Reading Comprehension - GMAT Verbal
Card 0 of 692
Recent advances in non-invasive human neuroimaging have provided researchers in the emerging field of social brain science with insights into the workings of consciousness and social cognition. Of special interest is the medial prefrontal cortex (MPFC), a region of the brain associated with memory, fear, and, perhaps, prejudice.
Fears create memories, and those memories appear to be stored in the amygdala. This same region also seems to create memories that counter those fears, though these memories are then stored in the MPFC. Neuroimages show that nerves from the MPFC project into the amygdala, providing the mechanism for suppressing the fear response. As one might expect, rodents with MPFC damage have a decreased ability to deal with certain fears.
MPFC activity also seems to correlate with self-referential judgments and memory. The dorsal MPFC in particular shows heightened activity during introspective mental activity. Interestingly, there is a reduction in ventral MPFC activity when individuals are involved in tasks that demand attention. This indicates that cognitive activity can decrease certain emotional processing. Other differences between these two areas of the MPFC have been noted. The ventral region becomes more engaged when an individual is shown photographs of strangers whose political beliefs—so the viewer is told—are similar to those of the person viewing the photograph, but the dorsal region becomes more active when the photographs are of individuals with whom the viewer does not share the same political perspective.
As long ago as the 19th century, scientists knew that damage to the MPFC interfered with social skills while leaving other mental skills untouched. With our newfound ability to actually observe mental activity in both healthy and impaired individuals without recourse to surgery, we have entered into an area that is sure to provide us with information about ourselves that will prove to be of enormous interest and great usefulness.
Which of the following does the author NOT mention as being an advantage of neuroimaging?
Recent advances in non-invasive human neuroimaging have provided researchers in the emerging field of social brain science with insights into the workings of consciousness and social cognition. Of special interest is the medial prefrontal cortex (MPFC), a region of the brain associated with memory, fear, and, perhaps, prejudice.
Fears create memories, and those memories appear to be stored in the amygdala. This same region also seems to create memories that counter those fears, though these memories are then stored in the MPFC. Neuroimages show that nerves from the MPFC project into the amygdala, providing the mechanism for suppressing the fear response. As one might expect, rodents with MPFC damage have a decreased ability to deal with certain fears.
MPFC activity also seems to correlate with self-referential judgments and memory. The dorsal MPFC in particular shows heightened activity during introspective mental activity. Interestingly, there is a reduction in ventral MPFC activity when individuals are involved in tasks that demand attention. This indicates that cognitive activity can decrease certain emotional processing. Other differences between these two areas of the MPFC have been noted. The ventral region becomes more engaged when an individual is shown photographs of strangers whose political beliefs—so the viewer is told—are similar to those of the person viewing the photograph, but the dorsal region becomes more active when the photographs are of individuals with whom the viewer does not share the same political perspective.
As long ago as the 19th century, scientists knew that damage to the MPFC interfered with social skills while leaving other mental skills untouched. With our newfound ability to actually observe mental activity in both healthy and impaired individuals without recourse to surgery, we have entered into an area that is sure to provide us with information about ourselves that will prove to be of enormous interest and great usefulness.
Which of the following does the author NOT mention as being an advantage of neuroimaging?
Solution: "Healthy individuals can be studied through simple surgical procedures."
Imagine this question as a checklist. Find the advantages that the author does mention, and eliminate those answer choices. The advantage of neuroimaging is that it is “non-invasive.” Surgery is invasive. "Researchers can better understand how people think about themselves.": The 1st paragraph tells us of advances in “self-referential judgments and memory,” in other words, how we think about ourselves. "The connections between some parts of the brain are made apparent.": The links between the amygdala and MPFC are shown by “neuroimages” (2nd paragraph.) "Greater insight as to how people perceive each other is made possible.": The 3rd paragraph discusses changes in the brain that depend on who individuals are thinking about. "Scientists do not have to rely on animals that have sustained injuries.": Since neuroimaging is “non-invasive,” humans (and perhaps, animals) that have not sustained injuries can be studied.
Solution: "Healthy individuals can be studied through simple surgical procedures."
Imagine this question as a checklist. Find the advantages that the author does mention, and eliminate those answer choices. The advantage of neuroimaging is that it is “non-invasive.” Surgery is invasive. "Researchers can better understand how people think about themselves.": The 1st paragraph tells us of advances in “self-referential judgments and memory,” in other words, how we think about ourselves. "The connections between some parts of the brain are made apparent.": The links between the amygdala and MPFC are shown by “neuroimages” (2nd paragraph.) "Greater insight as to how people perceive each other is made possible.": The 3rd paragraph discusses changes in the brain that depend on who individuals are thinking about. "Scientists do not have to rely on animals that have sustained injuries.": Since neuroimaging is “non-invasive,” humans (and perhaps, animals) that have not sustained injuries can be studied.
Compare your answer with the correct one above
Recent advances in non-invasive human neuroimaging have provided researchers in the emerging field of social brain science with insights into the workings of consciousness and social cognition. Of special interest is the medial prefrontal cortex (MPFC), a region of the brain associated with memory, fear, and, perhaps, prejudice.
Fears create memories, and those memories appear to be stored in the amygdala. This same region also seems to create memories that counter those fears, though these memories are then stored in the MPFC. Neuroimages show that nerves from the MPFC project into the amygdala, providing the mechanism for suppressing the fear response. As one might expect, rodents with MPFC damage have a decreased ability to deal with certain fears.
MPFC activity also seems to correlate with self-referential judgments and memory. The dorsal MPFC in particular shows heightened activity during introspective mental activity. Interestingly, there is a reduction in ventral MPFC activity when individuals are involved in tasks that demand attention. This indicates that cognitive activity can decrease certain emotional processing. Other differences between these two areas of the MPFC have been noted. The ventral region becomes more engaged when an individual is shown photographs of strangers whose political beliefs—so the viewer is told—are similar to those of the person viewing the photograph, but the dorsal region becomes more active when the photographs are of individuals with whom the viewer does not share the same political perspective.
As long ago as the 19th century, scientists knew that damage to the MPFC interfered with social skills while leaving other mental skills untouched. With our newfound ability to actually observe mental activity in both healthy and impaired individuals without recourse to surgery, we have entered into an area that is sure to provide us with information about ourselves that will prove to be of enormous interest and great usefulness.
According to the passage, it is likely that the memories that allay fears are .
Recent advances in non-invasive human neuroimaging have provided researchers in the emerging field of social brain science with insights into the workings of consciousness and social cognition. Of special interest is the medial prefrontal cortex (MPFC), a region of the brain associated with memory, fear, and, perhaps, prejudice.
Fears create memories, and those memories appear to be stored in the amygdala. This same region also seems to create memories that counter those fears, though these memories are then stored in the MPFC. Neuroimages show that nerves from the MPFC project into the amygdala, providing the mechanism for suppressing the fear response. As one might expect, rodents with MPFC damage have a decreased ability to deal with certain fears.
MPFC activity also seems to correlate with self-referential judgments and memory. The dorsal MPFC in particular shows heightened activity during introspective mental activity. Interestingly, there is a reduction in ventral MPFC activity when individuals are involved in tasks that demand attention. This indicates that cognitive activity can decrease certain emotional processing. Other differences between these two areas of the MPFC have been noted. The ventral region becomes more engaged when an individual is shown photographs of strangers whose political beliefs—so the viewer is told—are similar to those of the person viewing the photograph, but the dorsal region becomes more active when the photographs are of individuals with whom the viewer does not share the same political perspective.
As long ago as the 19th century, scientists knew that damage to the MPFC interfered with social skills while leaving other mental skills untouched. With our newfound ability to actually observe mental activity in both healthy and impaired individuals without recourse to surgery, we have entered into an area that is sure to provide us with information about ourselves that will prove to be of enormous interest and great usefulness.
According to the passage, it is likely that the memories that allay fears are .
Solution: "created and stored in different parts of the brain"
Refer back to the passage to answer this Specific question. According to the 2nd paragraph, the amygdala “creates memories that counter those fears, though these memories are then stored in the MPFC.” "formed in the dorsal and ventral MPFC": No connection is made between specific regions of the MPFC and fears. "related to memories that form prejudices": No connection is made between prejudices and memories that allay fears. "able to be manipulated in rats through neuroimaging procedures": No mention of manipulating rats’ memories is made. Neuroimaging is used for viewing images, not manipulating memories. "affected by tasks that demand attention": Attention-demanding tasks are not mentioned in relation to fears.
Solution: "created and stored in different parts of the brain"
Refer back to the passage to answer this Specific question. According to the 2nd paragraph, the amygdala “creates memories that counter those fears, though these memories are then stored in the MPFC.” "formed in the dorsal and ventral MPFC": No connection is made between specific regions of the MPFC and fears. "related to memories that form prejudices": No connection is made between prejudices and memories that allay fears. "able to be manipulated in rats through neuroimaging procedures": No mention of manipulating rats’ memories is made. Neuroimaging is used for viewing images, not manipulating memories. "affected by tasks that demand attention": Attention-demanding tasks are not mentioned in relation to fears.
Compare your answer with the correct one above
The phrase “alternative stable state” in ecology refers to the tendency of many ecosystems to have different, stable configurations of biotic and abiotic conditions across large time scales separated by what are called regime or phase shifts. Alternative stable state theory claims that instead of a forest transitioning slowly along a gradient toward a different stable state, that forest will reach a crucial tipping point (known as an ecological threshold) as deforestation occurs. Any change beyond this threshold will lead to a rapid change towards the second stable state of the biome in question, in this case a grassland.
Ecologists typically describe this theory with an analogy: Picture a set of three hills, between which are two valleys with a ball sitting in one of them that you want to push into the other. If you don’t push enough, the ball just rolls back down to where it started, but if you give the ball a big enough push, it will roll all the way into the valley on the other side of the hill. From there, it would require a similarly big push to get the ball back to where it started. Stable states are the valleys – where the balls want to stay if no outside forces are involved. However, if there is a big enough change in the environment to cause the ball to roll all the way up the hill to its highest point (the ecological threshold), the ball can be forced from one valley into another relatively quickly – this is a phase shift.
Until recently, most work discussing alternative stable states was theoretical – the idea of purposefully changing an environment to this extent was considered unthinkable – but several cases of confirmed alternative stable states have been reported. For example, disrupting the balance of phosphorous in a clearwater lake can lead to out-of-control phytoplankton blooms. Reducing this addition of phosphorous has so far not been an effective way of stopping the phytoplankton blooms, leading researchers to think that the ecosystem has been pushed into a new local equilibrium. This idea of hysteresis – that the state of an environment depends at least in part on its history and not just its current state – is at the core of many debates surrounding alternative stable state theory. However, whether most ecosystems that can exist under multiple stable states will readily convert between the two is still an open debate.
All of the following are discussed in the passage EXCEPT:
The phrase “alternative stable state” in ecology refers to the tendency of many ecosystems to have different, stable configurations of biotic and abiotic conditions across large time scales separated by what are called regime or phase shifts. Alternative stable state theory claims that instead of a forest transitioning slowly along a gradient toward a different stable state, that forest will reach a crucial tipping point (known as an ecological threshold) as deforestation occurs. Any change beyond this threshold will lead to a rapid change towards the second stable state of the biome in question, in this case a grassland.
Ecologists typically describe this theory with an analogy: Picture a set of three hills, between which are two valleys with a ball sitting in one of them that you want to push into the other. If you don’t push enough, the ball just rolls back down to where it started, but if you give the ball a big enough push, it will roll all the way into the valley on the other side of the hill. From there, it would require a similarly big push to get the ball back to where it started. Stable states are the valleys – where the balls want to stay if no outside forces are involved. However, if there is a big enough change in the environment to cause the ball to roll all the way up the hill to its highest point (the ecological threshold), the ball can be forced from one valley into another relatively quickly – this is a phase shift.
Until recently, most work discussing alternative stable states was theoretical – the idea of purposefully changing an environment to this extent was considered unthinkable – but several cases of confirmed alternative stable states have been reported. For example, disrupting the balance of phosphorous in a clearwater lake can lead to out-of-control phytoplankton blooms. Reducing this addition of phosphorous has so far not been an effective way of stopping the phytoplankton blooms, leading researchers to think that the ecosystem has been pushed into a new local equilibrium. This idea of hysteresis – that the state of an environment depends at least in part on its history and not just its current state – is at the core of many debates surrounding alternative stable state theory. However, whether most ecosystems that can exist under multiple stable states will readily convert between the two is still an open debate.
All of the following are discussed in the passage EXCEPT:
As with any “except” style specific question, you should go locate each of the incorrect answers and confirm their presence in the passage. The remaining choice will be the correct answer. The primary difficulty in this type of question usually comes from wordplay, so make sure you read each answer carefully to avoid accidentally misinterpreting one or more of them.
For "the importance of history in analyzing a particular environment", this can be found near the end of the last paragraph: “This idea of hysteresis – that the state of an environment depends at least in part on its history and not just its current state…” "the existence of multiple stable states for an ecosystem" can be found in multiple places but is most concretely stated in the last sentence: “However, whether most ecosystems that can exist under multiple stable states will readily convert between the two is still an open debate.” "out-of-control phytoplankton blooms in a lake" and "the addition of phosphorous to a clearwater lake" are easily found in the last paragraph with the following: “For example, disrupting the balance of phosphorous in a clearwater lake can lead to out-of-control phytoplankton blooms. Reducing this addition of phosphorous.” For "stable ecological configurations across short time frames", the correct answer, you must read carefully. “Stable ecological configurations” are indeed discussed in the passage but only over long time frames, not short time frames!
As with any “except” style specific question, you should go locate each of the incorrect answers and confirm their presence in the passage. The remaining choice will be the correct answer. The primary difficulty in this type of question usually comes from wordplay, so make sure you read each answer carefully to avoid accidentally misinterpreting one or more of them.
