in Angola and the British government’s policy regarding landmines. The result was a severe embarrassment for the government.
To try and limit the damage, the Foreign Secretary, Malcolm Rifkind, claimed that the Princess’s views on landmines were not very different from government policy, and that it was "working towards" a worldwide ban. The Defense Secretary, Michael Portillo, claimed the matter was "a misinterpretation or misunderstanding. "
For the Princess, the trip to this war torn country was an excellent opportunity to use her ,popularity to show the world how much destruction and suffering landmines can cause. She said that the experience had also given her the chance to get closer to people and their problems.
Princess Diana paid a visit to Angola in 1997 ______.

A:to clarify the British government’s stand on landmines B:to establish her image as a friend of landmine victims C:to investigate the sufferings of landmine victims there D:to voice her support for a total ban of landmines

下面的短文有15外空白，请根据短文的内容为每处空白处确定一个最佳选项。

A:victims B:participants C:researchers D:partners

? ?阅读下面的短文，文中有15处空白，每处空白给出4个选项，请根据短文的内容从4个选项中选择1个最佳答案。

A:victims B:participants C:researchers D:partners

? ?阅读下面的短文，文中有15处空白，每处空白给出了4个选项，请根据短文的内容从4个选项中选择1个最佳答案。

A:victims B:participants C:researchers D:partners

It came as something of a surprise when Diana, Princess of Wales, made a trip to Angola in 1997, to support the Red Cross’s campaign for a total ban on all anti-personnel landmines. Within hours of arriving in Angola, television screens around the world were filled with images of her comforting victims injured in explosions caused by landmines. "I knew the statistics," she said, "But putting a face to those figures brought the reality home to me: like when I met Sandra, a 13-year-old girl who had lost her leg, and people like her. "
The Princess concluded with a simple message: "We must stop landmines. " And she used every opportunity during her visit to repeat this message.
But, back in London, her views were not shared by some members of the British government, "which refused to support a ban on these weapons. Angry politicians launched an attack on the Princess in the press. They described her as "very ill-informed" and a "loose cannon" (乱放炮的人).
The Princess responded by brushing aside the criticisms:"This is a distraction (干扰) we do not need. All I’m trying to do is help. "
Opposition parties, the media and the public immediately voiced their support for the Princess. To make matters worse for the government, it soon emerged that the Princess’s trip had been approved by the Foreign Office, and that she was in fact very well-informed about both the situation in Angola and the British government’s policy regarding landmines. The result was a severe embarrassment for the government.
To try and limit the damage, the Foreign Secretary, Malcolm Rifkind, claimed that the Princess’s views on landmines were not very different from government poliey, and that it was "working towards" a worldwide ban. The Defense Secretary, Michael Portillo, claimed the matter was "a misinterpretation or misunderstanding. "
For the Princess, the trip to this war torn country was an excellent opportunity to use her popularity to show the world how much destruction and suffering landmines can cause. She said that the experience had also given her the ehance to get closer to people and their problems.
Princess Diana paid a visit to Angola in 1997______.

A:to clarify the British government’s stand on landmines B:to establish her image as a friend of landmine victims C:to investigate the sufferings of landmine victims there D:to voice her support for a total ban of landmines