请阅读Passage 1，完成小题。

Passage1

From James Moriarty to Ernst Stavro Blofeld, the idea of the evil genius has been a staple of storytelling. But is it true'? Or, to put the matter less starkly, is there a connection between creativity and dishonesty in real people who are not bent on world domination, as well as in fictional supervillains? Writing in Psychological Science, Francesca Gino of' Harvard University and Scott Wiltermuth of the University of Southern California suggest that there is-and that cheating actually increases creativity.

Dr Gino and Dr Wiltermuth tested the honesty of 153 volunteers with a task that involved adding up numbers for a cash reward, which was presented in a way that seemed to them to allow them to cheat undetected (though the researchers knew when they did). This was sandwiched between two tests for creativity, one of which was to work out how to fix a candle to a cardboard wall with a box of drawing pins, and the other a word-association test. This combination showed not only that creative people cheat more, but also that cheating seems to encourage creativity-for those who cheated in the adding-up test were even better at word association than their candle-test results predicted.

That result was confirmed by a second set of experiments, in which some people were given many opportunities to cheat and others few. The crucial predictor of creativity, the researchers confirmed, was the actual amount of cheating, not any propensity to cheat.

A third experiment tested the idea that this is because both creativity and dishonesty require, as it were, a flexible attitude to rules. In this experiment volunteers were asked about their attitude to bossy signs, such as “no cycling" and “no diving" notices, after being allowed to cheat (again, in a way transparent to the experimenters) on a coin-tossing test. Cheats, it turned out, were less constrained to obey such signs.

It is, it goes without saying, a long way from such acts of petty defiance to building a lair inside an extinct volcano and threatening Washington from it-or even to non-fictional acts of serious crime. But some sort of link exists, so this research does indeed suggest that Arthur Conan Doyle and Ian Fleming were on to something.

1. What c:an be concluded from the passage about James Moriarty and Ernst Stavro Blofeld?

A. They are two evil geniuses.

B. They are two psychologists.

C. They are two story-tellers.

D. They are two researchers.

2. Which of the following is closest in meaning to the underlined phrase “were on to something" in the last paragraph?

A. were inspired by something.

B. were going to do something.

C. were worried about something.

D. were aware of the nature.

3.Which of the following describes the sequence of Dr Gino and Dr Wiltermuth's research.

A. candle test, adding-up test, word association test.

B. candle test, word association test, adding-up test.

C. adding-up test, candle test, word association test.

D. adding-up test, word association test, candle test.

4. What does the underlined words “the other" in Paragraph 2 refer to?

A. The trick.

C. The reward.

B. The test.

D. The combination.

5.What conclusion can be drawn from this passage?

A. The more a person cheats, the more creative he is.

B. Cheating is likely to encourage creativity to some extent.

C. A person who cheats is more creative than a person who doesn't.

D. A person who is creative cheats more than a person who is less creative.