For "the importance of history in analyzing a particular environment", this can be found near the end of the last paragraph: “This idea of hysteresis – that the state of an environment depends at least in part on its history and not just its current state…” "the existence of multiple stable states for an ecosystem" can be found in multiple places but is most concretely stated in the last sentence: “However, whether most ecosystems that can exist under multiple stable states will readily convert between the two is still an open debate.” "out-of-control phytoplankton blooms in a lake" and "the addition of phosphorous to a clearwater lake" are easily found in the last paragraph with the following: “For example, disrupting the balance of phosphorous in a clearwater lake can lead to out-of-control phytoplankton blooms. Reducing this addition of phosphorous.” For "stable ecological configurations across short time frames", the correct answer, you must read carefully. “Stable ecological configurations” are indeed discussed in the passage but only over long time frames, not short time frames!
Compare your answer with the correct one above
The phrase “alternative stable state” in ecology refers to the tendency of many ecosystems to have different, stable configurations of biotic and abiotic conditions across large time scales separated by what are called regime or phase shifts. Alternative stable state theory claims that instead of a forest transitioning slowly along a gradient toward a different stable state, that forest will reach a crucial tipping point (known as an ecological threshold) as deforestation occurs. Any change beyond this threshold will lead to a rapid change towards the second stable state of the biome in question, in this case a grassland.
Ecologists typically describe this theory with an analogy: Picture a set of three hills, between which are two valleys with a ball sitting in one of them that you want to push into the other. \ If you don’t push enough, the ball just rolls back down to where it started, but if you give the ball a big enough push, it will roll all the way into the valley on the other side of the hill. From there, it would require a similarly big push to get the ball back to where it started. Stable states are the valleys – where the balls want to stay if no outside forces are involved. However, if there is a big enough change in the environment to cause the ball to roll all the way up the hill to its highest point (the ecological threshold), the ball can be forced from one valley into another relatively quickly – this is a phase shift.
Until recently, most work discussing alternative stable states was theoretical – the idea of purposefully changing an environment to this extent was considered unthinkable – but several cases of confirmed alternative stable states have been reported. For example, disrupting the balance of phosphorous in a clearwater lake can lead to out-of-control phytoplankton blooms. Reducing this addition of phosphorous has so far not been an effective way of stopping the phytoplankton blooms, leading researchers to think that the ecosystem has been pushed into a new local equilibrium. This idea of hysteresis – that the state of an environment depends at least in part on its history and not just its current state – is at the core of many debates surrounding alternative stable state theory. However, whether most ecosystems that can exist under multiple stable states will readily convert between the two is still an open debate.
Which of the following is confirmed in the passage as causing a phase shift in the environment?
The phrase “alternative stable state” in ecology refers to the tendency of many ecosystems to have different, stable configurations of biotic and abiotic conditions across large time scales separated by what are called regime or phase shifts. Alternative stable state theory claims that instead of a forest transitioning slowly along a gradient toward a different stable state, that forest will reach a crucial tipping point (known as an ecological threshold) as deforestation occurs. Any change beyond this threshold will lead to a rapid change towards the second stable state of the biome in question, in this case a grassland.
Ecologists typically describe this theory with an analogy: Picture a set of three hills, between which are two valleys with a ball sitting in one of them that you want to push into the other. \ If you don’t push enough, the ball just rolls back down to where it started, but if you give the ball a big enough push, it will roll all the way into the valley on the other side of the hill. From there, it would require a similarly big push to get the ball back to where it started. Stable states are the valleys – where the balls want to stay if no outside forces are involved. However, if there is a big enough change in the environment to cause the ball to roll all the way up the hill to its highest point (the ecological threshold), the ball can be forced from one valley into another relatively quickly – this is a phase shift.
Until recently, most work discussing alternative stable states was theoretical – the idea of purposefully changing an environment to this extent was considered unthinkable – but several cases of confirmed alternative stable states have been reported. For example, disrupting the balance of phosphorous in a clearwater lake can lead to out-of-control phytoplankton blooms. Reducing this addition of phosphorous has so far not been an effective way of stopping the phytoplankton blooms, leading researchers to think that the ecosystem has been pushed into a new local equilibrium. This idea of hysteresis – that the state of an environment depends at least in part on its history and not just its current state – is at the core of many debates surrounding alternative stable state theory. However, whether most ecosystems that can exist under multiple stable states will readily convert between the two is still an open debate.
Which of the following is confirmed in the passage as causing a phase shift in the environment?
For this type of specific question, you need to focus on keywords in the question stem and then go look in the passage where those words were discussed to find one of the answers. For this question, there were only two spots in the passage where concrete causes of a phase shift were discussed: in the beginning relating to the change from forest to grassland, and at the end with the observed example of the clearwater lake.
"the addition of phosphorous to a lake" can be found relatively easily in the last paragraph where the clearwater example is given. It states: “For example, disrupting the balance of phosphorous in a clearwater lake can lead to out-of-control phytoplankton blooms \[which is later described as a new stable state\].” Some might wonder if there is enough to prove that the phosphorous is “an addition” (this sentence only says disrupting a balance) but this is confirmed cleverly by the next sentence, which says: “Reducing this addition of phosphorous has…” So indeed you can be sure that the addition of phosphorous is confirmed in the passage as causing a phase shift and "the addition of phosphorous to a lake" is correct.
"the blooming of phytoplankton in a lake" is tricky as the blooming of phytoplankton is not the CAUSE of the phase shift; rather it is the new stable state that results from the cause, which is the addition of phosphorous. For "the movement of balls over a hill", the movement of balls over a hill relates to the analogy used in the second paragraph – it is not stated as a confirmed example in the passage.
For "the presence of drought conditions in a certain region", drought conditions could certainly cause a phase shift within certain ecologies, but this is not given as an example anywhere in the passage. "the repeated logging of certain forests" is also tricky, as deforestation is confirmed as the cause of a phase shift in the first paragraph. However, deforestation is in no way the same thing as repeated logging (remember to always look out for wordplay!!!) Most deforestation relates to things other than logging, and logging itself may or may not be the cause of a phase shift. The correct answer is "the addition of phosphorous to a lake".
For this type of specific question, you need to focus on keywords in the question stem and then go look in the passage where those words were discussed to find one of the answers. For this question, there were only two spots in the passage where concrete causes of a phase shift were discussed: in the beginning relating to the change from forest to grassland, and at the end with the observed example of the clearwater lake.
"the addition of phosphorous to a lake" can be found relatively easily in the last paragraph where the clearwater example is given. It states: “For example, disrupting the balance of phosphorous in a clearwater lake can lead to out-of-control phytoplankton blooms \[which is later described as a new stable state\].” Some might wonder if there is enough to prove that the phosphorous is “an addition” (this sentence only says disrupting a balance) but this is confirmed cleverly by the next sentence, which says: “Reducing this addition of phosphorous has…” So indeed you can be sure that the addition of phosphorous is confirmed in the passage as causing a phase shift and "the addition of phosphorous to a lake" is correct.
"the blooming of phytoplankton in a lake" is tricky as the blooming of phytoplankton is not the CAUSE of the phase shift; rather it is the new stable state that results from the cause, which is the addition of phosphorous. For "the movement of balls over a hill", the movement of balls over a hill relates to the analogy used in the second paragraph – it is not stated as a confirmed example in the passage.
For "the presence of drought conditions in a certain region", drought conditions could certainly cause a phase shift within certain ecologies, but this is not given as an example anywhere in the passage. "the repeated logging of certain forests" is also tricky, as deforestation is confirmed as the cause of a phase shift in the first paragraph. However, deforestation is in no way the same thing as repeated logging (remember to always look out for wordplay!!!) Most deforestation relates to things other than logging, and logging itself may or may not be the cause of a phase shift. The correct answer is "the addition of phosphorous to a lake".
Compare your answer with the correct one above
Feminist literary criticism is literary criticism informed by feminist theory, or more broadly by the politics of feminism. Its history has been widespread and varied, from classic works of nineteenth-century women authors such as George Eliot and Margaret Fuller, to cutting-edge theoretical work in women's studies and gender studies by "third-wave" authors. In the most general and simple terms, feminist literary criticism before the 1970s—in the first and second waves of feminism—was concerned with the politics of women's authorship and the representation of women's condition within literature, including the depiction of fictional female characters. In addition, feminist criticism was further concerned with the exclusion of women from the western literary canon – an exclusion that most feminist critics suggest is due to the views of women authors not being considered universal.
Since the development of more complex conceptions of gender and subjectivity and third-wave feminism, modern feminist literary criticism has taken a variety of new routes, namely in the tradition of the Frankfurt School's critical theory. It has considered gender in the terms of Freudian and Lacanian psychoanalysis, as part of the deconstruction of existing relations of power, and as a concrete political investment. It has also been closely associated with the birth and growth of gay studies. The more traditionally central feminist concern with the representation and politics of women's lives has continued to play an active role in criticism. More specifically, modern feminist criticism deals with those issues related to the patriarchal programming within key aspects of society including education, politics, and the work force.
Recently, Lisa Tuttle has defined feminist theory as asking "new questions of old texts." Consequently she cites the following as the primary goals of feminist criticism: \ to uncover a female tradition of writing; to interpret symbolism of women's writing so that it will not be lost or ignored by the male point of view; to analyze women writers and their writings from a female perspective; to examine sexism in literature; and to increase awareness of the sexual politics of language and style. Only through such analysis, she argues, can a proper view of feminist criticism be framed moving forward.
According to the passage, all of the following would likely be a concern for feminist critics during the first and second waves of feminism EXCEPT:
Feminist literary criticism is literary criticism informed by feminist theory, or more broadly by the politics of feminism. Its history has been widespread and varied, from classic works of nineteenth-century women authors such as George Eliot and Margaret Fuller, to cutting-edge theoretical work in women's studies and gender studies by "third-wave" authors. In the most general and simple terms, feminist literary criticism before the 1970s—in the first and second waves of feminism—was concerned with the politics of women's authorship and the representation of women's condition within literature, including the depiction of fictional female characters. In addition, feminist criticism was further concerned with the exclusion of women from the western literary canon – an exclusion that most feminist critics suggest is due to the views of women authors not being considered universal.
Since the development of more complex conceptions of gender and subjectivity and third-wave feminism, modern feminist literary criticism has taken a variety of new routes, namely in the tradition of the Frankfurt School's critical theory. It has considered gender in the terms of Freudian and Lacanian psychoanalysis, as part of the deconstruction of existing relations of power, and as a concrete political investment. It has also been closely associated with the birth and growth of gay studies. The more traditionally central feminist concern with the representation and politics of women's lives has continued to play an active role in criticism. More specifically, modern feminist criticism deals with those issues related to the patriarchal programming within key aspects of society including education, politics, and the work force.
Recently, Lisa Tuttle has defined feminist theory as asking "new questions of old texts." Consequently she cites the following as the primary goals of feminist criticism: \ to uncover a female tradition of writing; to interpret symbolism of women's writing so that it will not be lost or ignored by the male point of view; to analyze women writers and their writings from a female perspective; to examine sexism in literature; and to increase awareness of the sexual politics of language and style. Only through such analysis, she argues, can a proper view of feminist criticism be framed moving forward.
According to the passage, all of the following would likely be a concern for feminist critics during the first and second waves of feminism EXCEPT:
Explanation: All of the information required to answer the question comes in the first paragraph. The passage states explicitly that criticism in that era was concerned with “the politics of women's authorship”, “the depiction of fictional female characters” so "the politics relating to female authorship" and "the behavior of fictional female characters" are both concerns. For "the working conditions of several female characters", the passage states categorically that criticism in that era was concerned with “the representation of women's condition within literature” "the male domination of the literary world" is also a little difficult to find but is at the end of the first paragraph. The passage states that feminists were “concerned with the exclusion of women from the western literary canon” - which can be expressed as the male domination of the literary world. "the lack of important female characters in several popular novels" is correct as there is absolute nothing in the passage to suggest that feminist critics were concerned with several novels that did not happen to contain important female characters. Answer is "the lack of important female characters in several popular novels".
Explanation: All of the information required to answer the question comes in the first paragraph. The passage states explicitly that criticism in that era was concerned with “the politics of women's authorship”, “the depiction of fictional female characters” so "the politics relating to female authorship" and "the behavior of fictional female characters" are both concerns. For "the working conditions of several female characters", the passage states categorically that criticism in that era was concerned with “the representation of women's condition within literature” "the male domination of the literary world" is also a little difficult to find but is at the end of the first paragraph. The passage states that feminists were “concerned with the exclusion of women from the western literary canon” - which can be expressed as the male domination of the literary world. "the lack of important female characters in several popular novels" is correct as there is absolute nothing in the passage to suggest that feminist critics were concerned with several novels that did not happen to contain important female characters. Answer is "the lack of important female characters in several popular novels".
Compare your answer with the correct one above
Feminist literary criticism is literary criticism informed by feminist theory, or more broadly by the politics of feminism. Its history has been widespread and varied, from classic works of nineteenth-century women authors such as George Eliot and Margaret Fuller, to cutting-edge theoretical work in women's studies and gender studies by "third-wave" authors. In the most general and simple terms, feminist literary criticism before the 1970s—in the first and second waves of feminism—was concerned with the politics of women's authorship and the representation of women's condition within literature, including the depiction of fictional female characters. In addition, feminist criticism was further concerned with the exclusion of women from the western literary canon – an exclusion that most feminist critics suggest is due to the views of women authors not being considered universal.
Since the development of more complex conceptions of gender and subjectivity and third-wave feminism, modern feminist literary criticism has taken a variety of new routes, namely in the tradition of the Frankfurt School's critical theory. It has considered gender in the terms of Freudian and Lacanian psychoanalysis, as part of the deconstruction of existing relations of power, and as a concrete political investment. It has also been closely associated with the birth and growth of gay studies. The more traditionally central feminist concern with the representation and politics of women's lives has continued to play an active role in criticism. More specifically, modern feminist criticism deals with those issues related to the patriarchal programming within key aspects of society including education, politics, and the work force.
Recently, Lisa Tuttle has defined feminist theory as asking "new questions of old texts." Consequently she cites the following as the primary goals of feminist criticism: \ to uncover a female tradition of writing; to interpret symbolism of women's writing so that it will not be lost or ignored by the male point of view; to analyze women writers and their writings from a female perspective; to examine sexism in literature; and to increase awareness of the sexual politics of language and style. Only through such analysis, she argues, can a proper view of feminist criticism be framed moving forward.
According to the passage, all of the following are considered new routes of modern feminist literary criticism EXCEPT:
Feminist literary criticism is literary criticism informed by feminist theory, or more broadly by the politics of feminism. Its history has been widespread and varied, from classic works of nineteenth-century women authors such as George Eliot and Margaret Fuller, to cutting-edge theoretical work in women's studies and gender studies by "third-wave" authors. In the most general and simple terms, feminist literary criticism before the 1970s—in the first and second waves of feminism—was concerned with the politics of women's authorship and the representation of women's condition within literature, including the depiction of fictional female characters. In addition, feminist criticism was further concerned with the exclusion of women from the western literary canon – an exclusion that most feminist critics suggest is due to the views of women authors not being considered universal.
Since the development of more complex conceptions of gender and subjectivity and third-wave feminism, modern feminist literary criticism has taken a variety of new routes, namely in the tradition of the Frankfurt School's critical theory. It has considered gender in the terms of Freudian and Lacanian psychoanalysis, as part of the deconstruction of existing relations of power, and as a concrete political investment. It has also been closely associated with the birth and growth of gay studies. The more traditionally central feminist concern with the representation and politics of women's lives has continued to play an active role in criticism. More specifically, modern feminist criticism deals with those issues related to the patriarchal programming within key aspects of society including education, politics, and the work force.
Recently, Lisa Tuttle has defined feminist theory as asking "new questions of old texts." Consequently she cites the following as the primary goals of feminist criticism: \ to uncover a female tradition of writing; to interpret symbolism of women's writing so that it will not be lost or ignored by the male point of view; to analyze women writers and their writings from a female perspective; to examine sexism in literature; and to increase awareness of the sexual politics of language and style. Only through such analysis, she argues, can a proper view of feminist criticism be framed moving forward.
According to the passage, all of the following are considered new routes of modern feminist literary criticism EXCEPT:
As with most harder specific style questions, the primary difficulty comes from wordplay and/or precision in wording. First, you should locate where these issues are discussed. The second paragraph starts with “modern feminist literary criticism has taken a variety of new routes, namely in the tradition of the Frankfurt School's critical theory” so you would expect to find each of these after that. "viewing gender in terms of Freudian and Lacanian psychoanalysis.", "deconstructing existing relations of power in relation to gender.", and "regarding gender as a tangible political contribution." are each found quite easily in the second sentence of the paragraph so you know none of those is correct. For "focusing on the representation and politics of women’s lives.", it will first seem that this is also in the paragraph as two sentences later you find: “The more traditionally central feminist concern with the representation and politics of women's lives has continued to play an active role in criticism.” But if you read carefully you see that this is NOT new (a requirement in the question stem) because of the words “has continued.” As a result "focusing on the representation and politics of women’s lives." is correct. For "scrutinizing gender in the tradition of the Frankfurt School’s critical theory.", in the opening sentence of the paragraph it states that the new routes are in the tradition of the Frankfurt School’s critical theory so this is found in the passage. Correct answer is "focusing on the representation and politics of women’s lives.".
As with most harder specific style questions, the primary difficulty comes from wordplay and/or precision in wording. First, you should locate where these issues are discussed. The second paragraph starts with “modern feminist literary criticism has taken a variety of new routes, namely in the tradition of the Frankfurt School's critical theory” so you would expect to find each of these after that. "viewing gender in terms of Freudian and Lacanian psychoanalysis.", "deconstructing existing relations of power in relation to gender.", and "regarding gender as a tangible political contribution." are each found quite easily in the second sentence of the paragraph so you know none of those is correct. For "focusing on the representation and politics of women’s lives.", it will first seem that this is also in the paragraph as two sentences later you find: “The more traditionally central feminist concern with the representation and politics of women's lives has continued to play an active role in criticism.” But if you read carefully you see that this is NOT new (a requirement in the question stem) because of the words “has continued.” As a result "focusing on the representation and politics of women’s lives." is correct. For "scrutinizing gender in the tradition of the Frankfurt School’s critical theory.", in the opening sentence of the paragraph it states that the new routes are in the tradition of the Frankfurt School’s critical theory so this is found in the passage. Correct answer is "focusing on the representation and politics of women’s lives.".
Compare your answer with the correct one above
In day-to-day functioning, people rely on both memory and knowledge of that memory, referred to as metamemory. For example, a person often cannot immediately recall a name upon meeting someone, but they feel that they know it. This feeling is the result of monitoring memory. Because of this feeling-of-knowing (FOK), most people will continue to search their memory for this name. Once a name is generated, people then monitor and decide if they are confident enough to use that name.
Memory monitoring involves evaluating the ongoing progress of any aspect of memory. Experiments that evaluate memory monitoring typically have individuals make subjective judgments about their memory at various stages of learning and recall. Participants are asked a series of questions. After each question that they answer, they are asked to provide a retrospective confidence (RC) judgment, rating the likelihood that their response is accurate. When participants do not answer a question, they are asked for their prospective FOK judgment, assessing whether they nonetheless feel they do know the answer (for example because they think they may be able to remember it at some point in the future).
Perhaps predictably, RC judgments are highly correlated with actual knowledge of a topic. FOK judgments, however, correlate rather weakly—albeit positively—with actual knowledge. While there are some instances where the FOK is the result of a momentary inability to recall something, more often than not the FOK stems from the sense that one should know something, for example because the field is familiar.
Research has resulted in a general consensus that, when monitoring memory, individuals infer whether a particular response will be, or has been, remembered based on the inputs that are readily available. However, the particular inputs used differ depending on when memory is assessed. Prospective FOK judgments are thought to be based on familiarity of the cue, accessibility of information about the memory, or a combination of the two. In contrast, it is widely accepted that RC judgments are based on the memory-retrieval experience—that is, the “on-line” experience of directly retrieving some previously studied item.
According to the passage, FOK judgments and RC judgments differ in all of the following ways EXCEPT that
In day-to-day functioning, people rely on both memory and knowledge of that memory, referred to as metamemory. For example, a person often cannot immediately recall a name upon meeting someone, but they feel that they know it. This feeling is the result of monitoring memory. Because of this feeling-of-knowing (FOK), most people will continue to search their memory for this name. Once a name is generated, people then monitor and decide if they are confident enough to use that name.
Memory monitoring involves evaluating the ongoing progress of any aspect of memory. Experiments that evaluate memory monitoring typically have individuals make subjective judgments about their memory at various stages of learning and recall. Participants are asked a series of questions. After each question that they answer, they are asked to provide a retrospective confidence (RC) judgment, rating the likelihood that their response is accurate. When participants do not answer a question, they are asked for their prospective FOK judgment, assessing whether they nonetheless feel they do know the answer (for example because they think they may be able to remember it at some point in the future).
Perhaps predictably, RC judgments are highly correlated with actual knowledge of a topic. FOK judgments, however, correlate rather weakly—albeit positively—with actual knowledge. While there are some instances where the FOK is the result of a momentary inability to recall something, more often than not the FOK stems from the sense that one should know something, for example because the field is familiar.
Research has resulted in a general consensus that, when monitoring memory, individuals infer whether a particular response will be, or has been, remembered based on the inputs that are readily available. However, the particular inputs used differ depending on when memory is assessed. Prospective FOK judgments are thought to be based on familiarity of the cue, accessibility of information about the memory, or a combination of the two. In contrast, it is widely accepted that RC judgments are based on the memory-retrieval experience—that is, the “on-line” experience of directly retrieving some previously studied item.
According to the passage, FOK judgments and RC judgments differ in all of the following ways EXCEPT that
Except questions are specific questions for which you need to look back and find evidence for each answer in the text. If you can’t find evidence for a particular statement, that’s your answer. Remember, however, that these questions are often best done by process of elimination – it is often much easier to conclude that you can find evidence for four of five statements than conclude that you can’t find evidence for one.
The question asks for how FOK and RC judgments are different – therefore, the correct answer will be a way in which the two are the same or will be a completely untrue statement.
Answer choice "they assess knowledge at different points in the recall process." is true – FOK judgments assess knowledge for questions that are left unanswered after experimental subjects fail to answer them, while RC judgments assess knowledge after the participants answer a question. Eliminate "they assess knowledge at different points in the recall process.".
Answer choice "they are elicited experimentally under different conditions." is true for the same reason as "they assess knowledge at different points in the recall process.". The “different conditions” are the different points in the process under which RC and FOK judgments are assessed. Eliminate "they are elicited experimentally under different conditions.".
Answer choice "one is subjective and the other is objective." is false, since the passage states in paragraph 2 that both judgments are subjective: “Experiments that evaluate memory monitoring typically have individuals make subjective judgments about their memory at various stages of learning and recall.” Because choice "one is subjective and the other is objective."isn’t even true, it can’t be a point of difference, so choice "one is subjective and the other is objective." is correct.
Choice "they involve inferences based on different clues." is true based on information found in the fourth paragraph. The passage states that the “clue” the person bases a FOK judgment on is familiarity with the topic. For RC judgments, the “clue” is the memory retrieval experience itself – how they felt while they were remembering the information in question. Eliminate "they involve inferences based on different clues.".
Choice "one is more accurate than the other." is true based on information found in the third paragraph, which states that RC is a much more reliable indicator as to whether a person got something right or wrong than FOK is.
Except questions are specific questions for which you need to look back and find evidence for each answer in the text. If you can’t find evidence for a particular statement, that’s your answer. Remember, however, that these questions are often best done by process of elimination – it is often much easier to conclude that you can find evidence for four of five statements than conclude that you can’t find evidence for one.
The question asks for how FOK and RC judgments are different – therefore, the correct answer will be a way in which the two are the same or will be a completely untrue statement.
Answer choice "they assess knowledge at different points in the recall process." is true – FOK judgments assess knowledge for questions that are left unanswered after experimental subjects fail to answer them, while RC judgments assess knowledge after the participants answer a question. Eliminate "they assess knowledge at different points in the recall process.".
Answer choice "they are elicited experimentally under different conditions." is true for the same reason as "they assess knowledge at different points in the recall process.". The “different conditions” are the different points in the process under which RC and FOK judgments are assessed. Eliminate "they are elicited experimentally under different conditions.".
Answer choice "one is subjective and the other is objective." is false, since the passage states in paragraph 2 that both judgments are subjective: “Experiments that evaluate memory monitoring typically have individuals make subjective judgments about their memory at various stages of learning and recall.” Because choice "one is subjective and the other is objective."isn’t even true, it can’t be a point of difference, so choice "one is subjective and the other is objective." is correct.
Choice "they involve inferences based on different clues." is true based on information found in the fourth paragraph. The passage states that the “clue” the person bases a FOK judgment on is familiarity with the topic. For RC judgments, the “clue” is the memory retrieval experience itself – how they felt while they were remembering the information in question. Eliminate "they involve inferences based on different clues.".
Choice "one is more accurate than the other." is true based on information found in the third paragraph, which states that RC is a much more reliable indicator as to whether a person got something right or wrong than FOK is.
Compare your answer with the correct one above
In day-to-day functioning, people rely on both memory and knowledge of that memory, referred to as metamemory. For example, a person often cannot immediately recall a name upon meeting someone, but they feel that they know it. This feeling is the result of monitoring memory. Because of this feeling-of-knowing (FOK), most people will continue to search their memory for this name. Once a name is generated, people then monitor and decide if they are confident enough to use that name.
Memory monitoring involves evaluating the ongoing progress of any aspect of memory. Experiments that evaluate memory monitoring typically have individuals make subjective judgments about their memory at various stages of learning and recall. Participants are asked a series of questions. After each question that they answer, they are asked to provide a retrospective confidence (RC) judgment, rating the likelihood that their response is accurate. When participants do not answer a question, they are asked for their prospective FOK judgment, assessing whether they nonetheless feel they do know the answer (for example because they think they may be able to remember it at some point in the future).
Perhaps predictably, RC judgments are highly correlated with actual knowledge of a topic. FOK judgments, however, correlate rather weakly—albeit positively—with actual knowledge. While there are some instances where the FOK is the result of a momentary inability to recall something, more often than not the FOK stems from the sense that one should know something, for example because the field is familiar.
Research has resulted in a general consensus that, when monitoring memory, individuals infer whether a particular response will be, or has been, remembered based on the inputs that are readily available. However, the particular inputs used differ depending on when memory is assessed. Prospective FOK judgments are thought to be based on familiarity of the cue, accessibility of information about the memory, or a combination of the two. In contrast, it is widely accepted that RC judgments are based on the memory-retrieval experience—that is, the “on-line” experience of directly retrieving some previously studied item.
Which of the following, if true, would support the author's claims about the inputs associated with memory monitoring?
In day-to-day functioning, people rely on both memory and knowledge of that memory, referred to as metamemory. For example, a person often cannot immediately recall a name upon meeting someone, but they feel that they know it. This feeling is the result of monitoring memory. Because of this feeling-of-knowing (FOK), most people will continue to search their memory for this name. Once a name is generated, people then monitor and decide if they are confident enough to use that name.
Memory monitoring involves evaluating the ongoing progress of any aspect of memory. Experiments that evaluate memory monitoring typically have individuals make subjective judgments about their memory at various stages of learning and recall. Participants are asked a series of questions. After each question that they answer, they are asked to provide a retrospective confidence (RC) judgment, rating the likelihood that their response is accurate. When participants do not answer a question, they are asked for their prospective FOK judgment, assessing whether they nonetheless feel they do know the answer (for example because they think they may be able to remember it at some point in the future).
Perhaps predictably, RC judgments are highly correlated with actual knowledge of a topic. FOK judgments, however, correlate rather weakly—albeit positively—with actual knowledge. While there are some instances where the FOK is the result of a momentary inability to recall something, more often than not the FOK stems from the sense that one should know something, for example because the field is familiar.
Research has resulted in a general consensus that, when monitoring memory, individuals infer whether a particular response will be, or has been, remembered based on the inputs that are readily available. However, the particular inputs used differ depending on when memory is assessed. Prospective FOK judgments are thought to be based on familiarity of the cue, accessibility of information about the memory, or a combination of the two. In contrast, it is widely accepted that RC judgments are based on the memory-retrieval experience—that is, the “on-line” experience of directly retrieving some previously studied item.
Which of the following, if true, would support the author's claims about the inputs associated with memory monitoring?
Whenever the GMAT asks you to recall (or apply) a specific part of the text, you should consult your STOP reading of the passage to determine where in the text you need to look back to answer the question. In this case, the question asks you about the "inputs associated with memory monitoring." In other words, what factors affect a RC or FOK judgment? This information can be found in the last paragraph, which states that RC judgments are based on the "memory retrieval experience" whereas FOK judgments are based on "familiarity of the cue, accessibility of information about the memory, or a combination of the two." The correct answer will support one of these two claims.
The only one that matches is choice "Individuals who were asked the same question on subsequent days reported higher FOK - even if they didn't know the answer - than did individuals who hadn't heard the question before.". If individuals who have heard a question before (but still can't answer it) have higher FOK than those who haven't heard the question, that lines up with the claim that the "familiarity of the cue" affects FOK judgments.
Among the other answers, choice "Individuals report high RC if the memory accessed to answer a question had a large amount of accessible information associated with it." can be eliminated because the amount of information associated with an answer affects FOK judgments, not RC judgments. Choice "Brain scans of individuals performing FOK and RC judgments show that the two processes occur in different areas of the brain." can be eliminated because even if different parts of the brain are associated with each type of judgment, this doesn't support either claim. Choice "Prospective FOK judgments are often associated with high levels of brain activity around the memory retrieval centers of the brain." can be eliminated since there is no evidence that brain activity around memory retrieval means that there is more information associated with the question. And choice "The longer the time period between when an individual studies a topic and when he or she is asked about it, the lower the FOK judgment associated with that question." can be eliminated because time between studying and questioning is not listed as a factor in RC or FOK judgments.
Whenever the GMAT asks you to recall (or apply) a specific part of the text, you should consult your STOP reading of the passage to determine where in the text you need to look back to answer the question. In this case, the question asks you about the "inputs associated with memory monitoring." In other words, what factors affect a RC or FOK judgment? This information can be found in the last paragraph, which states that RC judgments are based on the "memory retrieval experience" whereas FOK judgments are based on "familiarity of the cue, accessibility of information about the memory, or a combination of the two." The correct answer will support one of these two claims.
The only one that matches is choice "Individuals who were asked the same question on subsequent days reported higher FOK - even if they didn't know the answer - than did individuals who hadn't heard the question before.". If individuals who have heard a question before (but still can't answer it) have higher FOK than those who haven't heard the question, that lines up with the claim that the "familiarity of the cue" affects FOK judgments.
Among the other answers, choice "Individuals report high RC if the memory accessed to answer a question had a large amount of accessible information associated with it." can be eliminated because the amount of information associated with an answer affects FOK judgments, not RC judgments. Choice "Brain scans of individuals performing FOK and RC judgments show that the two processes occur in different areas of the brain." can be eliminated because even if different parts of the brain are associated with each type of judgment, this doesn't support either claim. Choice "Prospective FOK judgments are often associated with high levels of brain activity around the memory retrieval centers of the brain." can be eliminated since there is no evidence that brain activity around memory retrieval means that there is more information associated with the question. And choice "The longer the time period between when an individual studies a topic and when he or she is asked about it, the lower the FOK judgment associated with that question." can be eliminated because time between studying and questioning is not listed as a factor in RC or FOK judgments.
Compare your answer with the correct one above
In day-to-day functioning, people rely on both memory and knowledge of that memory, referred to as metamemory. For example, a person often cannot immediately recall a name upon meeting someone, but they feel that they know it. This feeling is the result of monitoring memory. Because of this feeling-of-knowing (FOK), most people will continue to search their memory for this name. Once a name is generated, people then monitor and decide if they are confident enough to use that name.
Memory monitoring involves evaluating the ongoing progress of any aspect of memory. Experiments that evaluate memory monitoring typically have individuals make subjective judgments about their memory at various stages of learning and recall. Participants are asked a series of questions. After each question that they answer, they are asked to provide a retrospective confidence (RC) judgment, rating the likelihood that their response is accurate. When participants do not answer a question, they are asked for their prospective FOK judgment, assessing whether they nonetheless feel they do know the answer (for example because they think they may be able to remember it at some point in the future).
Perhaps predictably, RC judgments are highly correlated with actual knowledge of a topic. FOK judgments, however, correlate rather weakly—albeit positively—with actual knowledge. While there are some instances where the FOK is the result of a momentary inability to recall something, more often than not the FOK stems from the sense that one should know something, for example because the field is familiar.
Research has resulted in a general consensus that, when monitoring memory, individuals infer whether a particular response will be, or has been, remembered based on the inputs that are readily available. However, the particular inputs used differ depending on when memory is assessed. Prospective FOK judgments are thought to be based on familiarity of the cue, accessibility of information about the memory, or a combination of the two. In contrast, it is widely accepted that RC judgments are based on the memory-retrieval experience—that is, the “on-line” experience of directly retrieving some previously studied item.
Based on the information in the passage, in which of the following situations would a RC judgment occur?
In day-to-day functioning, people rely on both memory and knowledge of that memory, referred to as metamemory. For example, a person often cannot immediately recall a name upon meeting someone, but they feel that they know it. This feeling is the result of monitoring memory. Because of this feeling-of-knowing (FOK), most people will continue to search their memory for this name. Once a name is generated, people then monitor and decide if they are confident enough to use that name.
Memory monitoring involves evaluating the ongoing progress of any aspect of memory. Experiments that evaluate memory monitoring typically have individuals make subjective judgments about their memory at various stages of learning and recall. Participants are asked a series of questions. After each question that they answer, they are asked to provide a retrospective confidence (RC) judgment, rating the likelihood that their response is accurate. When participants do not answer a question, they are asked for their prospective FOK judgment, assessing whether they nonetheless feel they do know the answer (for example because they think they may be able to remember it at some point in the future).
Perhaps predictably, RC judgments are highly correlated with actual knowledge of a topic. FOK judgments, however, correlate rather weakly—albeit positively—with actual knowledge. While there are some instances where the FOK is the result of a momentary inability to recall something, more often than not the FOK stems from the sense that one should know something, for example because the field is familiar.
Research has resulted in a general consensus that, when monitoring memory, individuals infer whether a particular response will be, or has been, remembered based on the inputs that are readily available. However, the particular inputs used differ depending on when memory is assessed. Prospective FOK judgments are thought to be based on familiarity of the cue, accessibility of information about the memory, or a combination of the two. In contrast, it is widely accepted that RC judgments are based on the memory-retrieval experience—that is, the “on-line” experience of directly retrieving some previously studied item.
Based on the information in the passage, in which of the following situations would a RC judgment occur?
Remember that for any specific question, your strategy should be to go back to the text and read to remind yourself of exactly what the text said about the information being asked about. According to the text, RC judgments refer specifically to the process of monitoring the likelihood that a particular piece of information is correct once that piece of information is retrieved.
The only answer choice that matches this description is "A shopper considers whether the PIN he is about to enter is the correct one.". The shopper has already retrieved a piece of information (a PIN) and is considering whether it is correct before entering it.
Choice "A test taker reviews her test for potential calculation mistakes before turning it in." is close, but is incorrect because while it does deal with whether an already-answered question is correct, it doesn't deal with the probability that a memory is correct, but instead deals with whether the test taker made a careless mistake. Since RC judgments deal specifically with memory recall, this answer choice can be eliminated.
Among the other answers, choices "An individual tries to remember a password for an online application." and "A shopper tries to remember the price at which a particular item was advertised." can be eliminated because the process of remembering itself is neither a FOK or RC judgment. Choice "An individual studying for an exam reviews his notes to see what he needs to review." can be eliminated because it deals more closely with a "feeling of knowledge" judgment as described in the passage.
Remember that for any specific question, your strategy should be to go back to the text and read to remind yourself of exactly what the text said about the information being asked about. According to the text, RC judgments refer specifically to the process of monitoring the likelihood that a particular piece of information is correct once that piece of information is retrieved.
The only answer choice that matches this description is "A shopper considers whether the PIN he is about to enter is the correct one.". The shopper has already retrieved a piece of information (a PIN) and is considering whether it is correct before entering it.
Choice "A test taker reviews her test for potential calculation mistakes before turning it in." is close, but is incorrect because while it does deal with whether an already-answered question is correct, it doesn't deal with the probability that a memory is correct, but instead deals with whether the test taker made a careless mistake. Since RC judgments deal specifically with memory recall, this answer choice can be eliminated.
Among the other answers, choices "An individual tries to remember a password for an online application." and "A shopper tries to remember the price at which a particular item was advertised." can be eliminated because the process of remembering itself is neither a FOK or RC judgment. Choice "An individual studying for an exam reviews his notes to see what he needs to review." can be eliminated because it deals more closely with a "feeling of knowledge" judgment as described in the passage.
Compare your answer with the correct one above
In 2004, Jared Diamond published Collapse, a rigorous analysis of why certain ancient societies have perished. His groundbreaking study explored the environmental and historical factors that contributed to the demise of the “Viking colonies” of Greenland, the Polynesians of Easter Island, and the Anasazi of the American southwest. Diamond’s core thesis was that human recklessness and lack of foresight were the major factors in precipitating the ends of these societies.
Diamond’s work was among the first to seek out the commonalities between deforestation in Easter Island and resource depletion in ancient Greenland. Because he posited that human agency played a key role in determining whether cultures disintegrate or thrive, his message was viewed by many prominent environmental activists as a call to action – societies can remain vibrant providing they make prudent decisions regarding resource management.
However, many critics have claimed that Diamond’s explanations for the extinctions of ancient societies were simplistic, and placed undue blame on the regions’ inhabitants. For example, Terry Hunt, an archaeologist at the University of Hawaii, has claimed that the Polynesian deforestation, which Diamond attributed to the recklessness of the native peoples, was actually caused by predatory rats. Moreover, Hunt has noted that Diamond overlooked the role that European disease played in decimating native populations. If these other factors are taken into account, the issue of blame becomes a far more complex one and some of Diamond’s positions may need to be reconsidered.
According to the passage, all of the following were used by Diamond or Hunt to support their positions EXCEPT:
In 2004, Jared Diamond published Collapse, a rigorous analysis of why certain ancient societies have perished. His groundbreaking study explored the environmental and historical factors that contributed to the demise of the “Viking colonies” of Greenland, the Polynesians of Easter Island, and the Anasazi of the American southwest. Diamond’s core thesis was that human recklessness and lack of foresight were the major factors in precipitating the ends of these societies.
Diamond’s work was among the first to seek out the commonalities between deforestation in Easter Island and resource depletion in ancient Greenland. Because he posited that human agency played a key role in determining whether cultures disintegrate or thrive, his message was viewed by many prominent environmental activists as a call to action – societies can remain vibrant providing they make prudent decisions regarding resource management.
However, many critics have claimed that Diamond’s explanations for the extinctions of ancient societies were simplistic, and placed undue blame on the regions’ inhabitants. For example, Terry Hunt, an archaeologist at the University of Hawaii, has claimed that the Polynesian deforestation, which Diamond attributed to the recklessness of the native peoples, was actually caused by predatory rats. Moreover, Hunt has noted that Diamond overlooked the role that European disease played in decimating native populations. If these other factors are taken into account, the issue of blame becomes a far more complex one and some of Diamond’s positions may need to be reconsidered.
According to the passage, all of the following were used by Diamond or Hunt to support their positions EXCEPT:
For this specific style “EXCEPT” question, you need to go back and confirm which four of the answer choices were discussed in the passage. Here you need to make sure they were used as evidence for the two researchers. For "overuse of pasture land by animals of the Anasazi in the American southwest", you learn in the first paragraph that Diamond studied the Anasazi of the American southwest, but you are not told what he thinks specifically resulted in their disappearance. Nothing is stated about overuse of pasture so "overuse of pasture land by animals of the Anasazi in the American southwest" is correct. For "deforestation on Easter Island resulting from reckless behavior or lack of foresight" and "resource depletion in Greenland resulting from reckless behavior or lack of foresight" you learn the work of Diamond focused on “commonalities between deforestation in Easter Island and resource depletion in ancient Greenland” relating to his theory that “human recklessness” and “lack of foresight” were the cause of the disappearance. So both "deforestation on Easter Island resulting from reckless behavior or lack of foresight" and "resource depletion in Greenland resulting from reckless behavior or lack of foresight" were used to support Diamond’s thesis. "deforestation on Easter Island resulting from animal behavior" and "the spreading of disease by Europeans among some native populations" are explicitly given in the third paragraph as reasons for Hunt’s position that Diamond was too simplistic and placed undue blame on the native populations. The correct answer is "overuse of pasture land by animals of the Anasazi in the American southwest".
For this specific style “EXCEPT” question, you need to go back and confirm which four of the answer choices were discussed in the passage. Here you need to make sure they were used as evidence for the two researchers. For "overuse of pasture land by animals of the Anasazi in the American southwest", you learn in the first paragraph that Diamond studied the Anasazi of the American southwest, but you are not told what he thinks specifically resulted in their disappearance. Nothing is stated about overuse of pasture so "overuse of pasture land by animals of the Anasazi in the American southwest" is correct. For "deforestation on Easter Island resulting from reckless behavior or lack of foresight" and "resource depletion in Greenland resulting from reckless behavior or lack of foresight" you learn the work of Diamond focused on “commonalities between deforestation in Easter Island and resource depletion in ancient Greenland” relating to his theory that “human recklessness” and “lack of foresight” were the cause of the disappearance. So both "deforestation on Easter Island resulting from reckless behavior or lack of foresight" and "resource depletion in Greenland resulting from reckless behavior or lack of foresight" were used to support Diamond’s thesis. "deforestation on Easter Island resulting from animal behavior" and "the spreading of disease by Europeans among some native populations" are explicitly given in the third paragraph as reasons for Hunt’s position that Diamond was too simplistic and placed undue blame on the native populations. The correct answer is "overuse of pasture land by animals of the Anasazi in the American southwest".
Compare your answer with the correct one above
In 2004, Jared Diamond published Collapse, a rigorous analysis of why certain ancient societies have perished. His groundbreaking study explored the environmental and historical factors that contributed to the demise of the “Viking colonies” of Greenland, the Polynesians of Easter Island, and the Anasazi of the American southwest. Diamond’s core thesis was that human recklessness and lack of foresight were the major factors in precipitating the ends of these societies.
Diamond’s work was among the first to seek out the commonalities between deforestation in Easter Island and resource depletion in ancient Greenland. Because he posited that human agency played a key role in determining whether cultures disintegrate or thrive, his message was viewed by many prominent environmental activists as a call to action – societies can remain vibrant providing they make prudent decisions regarding resource management.
However, many critics have claimed that Diamond’s explanations for the extinctions of ancient societies were simplistic, and placed undue blame on the regions’ inhabitants. For example, Terry Hunt, an archaeologist at the University of Hawaii, has claimed that the Polynesian deforestation, which Diamond attributed to the recklessness of the native peoples, was actually caused by predatory rats. Moreover, Hunt has noted that Diamond overlooked the role that European disease played in decimating native populations. If these other factors are taken into account, the issue of blame becomes a far more complex one and some of Diamond’s positions may need to be reconsidered.
According to the passage, which of the following is used by Diamond as a piece of evidence for his core thesis?
In 2004, Jared Diamond published Collapse, a rigorous analysis of why certain ancient societies have perished. His groundbreaking study explored the environmental and historical factors that contributed to the demise of the “Viking colonies” of Greenland, the Polynesians of Easter Island, and the Anasazi of the American southwest. Diamond’s core thesis was that human recklessness and lack of foresight were the major factors in precipitating the ends of these societies.
Diamond’s work was among the first to seek out the commonalities between deforestation in Easter Island and resource depletion in ancient Greenland. Because he posited that human agency played a key role in determining whether cultures disintegrate or thrive, his message was viewed by many prominent environmental activists as a call to action – societies can remain vibrant providing they make prudent decisions regarding resource management.
However, many critics have claimed that Diamond’s explanations for the extinctions of ancient societies were simplistic, and placed undue blame on the regions’ inhabitants. For example, Terry Hunt, an archaeologist at the University of Hawaii, has claimed that the Polynesian deforestation, which Diamond attributed to the recklessness of the native peoples, was actually caused by predatory rats. Moreover, Hunt has noted that Diamond overlooked the role that European disease played in decimating native populations. If these other factors are taken into account, the issue of blame becomes a far more complex one and some of Diamond’s positions may need to be reconsidered.
According to the passage, which of the following is used by Diamond as a piece of evidence for his core thesis?
In this specific style question, you need to go back to the passage and confirm which one of these five facts was used to support Diamond’s position. Answer choices "The fact that diseases were introduced by Europeans" and "The fact that deforestation resulted from animal behavior" are two things that are used by Hunt to support his position – they were used to undermine Diamond’s core thesis so these are both incorrect. "The fact that there was proper resource management" and "The fact that there was a natural depletion of food sources" also have it backwards. Diamond believed that it was human behavior – “human recklessness” and “lack of foresight” – that led to the extinction of these societies. Proper resource management and a natural depletion of food sources would not support this thesis. "The fact that cultures were unable to accurately predict the future" matches exactly the reason given by Diamond in the last sentence of the first paragraph: “a lack of foresight”. “Foresight” is defined as: “the ability to predict or the action of predicting what will happen or be needed in the future.” So a “lack of foresight” is synonymous with an “inability to accurately predict the future.” Remember that the primary difficulty in specific style questions is wordplay. The correct answer will often use a synonymous, but difficult to recognize, form of what is stated in the passage and the incorrect answer choices will use similar but inaccurate descriptions of what you read. The correct answer is "The fact that cultures were unable to accurately predict the future".
In this specific style question, you need to go back to the passage and confirm which one of these five facts was used to support Diamond’s position. Answer choices "The fact that diseases were introduced by Europeans" and "The fact that deforestation resulted from animal behavior" are two things that are used by Hunt to support his position – they were used to undermine Diamond’s core thesis so these are both incorrect. "The fact that there was proper resource management" and "The fact that there was a natural depletion of food sources" also have it backwards. Diamond believed that it was human behavior – “human recklessness” and “lack of foresight” – that led to the extinction of these societies. Proper resource management and a natural depletion of food sources would not support this thesis. "The fact that cultures were unable to accurately predict the future" matches exactly the reason given by Diamond in the last sentence of the first paragraph: “a lack of foresight”. “Foresight” is defined as: “the ability to predict or the action of predicting what will happen or be needed in the future.” So a “lack of foresight” is synonymous with an “inability to accurately predict the future.” Remember that the primary difficulty in specific style questions is wordplay. The correct answer will often use a synonymous, but difficult to recognize, form of what is stated in the passage and the incorrect answer choices will use similar but inaccurate descriptions of what you read. The correct answer is "The fact that cultures were unable to accurately predict the future".
Compare your answer with the correct one above
While hotels have traditionally held a firm grip on the market of vacation-goers, the emergence of companies fostering short-term rentals are dramatically changing the landscape of the travel industry. Before the advent of the modern online forum, short-term rentals were an arrangement limited by sheer logistics. Information about the availability of (and desire for) a short-term rental was difficult to transmit and share. However, with the current explosion of social media and cyber enterprise, the business model of short-term rentals has blossomed.
In 2011, 40% of travelers reported that they would be staying in a short-term rental during the year, as opposed to a traditional hotel. By 2013, this figure had jumped up to a staggering 49%. The short-term rental business is a $24 billion market, holding 8% of the total market of U.S. travel. Rapidly expanding and growing with the innovations of creative renters, the question that hangs in the air is what this means for communities. Short-term rentals have had a polarizing effect in many ways, becoming a source of joy for venturists and cause of dismay for many homeowners.
In recent news, there have been incredible scandals in which short-term renters have abused the property loaned to them, causing thousands of dollars' worth of property damage. Other accusations include disturbing the peace and the commission of criminal acts. Homeowners' Associations (HOAs) have been up in arms, and the legal backlash has been significant. New York enacted firm restrictions on short-term renters, and many HOAs now embed limits on the purposes that a space may be used for, barring short-term rentals.
However, this reaction is an over-reaction, and a detrimental one at that. Cities and towns that set hard limits against short-term rentals are halting the economic growth that would otherwise accompany them. Vacationers are likely to be deterred from venturing out to towns that have banned more affordable short-term rentals. While some vacationers might opt to stay at a hotel in desirable locations, as the short-term rental industry continues to grow, it will become more and more likely that vacation-goers will simply choose alternative destinations that actually allow for short-term rentals.
This is not to say, however, that short-term rentals should be completely unregulated. The key is imposing useful regulations that are mutually beneficial to both communities and to the proprietors of short-term rentals. One potential solution would be to impose reasonable taxes on visitors that use short-term rentals; having requirements for minimum stays could also ensure more consistency for the communities. This also has the added benefit of generating income for towns and cities. There is no reason why communities should see the short-term rental industry as an adversary, when it can just as easily be made into an ally.
The purpose of this passage is to .
While hotels have traditionally held a firm grip on the market of vacation-goers, the emergence of companies fostering short-term rentals are dramatically changing the landscape of the travel industry. Before the advent of the modern online forum, short-term rentals were an arrangement limited by sheer logistics. Information about the availability of (and desire for) a short-term rental was difficult to transmit and share. However, with the current explosion of social media and cyber enterprise, the business model of short-term rentals has blossomed.
In 2011, 40% of travelers reported that they would be staying in a short-term rental during the year, as opposed to a traditional hotel. By 2013, this figure had jumped up to a staggering 49%. The short-term rental business is a $24 billion market, holding 8% of the total market of U.S. travel. Rapidly expanding and growing with the innovations of creative renters, the question that hangs in the air is what this means for communities. Short-term rentals have had a polarizing effect in many ways, becoming a source of joy for venturists and cause of dismay for many homeowners.
In recent news, there have been incredible scandals in which short-term renters have abused the property loaned to them, causing thousands of dollars' worth of property damage. Other accusations include disturbing the peace and the commission of criminal acts. Homeowners' Associations (HOAs) have been up in arms, and the legal backlash has been significant. New York enacted firm restrictions on short-term renters, and many HOAs now embed limits on the purposes that a space may be used for, barring short-term rentals.
However, this reaction is an over-reaction, and a detrimental one at that. Cities and towns that set hard limits against short-term rentals are halting the economic growth that would otherwise accompany them. Vacationers are likely to be deterred from venturing out to towns that have banned more affordable short-term rentals. While some vacationers might opt to stay at a hotel in desirable locations, as the short-term rental industry continues to grow, it will become more and more likely that vacation-goers will simply choose alternative destinations that actually allow for short-term rentals.
This is not to say, however, that short-term rentals should be completely unregulated. The key is imposing useful regulations that are mutually beneficial to both communities and to the proprietors of short-term rentals. One potential solution would be to impose reasonable taxes on visitors that use short-term rentals; having requirements for minimum stays could also ensure more consistency for the communities. This also has the added benefit of generating income for towns and cities. There is no reason why communities should see the short-term rental industry as an adversary, when it can just as easily be made into an ally.
The purpose of this passage is to .
This passage is written to support short-term rentals and provide arguments as to why they should be supported. Therefore, the correct answer is "advocate for a particular position." The passage is not objective and unbiased, as it clearly has a particular agenda. While the intersection of business and community is a theme discussed in the passage, it is not the primary purpose. Short-term rentals are not a negative phenonmen, and so the answer choice, "rationalize a negative phenomenon," is also incorrect. The passage also does not "point out the weaknesses in a widely accepted point of view."
This passage is written to support short-term rentals and provide arguments as to why they should be supported. Therefore, the correct answer is "advocate for a particular position." The passage is not objective and unbiased, as it clearly has a particular agenda. While the intersection of business and community is a theme discussed in the passage, it is not the primary purpose. Short-term rentals are not a negative phenonmen, and so the answer choice, "rationalize a negative phenomenon," is also incorrect. The passage also does not "point out the weaknesses in a widely accepted point of view."
Compare your answer with the correct one above
While hotels have traditionally held a firm grip on the market of vacation-goers, the emergence of companies fostering short-term rentals are dramatically changing the landscape of the travel industry. Before the advent of the modern online forum, short-term rentals were an arrangement limited by sheer logistics. Information about the availability of (and desire for) a short-term rental was difficult to transmit and share. However, with the current explosion of social media and cyber enterprise, the business model of short-term rentals has blossomed.
In 2011, 40% of travelers reported that they would be staying in a short-term rental during the year, as opposed to a traditional hotel. By 2013, this figure had jumped up to a staggering 49%. The short-term rental business is a $24 billion market, holding 8% of the total market of U.S. travel. Rapidly expanding and growing with the innovations of creative renters, the question that hangs in the air is what this means for communities. Short-term rentals have had a polarizing effect in many ways, becoming a source of joy for venturists and cause of dismay for many homeowners.
In recent news, there have been incredible scandals in which short-term renters have abused the property loaned to them, causing thousands of dollars' worth of property damage. Other accusations include disturbing the peace and the commission of criminal acts. Homeowners' Associations (HOAs) have been up in arms, and the legal backlash has been significant. New York enacted firm restrictions on short-term renters, and many HOAs now embed limits on the purposes that a space may be used for, barring short-term rentals.
However, this reaction is an over-reaction, and a detrimental one at that. Cities and towns that set hard limits against short-term rentals are halting the economic growth that would otherwise accompany them. Vacationers are likely to be deterred from venturing out to towns that have banned more affordable short-term rentals. While some vacationers might opt to stay at a hotel in desirable locations, as the short-term rental industry continues to grow, it will become more and more likely that vacation-goers will simply choose alternative destinations that actually allow for short-term rentals.
This is not to say, however, that short-term rentals should be completely unregulated. The key is imposing useful regulations that are mutually beneficial to both communities and to the proprietors of short-term rentals. One potential solution would be to impose reasonable taxes on visitors that use short-term rentals; having requirements for minimum stays could also ensure more consistency for the communities. This also has the added benefit of generating income for towns and cities. There is no reason why communities should see the short-term rental industry as an adversary, when it can just as easily be made into an ally.
The use of the underlined phrase "hard limits" in the context of the fourth paragraph most closely means .
While hotels have traditionally held a firm grip on the market of vacation-goers, the emergence of companies fostering short-term rentals are dramatically changing the landscape of the travel industry. Before the advent of the modern online forum, short-term rentals were an arrangement limited by sheer logistics. Information about the availability of (and desire for) a short-term rental was difficult to transmit and share. However, with the current explosion of social media and cyber enterprise, the business model of short-term rentals has blossomed.
In 2011, 40% of travelers reported that they would be staying in a short-term rental during the year, as opposed to a traditional hotel. By 2013, this figure had jumped up to a staggering 49%. The short-term rental business is a $24 billion market, holding 8% of the total market of U.S. travel. Rapidly expanding and growing with the innovations of creative renters, the question that hangs in the air is what this means for communities. Short-term rentals have had a polarizing effect in many ways, becoming a source of joy for venturists and cause of dismay for many homeowners.
In recent news, there have been incredible scandals in which short-term renters have abused the property loaned to them, causing thousands of dollars' worth of property damage. Other accusations include disturbing the peace and the commission of criminal acts. Homeowners' Associations (HOAs) have been up in arms, and the legal backlash has been significant. New York enacted firm restrictions on short-term renters, and many HOAs now embed limits on the purposes that a space may be used for, barring short-term rentals.
However, this reaction is an over-reaction, and a detrimental one at that. Cities and towns that set hard limits against short-term rentals are halting the economic growth that would otherwise accompany them. Vacationers are likely to be deterred from venturing out to towns that have banned more affordable short-term rentals. While some vacationers might opt to stay at a hotel in desirable locations, as the short-term rental industry continues to grow, it will become more and more likely that vacation-goers will simply choose alternative destinations that actually allow for short-term rentals.
This is not to say, however, that short-term rentals should be completely unregulated. The key is imposing useful regulations that are mutually beneficial to both communities and to the proprietors of short-term rentals. One potential solution would be to impose reasonable taxes on visitors that use short-term rentals; having requirements for minimum stays could also ensure more consistency for the communities. This also has the added benefit of generating income for towns and cities. There is no reason why communities should see the short-term rental industry as an adversary, when it can just as easily be made into an ally.
The use of the underlined phrase "hard limits" in the context of the fourth paragraph most closely means .
The use of the term "hard limits" is used in the paragraph that describes how some cities and towns do not allow any short-term rentals. Based on this context, "hard limits" refers to a decisive ban, so the term that is closest in meaning would be "restrictions that are uncompromising."
While the author might see the rules as unfair, impratical, or as being overbearing restrictions, these are not the meaning carried by the term "hard limits." Additionally, the author does not see the hard limits as being "useful regulations," so this answer choice is wrong.
The use of the term "hard limits" is used in the paragraph that describes how some cities and towns do not allow any short-term rentals. Based on this context, "hard limits" refers to a decisive ban, so the term that is closest in meaning would be "restrictions that are uncompromising."
While the author might see the rules as unfair, impratical, or as being overbearing restrictions, these are not the meaning carried by the term "hard limits." Additionally, the author does not see the hard limits as being "useful regulations," so this answer choice is wrong.
Compare your answer with the correct one above
The United Nations Convention on Contracts for the International Sale of Goods (CISG) can help countries throughout the world have a more uniform way of navigating the challenging waters of international law surrounding trade. It is not uncommon for two countries to have adopted different laws on international trade that conflict with each other. This becomes a serious problem when trade disputes arise. To help make this concept more tangible, consider the following hypothetical.
Suppose China ships three million dollars' worth of electronics to Uganda using standard bulk shipping transportation methods via a commonly traveled sea route. However, the packaging isn't secured in a manner sufficient to withstand unforeseen weather conditions. As a result, the goods become damaged in transit and are no longer fit for resale. Given that two countries are involved in this transaction–China and Uganda–the question arises as to which country’s trade laws will apply to resolve the matter at hand.
In this scenario, it is fortunate that both China and Uganda are parties to the CISG, which provide for a uniform set of laws governing trade. Such laws cover which party would be responsible for the damaged goods in this scenario. As a result, there will be no dispute as to whether China’s or Uganda's trade laws apply. Given that both countries are parties to the CISG, the laws set forth by the CISG would be applicable.
However, not all countries are parties to the CISG. One example is Rwanda. Even though Rwanda is not a party to the CISG, the fact of the matter is that CISG laws can still apply to it. The CISG applies to trade between countries so long as one of those countries is a party to the CISG (unless the parties expressly specify that the CISG will not apply to their specific trade arrangement). Several of Rwanda's main trade partners, such as the United States, China, Belgium, and Uganda, are parties to the CISG, so the laws of the treaty will apply in those trade agreements. Meanwhile, there is a different story when it comes to Rwanda's trade agreements with Kenya, Swaziland, Tanzania, and Thailand, which are not parties to the CISG. Due to these countries’ lack of membership in the CISG, if a problem ever arose in a trade agreement between Rwanda and one those countries, it would be unclear as to which country’s laws would apply.
There has been heated discussion as to whether Rwanda should sign the CISG. The United Nations Development Program takes the stance that it would behoove Rwanda to join. Whether or not Rwanda decides to become a member, the CISG will still apply to a large portion of its trade agreements, as about 100 countries are in fact CISG members, with a strong portion of those members also being trade partners with Rwanda. On the flip side, some Rwandan politicians believe that valuable autonomy would be lost if Rwanda assented to the CISG. However, given the potential benefits that Rwanda stands to gain from the CISG, these fears do not merit forgoing such a valuable opportunity.
The use of the underlined phrase "heated discussion“ in the context of the last paragraph of the passage most closely means .
The United Nations Convention on Contracts for the International Sale of Goods (CISG) can help countries throughout the world have a more uniform way of navigating the challenging waters of international law surrounding trade. It is not uncommon for two countries to have adopted different laws on international trade that conflict with each other. This becomes a serious problem when trade disputes arise. To help make this concept more tangible, consider the following hypothetical.
Suppose China ships three million dollars' worth of electronics to Uganda using standard bulk shipping transportation methods via a commonly traveled sea route. However, the packaging isn't secured in a manner sufficient to withstand unforeseen weather conditions. As a result, the goods become damaged in transit and are no longer fit for resale. Given that two countries are involved in this transaction–China and Uganda–the question arises as to which country’s trade laws will apply to resolve the matter at hand.
In this scenario, it is fortunate that both China and Uganda are parties to the CISG, which provide for a uniform set of laws governing trade. Such laws cover which party would be responsible for the damaged goods in this scenario. As a result, there will be no dispute as to whether China’s or Uganda's trade laws apply. Given that both countries are parties to the CISG, the laws set forth by the CISG would be applicable.
However, not all countries are parties to the CISG. One example is Rwanda. Even though Rwanda is not a party to the CISG, the fact of the matter is that CISG laws can still apply to it. The CISG applies to trade between countries so long as one of those countries is a party to the CISG (unless the parties expressly specify that the CISG will not apply to their specific trade arrangement). Several of Rwanda's main trade partners, such as the United States, China, Belgium, and Uganda, are parties to the CISG, so the laws of the treaty will apply in those trade agreements. Meanwhile, there is a different story when it comes to Rwanda's trade agreements with Kenya, Swaziland, Tanzania, and Thailand, which are not parties to the CISG. Due to these countries’ lack of membership in the CISG, if a problem ever arose in a trade agreement between Rwanda and one those countries, it would be unclear as to which country’s laws would apply.
There has been heated discussion as to whether Rwanda should sign the CISG. The United Nations Development Program takes the stance that it would behoove Rwanda to join. Whether or not Rwanda decides to become a member, the CISG will still apply to a large portion of its trade agreements, as about 100 countries are in fact CISG members, with a strong portion of those members also being trade partners with Rwanda. On the flip side, some Rwandan politicians believe that valuable autonomy would be lost if Rwanda assented to the CISG. However, given the potential benefits that Rwanda stands to gain from the CISG, these fears do not merit forgoing such a valuable opportunity.
The use of the underlined phrase "heated discussion“ in the context of the last paragraph of the passage most closely means .
The phrase, "heated discussion" appears in the last paragraph in this sentence: "There has been heated discussion as to whether Rwanda should sign the CISG." Given the context in which the phrase appears, it seems to mean that strong arguments are being made both for and against membership in the CISG. As such, "strong debate" is the best answer, as the discoure is not emotional, is not characerized as being combative, nor unfair, and there is no indication that "intense persuasion" is being utilized.
The phrase, "heated discussion" appears in the last paragraph in this sentence: "There has been heated discussion as to whether Rwanda should sign the CISG." Given the context in which the phrase appears, it seems to mean that strong arguments are being made both for and against membership in the CISG. As such, "strong debate" is the best answer, as the discoure is not emotional, is not characerized as being combative, nor unfair, and there is no indication that "intense persuasion" is being utilized.
Compare your answer with the correct one above
The United Nations Convention on Contracts for the International Sale of Goods (CISG) can help countries throughout the world have a more uniform way of navigating the challenging waters of international law surrounding trade. It is not uncommon for two countries to have adopted different laws on international trade that conflict with each other. This becomes a serious problem when trade disputes arise. To help make this concept more tangible, consider the following hypothetical.
Suppose China ships three million dollars' worth of electronics to Uganda using standard bulk shipping transportation methods via a commonly traveled sea route. However, the packaging isn't secured in a manner sufficient to withstand unforeseen weather conditions. As a result, the goods become damaged in transit and are no longer fit for resale. Given that two countries are involved in this transaction–China and Uganda–the question arises as to which country’s trade laws will apply to resolve the matter at hand.
In this scenario, it is fortunate that both China and Uganda are parties to the CISG, which provide for a uniform set of laws governing trade. Such laws cover which party would be responsible for the damaged goods in this scenario. As a result, there will be no dispute as to whether China’s or Uganda's trade laws apply. Given that both countries are parties to the CISG, the laws set forth by the CISG would be applicable.
However, not all countries are parties to the CISG. One example is Rwanda. Even though Rwanda is not a party to the CISG, the fact of the matter is that CISG laws can still apply to it. The CISG applies to trade between countries so long as one of those countries is a party to the CISG (unless the parties expressly specify that the CISG will not apply to their specific trade arrangement). Several of Rwanda's main trade partners, such as the United States, China, Belgium, and Uganda, are parties to the CISG, so the laws of the treaty will apply in those trade agreements. Meanwhile, there is a different story when it comes to Rwanda's trade agreements with Kenya, Swaziland, Tanzania, and Thailand, which are not parties to the CISG. Due to these countries’ lack of membership in the CISG, if a problem ever arose in a trade agreement between Rwanda and one those countries, it would be unclear as to which country’s laws would apply.
There has been heated discussion as to whether Rwanda should sign the CISG. The United Nations Development Program takes the stance that it would behoove Rwanda to join. Whether or not Rwanda decides to become a member, the CISG will still apply to a large portion of its trade agreements, as about 100 countries are in fact CISG members, with a strong portion of those members also being trade partners with Rwanda. On the flip side, some Rwandan politicians believe that valuable autonomy would be lost if Rwanda assented to the CISG. However, given the potential benefits that Rwanda stands to gain from the CISG, these fears do not merit forgoing such a valuable opportunity.
Which of the following is the main purpose of the article?
The United Nations Convention on Contracts for the International Sale of Goods (CISG) can help countries throughout the world have a more uniform way of navigating the challenging waters of international law surrounding trade. It is not uncommon for two countries to have adopted different laws on international trade that conflict with each other. This becomes a serious problem when trade disputes arise. To help make this concept more tangible, consider the following hypothetical.
Suppose China ships three million dollars' worth of electronics to Uganda using standard bulk shipping transportation methods via a commonly traveled sea route. However, the packaging isn't secured in a manner sufficient to withstand unforeseen weather conditions. As a result, the goods become damaged in transit and are no longer fit for resale. Given that two countries are involved in this transaction–China and Uganda–the question arises as to which country’s trade laws will apply to resolve the matter at hand.
In this scenario, it is fortunate that both China and Uganda are parties to the CISG, which provide for a uniform set of laws governing trade. Such laws cover which party would be responsible for the damaged goods in this scenario. As a result, there will be no dispute as to whether China’s or Uganda's trade laws apply. Given that both countries are parties to the CISG, the laws set forth by the CISG would be applicable.
However, not all countries are parties to the CISG. One example is Rwanda. Even though Rwanda is not a party to the CISG, the fact of the matter is that CISG laws can still apply to it. The CISG applies to trade between countries so long as one of those countries is a party to the CISG (unless the parties expressly specify that the CISG will not apply to their specific trade arrangement). Several of Rwanda's main trade partners, such as the United States, China, Belgium, and Uganda, are parties to the CISG, so the laws of the treaty will apply in those trade agreements. Meanwhile, there is a different story when it comes to Rwanda's trade agreements with Kenya, Swaziland, Tanzania, and Thailand, which are not parties to the CISG. Due to these countries’ lack of membership in the CISG, if a problem ever arose in a trade agreement between Rwanda and one those countries, it would be unclear as to which country’s laws would apply.
There has been heated discussion as to whether Rwanda should sign the CISG. The United Nations Development Program takes the stance that it would behoove Rwanda to join. Whether or not Rwanda decides to become a member, the CISG will still apply to a large portion of its trade agreements, as about 100 countries are in fact CISG members, with a strong portion of those members also being trade partners with Rwanda. On the flip side, some Rwandan politicians believe that valuable autonomy would be lost if Rwanda assented to the CISG. However, given the potential benefits that Rwanda stands to gain from the CISG, these fears do not merit forgoing such a valuable opportunity.
Which of the following is the main purpose of the article?
The article is written with a heavy-handed favoritism towards Rwanda becoming a member of the CISG. This is especially apparent in the opening and closing paragraphs. Therefore, the correct answer is "Explain why Rwanda should become a member of the CISG."
The article is written with a heavy-handed favoritism towards Rwanda becoming a member of the CISG. This is especially apparent in the opening and closing paragraphs. Therefore, the correct answer is "Explain why Rwanda should become a member of the CISG."
Compare your answer with the correct one above
While hotels have traditionally held a firm grip on the market of vacation-goers, the emergence of companies fostering short-term rentals are dramatically changing the landscape of the travel industry. Before the advent of the modern online forum, short-term rentals were an arrangement limited by sheer logistics. Information about the availability of (and desire for) a short-term rental was difficult to transmit and share. However, with the current explosion of social media and cyber enterprise, the business model of short-term rentals has blossomed.
In 2011, 40% of travelers reported that they would be staying in a short-term rental during the year, as opposed to a traditional hotel. By 2013, this figure had jumped up to a staggering 49%. The short-term rental business is a $24 billion market, holding 8% of the total market of U.S. travel. Rapidly expanding and growing with the innovations of creative renters, the question that hangs in the air is what this means for communities. Short-term rentals have had a polarizing effect in many ways, becoming a source of joy for venturists and cause of dismay for many homeowners.
In recent news, there have been incredible scandals in which short-term renters have abused the property loaned to them, causing thousands of dollars' worth of property damage. Other accusations include disturbing the peace and the commission of criminal acts. Homeowners' Associations (HOAs) have been up in arms, and the legal backlash has been significant. New York enacted firm restrictions on short-term renters, and many HOAs now embed limits on the purposes that a space may be used for, barring short-term rentals.
However, this reaction is an over-reaction, and a detrimental one at that. Cities and towns that set hard limits against short-term rentals are halting the economic growth that would otherwise accompany them. Vacationers are likely to be deterred from venturing out to towns that have banned more affordable short-term rentals. While some vacationers might opt to stay at a hotel in desirable locations, as the short-term rental industry continues to grow, it will become more and more likely that vacation-goers will simply choose alternative destinations that actually allow for short-term rentals.
This is not to say, however, that short-term rentals should be completely unregulated. The key is imposing useful regulations that are mutually beneficial to both communities and to the proprietors of short-term rentals. One potential solution would be to impose reasonable taxes on visitors that use short-term rentals; having requirements for minimum stays could also ensure more consistency for the communities. This also has the added benefit of generating income for towns and cities. There is no reason why communities should see the short-term rental industry as an adversary, when it can just as easily be made into an ally.
The author would most likely agree with which of the following statements?
While hotels have traditionally held a firm grip on the market of vacation-goers, the emergence of companies fostering short-term rentals are dramatically changing the landscape of the travel industry. Before the advent of the modern online forum, short-term rentals were an arrangement limited by sheer logistics. Information about the availability of (and desire for) a short-term rental was difficult to transmit and share. However, with the current explosion of social media and cyber enterprise, the business model of short-term rentals has blossomed.
In 2011, 40% of travelers reported that they would be staying in a short-term rental during the year, as opposed to a traditional hotel. By 2013, this figure had jumped up to a staggering 49%. The short-term rental business is a $24 billion market, holding 8% of the total market of U.S. travel. Rapidly expanding and growing with the innovations of creative renters, the question that hangs in the air is what this means for communities. Short-term rentals have had a polarizing effect in many ways, becoming a source of joy for venturists and cause of dismay for many homeowners.
In recent news, there have been incredible scandals in which short-term renters have abused the property loaned to them, causing thousands of dollars' worth of property damage. Other accusations include disturbing the peace and the commission of criminal acts. Homeowners' Associations (HOAs) have been up in arms, and the legal backlash has been significant. New York enacted firm restrictions on short-term renters, and many HOAs now embed limits on the purposes that a space may be used for, barring short-term rentals.
However, this reaction is an over-reaction, and a detrimental one at that. Cities and towns that set hard limits against short-term rentals are halting the economic growth that would otherwise accompany them. Vacationers are likely to be deterred from venturing out to towns that have banned more affordable short-term rentals. While some vacationers might opt to stay at a hotel in desirable locations, as the short-term rental industry continues to grow, it will become more and more likely that vacation-goers will simply choose alternative destinations that actually allow for short-term rentals.
This is not to say, however, that short-term rentals should be completely unregulated. The key is imposing useful regulations that are mutually beneficial to both communities and to the proprietors of short-term rentals. One potential solution would be to impose reasonable taxes on visitors that use short-term rentals; having requirements for minimum stays could also ensure more consistency for the communities. This also has the added benefit of generating income for towns and cities. There is no reason why communities should see the short-term rental industry as an adversary, when it can just as easily be made into an ally.
The author would most likely agree with which of the following statements?
The author would most likely agree with the statement "While short-term rentals and communities would mutually benefit from regulations, a hard ban against them would be mutually counter-productive." This is because the author explicitly states that communities and short-term rentals should be allies as opposed to enemies. Thus, mutually beneficial regulations would serve them both well.
This answer choice says the exact opposite, and so it is incorrect: "Communities should see short-term rentals as an adversary, when they can just as easily be made an ally."
There is no evidence to suggest that the author supports this statement: "Although short-term rentals are popular right now, it is likely that they will diminish in value as more restrictions are enstated against them."
The author implies that hotels and short-term rentals are competitors, so this statement is not correct: "Hotels and short-term rentals complement each other and can contribute to one another's mutual development."
The author believes that some regulations are beneficial, so this statement is incorrect: "In general, regulations have proven to do a disservice to travel industry, as the red tape prevents commerce from moving freely, and discourages travel as a whole."
The author would most likely agree with the statement "While short-term rentals and communities would mutually benefit from regulations, a hard ban against them would be mutually counter-productive." This is because the author explicitly states that communities and short-term rentals should be allies as opposed to enemies. Thus, mutually beneficial regulations would serve them both well.
This answer choice says the exact opposite, and so it is incorrect: "Communities should see short-term rentals as an adversary, when they can just as easily be made an ally."
There is no evidence to suggest that the author supports this statement: "Although short-term rentals are popular right now, it is likely that they will diminish in value as more restrictions are enstated against them."
The author implies that hotels and short-term rentals are competitors, so this statement is not correct: "Hotels and short-term rentals complement each other and can contribute to one another's mutual development."
The author believes that some regulations are beneficial, so this statement is incorrect: "In general, regulations have proven to do a disservice to travel industry, as the red tape prevents commerce from moving freely, and discourages travel as a whole."
Compare your answer with the correct one above
While hotels have traditionally held a firm grip on the market of vacation-goers, the emergence of companies fostering short-term rentals are dramatically changing the landscape of the travel industry. Before the advent of the modern online forum, short-term rentals were an arrangement limited by sheer logistics. Information about the availability of (and desire for) a short-term rental was difficult to transmit and share. However, with the current explosion of social media and cyber enterprise, the business model of short-term rentals has blossomed.
In 2011, 40% of travelers reported that they would be staying in a short-term rental during the year, as opposed to a traditional hotel. By 2013, this figure had jumped up to a staggering 49%. The short-term rental business is a $24 billion market, holding 8% of the total market of U.S. travel. Rapidly expanding and growing with the innovations of creative renters, the question that hangs in the air is what this means for communities. Short-term rentals have had a polarizing effect in many ways, becoming a source of joy for venturists and cause of dismay for many homeowners.
In recent news, there have been incredible scandals in which short-term renters have abused the property loaned to them, causing thousands of dollars' worth of property damage. Other accusations include disturbing the peace and the commission of criminal acts. Homeowners' Associations (HOAs) have been up in arms, and the legal backlash has been significant. New York enacted firm restrictions on short-term renters, and many HOAs now embed limits on the purposes that a space may be used for, barring short-term rentals.
However, this reaction is an over-reaction, and a detrimental one at that. Cities and towns that set hard limits against short-term rentals are halting the economic growth that would otherwise accompany them. Vacationers are likely to be deterred from venturing out to towns that have banned more affordable short-term rentals. While some vacationers might opt to stay at a hotel in desirable locations, as the short-term rental industry continues to grow, it will become more and more likely that vacation-goers will simply choose alternative destinations that actually allow for short-term rentals.
This is not to say, however, that short-term rentals should be completely unregulated. The key is imposing useful regulations that are mutually beneficial to both communities and to the proprietors of short-term rentals. One potential solution would be to impose reasonable taxes on visitors that use short-term rentals; having requirements for minimum stays could also ensure more consistency for the communities. This also has the added benefit of generating income for towns and cities. There is no reason why communities should see the short-term rental industry as an adversary, when it can just as easily be made into an ally.
Which of the following most likely explains why Homeowners' Associations do not tend to support short-term rentals?
While hotels have traditionally held a firm grip on the market of vacation-goers, the emergence of companies fostering short-term rentals are dramatically changing the landscape of the travel industry. Before the advent of the modern online forum, short-term rentals were an arrangement limited by sheer logistics. Information about the availability of (and desire for) a short-term rental was difficult to transmit and share. However, with the current explosion of social media and cyber enterprise, the business model of short-term rentals has blossomed.
In 2011, 40% of travelers reported that they would be staying in a short-term rental during the year, as opposed to a traditional hotel. By 2013, this figure had jumped up to a staggering 49%. The short-term rental business is a $24 billion market, holding 8% of the total market of U.S. travel. Rapidly expanding and growing with the innovations of creative renters, the question that hangs in the air is what this means for communities. Short-term rentals have had a polarizing effect in many ways, becoming a source of joy for venturists and cause of dismay for many homeowners.
In recent news, there have been incredible scandals in which short-term renters have abused the property loaned to them, causing thousands of dollars' worth of property damage. Other accusations include disturbing the peace and the commission of criminal acts. Homeowners' Associations (HOAs) have been up in arms, and the legal backlash has been significant. New York enacted firm restrictions on short-term renters, and many HOAs now embed limits on the purposes that a space may be used for, barring short-term rentals.
However, this reaction is an over-reaction, and a detrimental one at that. Cities and towns that set hard limits against short-term rentals are halting the economic growth that would otherwise accompany them. Vacationers are likely to be deterred from venturing out to towns that have banned more affordable short-term rentals. While some vacationers might opt to stay at a hotel in desirable locations, as the short-term rental industry continues to grow, it will become more and more likely that vacation-goers will simply choose alternative destinations that actually allow for short-term rentals.
This is not to say, however, that short-term rentals should be completely unregulated. The key is imposing useful regulations that are mutually beneficial to both communities and to the proprietors of short-term rentals. One potential solution would be to impose reasonable taxes on visitors that use short-term rentals; having requirements for minimum stays could also ensure more consistency for the communities. This also has the added benefit of generating income for towns and cities. There is no reason why communities should see the short-term rental industry as an adversary, when it can just as easily be made into an ally.
Which of the following most likely explains why Homeowners' Associations do not tend to support short-term rentals?
The best answer is "Short-term rentals, due to the transitory nature of their inhabitants, can make the members of a community feel uncomfortable, thereby negatively impacting the Homeowners' Association." Given that the patrons of short-term rentals are constantly coming and going, the nature of short-term rentals can upset members of a Homeowners' Association, who usually strive for consistency and stability.
While short-term rentals may be competition for hotels, there is no evidence that they are competition for Homeowners' Associations. Therefore, this answer choice is wrong: "Homeowners' Associations see short-term rentals as being competition for the market of vacationers."
The fact that short-term rentals experience success would not be an upsetting factor for Homeowners' Associations. Therefore, this answer choice is wrong: "Short-term rentals do not confer a benefit on the Homeowners' Association that is comparable to that conferred on the proprietor of a short-term rental."
There is no evidence in the passage to support either "Short-term rentals directly confer extra fees on Homeowners' Associations" or "Homeowners' Associations, as a general policy, have always looked down upon short-term rentals because they are unsanitary."
The best answer is "Short-term rentals, due to the transitory nature of their inhabitants, can make the members of a community feel uncomfortable, thereby negatively impacting the Homeowners' Association." Given that the patrons of short-term rentals are constantly coming and going, the nature of short-term rentals can upset members of a Homeowners' Association, who usually strive for consistency and stability.
While short-term rentals may be competition for hotels, there is no evidence that they are competition for Homeowners' Associations. Therefore, this answer choice is wrong: "Homeowners' Associations see short-term rentals as being competition for the market of vacationers."
The fact that short-term rentals experience success would not be an upsetting factor for Homeowners' Associations. Therefore, this answer choice is wrong: "Short-term rentals do not confer a benefit on the Homeowners' Association that is comparable to that conferred on the proprietor of a short-term rental."
There is no evidence in the passage to support either "Short-term rentals directly confer extra fees on Homeowners' Associations" or "Homeowners' Associations, as a general policy, have always looked down upon short-term rentals because they are unsanitary."
Compare your answer with the correct one above
While hotels have traditionally held a firm grip on the market of vacation-goers, the emergence of companies fostering short-term rentals are dramatically changing the landscape of the travel industry. Before the advent of the modern online forum, short-term rentals were an arrangement limited by sheer logistics. Information about the availability of (and desire for) a short-term rental was difficult to transmit and share. However, with the current explosion of social media and cyber enterprise, the business model of short-term rentals has blossomed.
In 2011, 40% of travelers reported that they would be staying in a short-term rental during the year, as opposed to a traditional hotel. By 2013, this figure had jumped up to a staggering 49%. The short-term rental business is a $24 billion market, holding 8% of the total market of U.S. travel. Rapidly expanding and growing with the innovations of creative renters, the question that hangs in the air is what this means for communities. Short-term rentals have had a polarizing effect in many ways, becoming a source of joy for venturists and cause of dismay for many homeowners.
In recent news, there have been incredible scandals in which short-term renters have abused the property loaned to them, causing thousands of dollars' worth of property damage. Other accusations include disturbing the peace and the commission of criminal acts. Homeowners' Associations (HOAs) have been up in arms, and the legal backlash has been significant. New York enacted firm restrictions on short-term renters, and many HOAs now embed limits on the purposes that a space may be used for, barring short-term rentals.
However, this reaction is an over-reaction, and a detrimental one at that. Cities and towns that set hard limits against short-term rentals are halting the economic growth that would otherwise accompany them. Vacationers are likely to be deterred from venturing out to towns that have banned more affordable short-term rentals. While some vacationers might opt to stay at a hotel in desirable locations, as the short-term rental industry continues to grow, it will become more and more likely that vacation-goers will simply choose alternative destinations that actually allow for short-term rentals.
This is not to say, however, that short-term rentals should be completely unregulated. The key is imposing useful regulations that are mutually beneficial to both communities and to the proprietors of short-term rentals. One potential solution would be to impose reasonable taxes on visitors that use short-term rentals; having requirements for minimum stays could also ensure more consistency for the communities. This also has the added benefit of generating income for towns and cities. There is no reason why communities should see the short-term rental industry as an adversary, when it can just as easily be made into an ally.
The primary purpose of the second paragraph is to .
While hotels have traditionally held a firm grip on the market of vacation-goers, the emergence of companies fostering short-term rentals are dramatically changing the landscape of the travel industry. Before the advent of the modern online forum, short-term rentals were an arrangement limited by sheer logistics. Information about the availability of (and desire for) a short-term rental was difficult to transmit and share. However, with the current explosion of social media and cyber enterprise, the business model of short-term rentals has blossomed.
In 2011, 40% of travelers reported that they would be staying in a short-term rental during the year, as opposed to a traditional hotel. By 2013, this figure had jumped up to a staggering 49%. The short-term rental business is a $24 billion market, holding 8% of the total market of U.S. travel. Rapidly expanding and growing with the innovations of creative renters, the question that hangs in the air is what this means for communities. Short-term rentals have had a polarizing effect in many ways, becoming a source of joy for venturists and cause of dismay for many homeowners.
In recent news, there have been incredible scandals in which short-term renters have abused the property loaned to them, causing thousands of dollars' worth of property damage. Other accusations include disturbing the peace and the commission of criminal acts. Homeowners' Associations (HOAs) have been up in arms, and the legal backlash has been significant. New York enacted firm restrictions on short-term renters, and many HOAs now embed limits on the purposes that a space may be used for, barring short-term rentals.
However, this reaction is an over-reaction, and a detrimental one at that. Cities and towns that set hard limits against short-term rentals are halting the economic growth that would otherwise accompany them. Vacationers are likely to be deterred from venturing out to towns that have banned more affordable short-term rentals. While some vacationers might opt to stay at a hotel in desirable locations, as the short-term rental industry continues to grow, it will become more and more likely that vacation-goers will simply choose alternative destinations that actually allow for short-term rentals.
This is not to say, however, that short-term rentals should be completely unregulated. The key is imposing useful regulations that are mutually beneficial to both communities and to the proprietors of short-term rentals. One potential solution would be to impose reasonable taxes on visitors that use short-term rentals; having requirements for minimum stays could also ensure more consistency for the communities. This also has the added benefit of generating income for towns and cities. There is no reason why communities should see the short-term rental industry as an adversary, when it can just as easily be made into an ally.
The primary purpose of the second paragraph is to .
While the first paragraph provides background on the short-term rental phenomenon, explaining how the internet aided its spread, the third paragraph addresses the controversies that it has sparked. As a means of transitioning between these two topics, the second paragraph explains the significance of short-term rentals in order to allow the full impact of the controversial issues to be comprehended by the reader. Therefore, the correct answer is "Emphasize the impact that short-term rentals have had on the travel industry, thereby transitioning betwen the first and third paragraphs."
A tempting wrong answer is "Convince the reader that short-term rentals are the most significant development in the realm in which the housing industry and the travel industry intersect." While this sounds like it could be accurate, there is no evidence in the passage to indicate that short-term rentals are "the most significant development in the realm in which the housing industry and the travel industry intersect." The author does not provide sufficient information to justify use of the superlative "most."
While the first paragraph provides background on the short-term rental phenomenon, explaining how the internet aided its spread, the third paragraph addresses the controversies that it has sparked. As a means of transitioning between these two topics, the second paragraph explains the significance of short-term rentals in order to allow the full impact of the controversial issues to be comprehended by the reader. Therefore, the correct answer is "Emphasize the impact that short-term rentals have had on the travel industry, thereby transitioning betwen the first and third paragraphs."
A tempting wrong answer is "Convince the reader that short-term rentals are the most significant development in the realm in which the housing industry and the travel industry intersect." While this sounds like it could be accurate, there is no evidence in the passage to indicate that short-term rentals are "the most significant development in the realm in which the housing industry and the travel industry intersect." The author does not provide sufficient information to justify use of the superlative "most."
Compare your answer with the correct one above
The United Nations Convention on Contracts for the International Sale of Goods (CISG) can help countries throughout the world have a more uniform way of navigating the challenging waters of international law surrounding trade. It is not uncommon for two countries to have adopted different laws on international trade that conflict with each other. This becomes a serious problem when trade disputes arise. To help make this concept more tangible, consider the following hypothetical.
Suppose China ships three million dollars' worth of electronics to Uganda using standard bulk shipping transportation methods via a commonly traveled sea route. However, the packaging isn't secured in a manner sufficient to withstand unforeseen weather conditions. As a result, the goods become damaged in transit and are no longer fit for resale. Given that two countries are involved in this transaction–China and Uganda–the question arises as to which country’s trade laws will apply to resolve the matter at hand.
In this scenario, it is fortunate that both China and Uganda are parties to the CISG, which provide for a uniform set of laws governing trade. Such laws cover which party would be responsible for the damaged goods in this scenario. As a result, there will be no dispute as to whether China’s or Uganda's trade laws apply. Given that both countries are parties to the CISG, the laws set forth by the CISG would be applicable.
However, not all countries are parties to the CISG. One example is Rwanda. Even though Rwanda is not a party to the CISG, the fact of the matter is that CISG laws can still apply to it. The CISG applies to trade between countries so long as one of those countries is a party to the CISG (unless the parties expressly specify that the CISG will not apply to their specific trade arrangement). Several of Rwanda's main trade partners, such as the United States, China, Belgium, and Uganda, are parties to the CISG, so the laws of the treaty will apply in those trade agreements. Meanwhile, there is a different story when it comes to Rwanda's trade agreements with Kenya, Swaziland, Tanzania, and Thailand, which are not parties to the CISG. Due to these countries’ lack of membership in the CISG, if a problem ever arose in a trade agreement between Rwanda and one those countries, it would be unclear as to which country’s laws would apply.
There has been heated discussion as to whether Rwanda should sign the CISG. The United Nations Development Program takes the stance that it would behoove Rwanda to join. Whether or not Rwanda decides to become a member, the CISG will still apply to a large portion of its trade agreements, as about 100 countries are in fact CISG members, with a strong portion of those members also being trade partners with Rwanda. On the flip side, some Rwandan politicians believe that valuable autonomy would be lost if Rwanda assented to the CISG. However, given the potential benefits that Rwanda stands to gain from the CISG, these fears do not merit forgoing such a valuable opportunity.
The primary purpose of the second paragraph is to .
The United Nations Convention on Contracts for the International Sale of Goods (CISG) can help countries throughout the world have a more uniform way of navigating the challenging waters of international law surrounding trade. It is not uncommon for two countries to have adopted different laws on international trade that conflict with each other. This becomes a serious problem when trade disputes arise. To help make this concept more tangible, consider the following hypothetical.
Suppose China ships three million dollars' worth of electronics to Uganda using standard bulk shipping transportation methods via a commonly traveled sea route. However, the packaging isn't secured in a manner sufficient to withstand unforeseen weather conditions. As a result, the goods become damaged in transit and are no longer fit for resale. Given that two countries are involved in this transaction–China and Uganda–the question arises as to which country’s trade laws will apply to resolve the matter at hand.
In this scenario, it is fortunate that both China and Uganda are parties to the CISG, which provide for a uniform set of laws governing trade. Such laws cover which party would be responsible for the damaged goods in this scenario. As a result, there will be no dispute as to whether China’s or Uganda's trade laws apply. Given that both countries are parties to the CISG, the laws set forth by the CISG would be applicable.
However, not all countries are parties to the CISG. One example is Rwanda. Even though Rwanda is not a party to the CISG, the fact of the matter is that CISG laws can still apply to it. The CISG applies to trade between countries so long as one of those countries is a party to the CISG (unless the parties expressly specify that the CISG will not apply to their specific trade arrangement). Several of Rwanda's main trade partners, such as the United States, China, Belgium, and Uganda, are parties to the CISG, so the laws of the treaty will apply in those trade agreements. Meanwhile, there is a different story when it comes to Rwanda's trade agreements with Kenya, Swaziland, Tanzania, and Thailand, which are not parties to the CISG. Due to these countries’ lack of membership in the CISG, if a problem ever arose in a trade agreement between Rwanda and one those countries, it would be unclear as to which country’s laws would apply.
There has been heated discussion as to whether Rwanda should sign the CISG. The United Nations Development Program takes the stance that it would behoove Rwanda to join. Whether or not Rwanda decides to become a member, the CISG will still apply to a large portion of its trade agreements, as about 100 countries are in fact CISG members, with a strong portion of those members also being trade partners with Rwanda. On the flip side, some Rwandan politicians believe that valuable autonomy would be lost if Rwanda assented to the CISG. However, given the potential benefits that Rwanda stands to gain from the CISG, these fears do not merit forgoing such a valuable opportunity.
The primary purpose of the second paragraph is to .
The purpose of the second paragraph is to "provide an example that makes an abstract concept easier to understand." In fact, the second paragraph discusses the scenario of a trade arrangement between Uganda and China in order to show the practial applications of the CISG. The purpose of the second paragraph is also signaled in the last sentence of the first paragraph, which reads, "To help make this concept more tangible, consider the following hypothetical."
The purpose of the second paragraph is to "provide an example that makes an abstract concept easier to understand." In fact, the second paragraph discusses the scenario of a trade arrangement between Uganda and China in order to show the practial applications of the CISG. The purpose of the second paragraph is also signaled in the last sentence of the first paragraph, which reads, "To help make this concept more tangible, consider the following hypothetical."
Compare your answer with the correct one above
While hotels have traditionally held a firm grip on the market of vacation-goers, the emergence of companies fostering short-term rentals are dramatically changing the landscape of the travel industry. Before the advent of the modern online forum, short-term rentals were an arrangement limited by sheer logistics. Information about the availability of (and desire for) a short-term rental was difficult to transmit and share. However, with the current explosion of social media and cyber enterprise, the business model of short-term rentals has blossomed.
In 2011, 40% of travelers reported that they would be staying in a short-term rental during the year, as opposed to a traditional hotel. By 2013, this figure had jumped up to a staggering 49%. The short-term rental business is a $24 billion market, holding 8% of the total market of U.S. travel. Rapidly expanding and growing with the innovations of creative renters, the question that hangs in the air is what this means for communities. Short-term rentals have had a polarizing effect in many ways, becoming a source of joy for venturists and cause of dismay for many homeowners.
In recent news, there have been incredible scandals in which short-term renters have abused the property loaned to them, causing thousands of dollars' worth of property damage. Other accusations include disturbing the peace and the commission of criminal acts. Homeowners' Associations (HOAs) have been up in arms, and the legal backlash has been significant. New York enacted firm restrictions on short-term renters, and many HOAs now embed limits on the purposes that a space may be used for, barring short-term rentals.
However, this reaction is an over-reaction, and a detrimental one at that. Cities and towns that set hard limits against short-term rentals are halting the economic growth that would otherwise accompany them. Vacationers are likely to be deterred from venturing out to towns that have banned more affordable short-term rentals. While some vacationers might opt to stay at a hotel in desirable locations, as the short-term rental industry continues to grow, it will become more and more likely that vacation-goers will simply choose alternative destinations that actually allow for short-term rentals.
This is not to say, however, that short-term rentals should be completely unregulated. The key is imposing useful regulations that are mutually beneficial to both communities and to the proprietors of short-term rentals. One potential solution would be to impose reasonable taxes on visitors that use short-term rentals; having requirements for minimum stays could also ensure more consistency for the communities. This also has the added benefit of generating income for towns and cities. There is no reason why communities should see the short-term rental industry as an adversary, when it can just as easily be made into an ally.
Which of the following, if true, best supports the author's contention that bans against short-term rentals would inhibit economic development?
While hotels have traditionally held a firm grip on the market of vacation-goers, the emergence of companies fostering short-term rentals are dramatically changing the landscape of the travel industry. Before the advent of the modern online forum, short-term rentals were an arrangement limited by sheer logistics. Information about the availability of (and desire for) a short-term rental was difficult to transmit and share. However, with the current explosion of social media and cyber enterprise, the business model of short-term rentals has blossomed.
In 2011, 40% of travelers reported that they would be staying in a short-term rental during the year, as opposed to a traditional hotel. By 2013, this figure had jumped up to a staggering 49%. The short-term rental business is a $24 billion market, holding 8% of the total market of U.S. travel. Rapidly expanding and growing with the innovations of creative renters, the question that hangs in the air is what this means for communities. Short-term rentals have had a polarizing effect in many ways, becoming a source of joy for venturists and cause of dismay for many homeowners.
In recent news, there have been incredible scandals in which short-term renters have abused the property loaned to them, causing thousands of dollars' worth of property damage. Other accusations include disturbing the peace and the commission of criminal acts. Homeowners' Associations (HOAs) have been up in arms, and the legal backlash has been significant. New York enacted firm restrictions on short-term renters, and many HOAs now embed limits on the purposes that a space may be used for, barring short-term rentals.
However, this reaction is an over-reaction, and a detrimental one at that. Cities and towns that set hard limits against short-term rentals are halting the economic growth that would otherwise accompany them. Vacationers are likely to be deterred from venturing out to towns that have banned more affordable short-term rentals. While some vacationers might opt to stay at a hotel in desirable locations, as the short-term rental industry continues to grow, it will become more and more likely that vacation-goers will simply choose alternative destinations that actually allow for short-term rentals.
This is not to say, however, that short-term rentals should be completely unregulated. The key is imposing useful regulations that are mutually beneficial to both communities and to the proprietors of short-term rentals. One potential solution would be to impose reasonable taxes on visitors that use short-term rentals; having requirements for minimum stays could also ensure more consistency for the communities. This also has the added benefit of generating income for towns and cities. There is no reason why communities should see the short-term rental industry as an adversary, when it can just as easily be made into an ally.
Which of the following, if true, best supports the author's contention that bans against short-term rentals would inhibit economic development?
The author's conclusion that bans against short-term rentals would inhibit economic development hinges on the fact that short-term rentals are a non-substitutable commodity that consumers seek out.
The only answer choice that describes short-term rentals as a non-substitutable commodity is "Many vacationers exclusively use short-term rentals and would be unlikely to visit a town or city without them."
If many vacationers exclusively use short-term rentals, then that means they will not use hotels as a replacement. As a result, towns and businesses would lose the business that these patrons would otherwise provide.
A tempting wrong answer is "Vacationers who enjoy short-term rentals tend to spend more money in tourist destinations." This answer is not as strong as the correct answer because it does not make an argument that short-term rentals are non-substitutable. There is nothing to suggest that vacationers who enjoy short-term rentals would not settle for hotels if short-term rentals were not available.
The author's conclusion that bans against short-term rentals would inhibit economic development hinges on the fact that short-term rentals are a non-substitutable commodity that consumers seek out.
The only answer choice that describes short-term rentals as a non-substitutable commodity is "Many vacationers exclusively use short-term rentals and would be unlikely to visit a town or city without them."
If many vacationers exclusively use short-term rentals, then that means they will not use hotels as a replacement. As a result, towns and businesses would lose the business that these patrons would otherwise provide.
A tempting wrong answer is "Vacationers who enjoy short-term rentals tend to spend more money in tourist destinations." This answer is not as strong as the correct answer because it does not make an argument that short-term rentals are non-substitutable. There is nothing to suggest that vacationers who enjoy short-term rentals would not settle for hotels if short-term rentals were not available.
Compare your answer with the correct one above