Sectional Tests: Verbal - 4 - GMAT MCQ

This question could potentially be time-consuming, because it asks about Lochner, a case that is discussed throughout the passage. Let's start with the key point about Lochner, which is that it removed limits on working hours for bakers. Answer choice (B) is the opposite of that point, so (B) is out.
Answer choice (A) refers to a specific comment late in the passage; we can confirm that the comment referred to West Coast, not Lochner (and it's also not true, according to the passage). So (A) is out.
(C) is out because it was later "undermined," not "overturned," and it was undermined by West Coast, not prompting West Coast. Choice (E) is nonsensical, since Lochner was a single ruling. (D) is correct, as we can confirm in the first paragraph. The right to enter into contracts was the thing the Court was trying to defend in ruling on Lochner. The correct answer is (D).
On this question, if you got to a point at which you were about 75% or 80% certain that (D) was the correct answer, but you were not 100% sure about the relationship between Lochner and the freedom of contract point, I would counsel you to take a moment with the passage to understand the freedom of contract point. The first question in the passage is often an opportunity to clear up something you were confused about. Also, once we determine that (D) is the correct answer, we get a useful tidbit about the passage: "Locher reasserted an individual's right to enter freely into contracts." We still have at least two questions to go, so a minimal effort to improve our grasp is worth it. We might even get another question in which this point is directly tested.

This question points us to the rationale for Lochner. As it happens, we just decided and learned from the last question that "Locher reasserted an individual's right to enter freely into contracts." And, as it turns out, this question asks us to focus on the lines which include that same portion of the passage. This is a completely realistic example of how you can "sharpen as you go" in Reading Comprehension. Lochner is all about defending the right to enter freely into contracts. Let's take that nugget of wisdom and see how far it gets us with the answer choices.
Choice (B) is irrelevant and somewhat opposite to the point. Choice (D) and Choice (A) are both out of the scope of the question, since we can't go so far to conclude about other types of contracts, or all previous contracts. That leaves us with (C) and (E), both of which involve contracts. Both step somewhat beyond what is obvious in lines 5-19.
Choice (C) mentions safety, which doesn't appear in the passage explicitly until the very end of the passage. That sentence says that the basis of Lochner and protecting health and safety are different. This implies that protecting health and safety was contrary to Lochner. Therefore, answer (C) would appear to be correct. We do know, after all, that Lochner was aggressive in protecting individuals' right to contract. Given that, does (E) have an objective error? Choice (E) is, in fact, contrary to the ruling of Lochner, as it has been described to us, because requiring a maximum number hours of work per week could be seen as setting limits on what workers can agree to.

This question asks us about a key detail in how the rulings are related to each other, and one which we noted on reading the passage. West Cost overturned Adkins, and "undermined" Lochner. Since it undermined Lochner, it didn't overturn the ruling, but it might have removed some of the significance of the ruling or possibly established a basis on which Lochner was later overturned. Since it didn't overturn Lochner, choices (A), (D), and (E) are out. We are left with (B) and (C). (B) appears to be accurate, because "a ruling that had depended in part on Lochner" is a valid description of Adkins, and "intact but weakened" is a valid way to paraphrase "undermined." Since (B) appears to be accurate, we can focus on finding an objective error in (C). Indeed, to pick on what appears to be the more vulnerable part of (C), we have no basis to think that West Coast asserted a new interpretation of women's rights. Advancing women's rights was attributed to Adkins, and West Coast appears to have ruled solely on the basis of a new interpretation of freedom of contract, as the description starting in line 28 indicates.

This question asks about a little phrase which may have slipped our attention, but which includes hints of commentary from the author, who gives us a glimpse into what he considers unexpected and expected--and possibly significant. Checking the line, we see that the "unexpected shift" was in Associate Justice Roberts. His shift was critical to the outcome of West Coast Hotel. We also see that there was a differing view and a bit of an accusation from Justice Sutherland, which may or may not be important in this question. Let's go on the answer choices.

Choice (A) sounds accurate to the summary we just gave ourselves. Choice (B) is out because the passage decides that the ruling was not based on strictly contemporary events.

Choice (C) aligns Roberts with Sutherland, so it's inaccurate. Choice (D) is unsupported and most likely implausible, as he appeared to influence the court more than the other way around, and for different reasons than women's rights.

Choice (E) makes a strong claim that is neither stated nor implied by the passage, which does not make general and certainly not future-oriented statements about the degree of agreement within the Court.

This question asks about a detail mentioned in lines of the passage, the only place where usury is mentioned. We can read right off the sentence that usury is mentioned as an example of "constraint on contract." These constraints were not bad things, but rather were examples, in the new ruling of West Coast, that the law had restricted the freedom of contract in appropriate ways all along. Let's turn to the answer choices. (A) is consistent with our understanding. Usury is the "legal precedent" it's talking about, and the result of West Coast was to overturn Adkins.
Choice (B) inaccurately describes the context of West Coast, because prior to that ruling the number of hours was not protected by the Court, according to what we've been told. So (B) is out.
Choice (C) is out; this is not about gender. Choice (D) is inaccurate, because due process, so far as we know, was never dropped by the Court and thus didn't need to be reinstated; we don't hear anything about due process after the first paragraph.
Choice (E) goes too far in discussing the "scope of human rights," because this concept hasn't been addressed or defined in the passage to any extent.

We should summarize before looking at the answer choices, even if our summary is inelegant. The purpose of this passage is to describe a series of court rulings that involve worker's rights and the protection of workers. There were some aspects that were overturned with time, and some influences that outlived the specific rulings. Let's look for something like that in the answer choices. Choice (A) sounds right in "trace the development," but off target in "due process" and in the gender focus, which are not the primary focus.
Choice (B) is slightly suspect in that it mentions the present-day situation, which is not described in the passage, but it's correct in focusing on worker's rights, and there is some discussion of the legacy of these rulings, so (B) may be correct. (C) is out, because the passage doesn't "question" anything; we don't have that degree of opinion. (D) is out, because we haven't learned a precise date of worker's rights; it was a gradual process. Choice (E) is out, since the passages talk almost exclusively about one type of protection, that against excessive working hours.

This question asks us for an inference. The correct answer could hit on a point that is central to the message of the passage, or it could appear to come from nowhere. We can evaluate the answer choices based on the main idea. Namely, the point of West Coast was that the Court decided that it could restrict working hours, since it had all along been reasonably restricting workers' contracts for their protection. (A), (B), and (C) are all contrary to that basic point.
(D) is plausible, but unsupported. Choice (E) must be correct, because if it's not, it will generate an inconsistency with the passage. The point of Justice Roberts was that constraints such as usury had existed prior West Coast, and he was referring to these constraints as evidence, not attacking them. Therefore, pressures such as usury were indeed "subject to constraint through legislation."

This is a weaken question as evidenced by the word weaken. The task of the question is indicated by the phrase Which of the following, if true, would weaken. The subject of this question is the explanation offered by the Neo-Marxists for why communist revolutions have not occurred in industrialized countries. In order to answer the question, determine what the passage states about the subject, evaluate the answer choices, and eliminate any choice which does not weaken the subject. According to the passage, citizens of capitalistic states are suffering from a “false consciousness” so that they are unable to accurately assess their chances of upward mobility. The result is that these citizens thus accept economic inequity.

Choice A: No. The assertion that citizens believe that they eventually will become wealthy regardless of their current economic status may seem tempting, but is a reversal. The Neo-Marxists suggest that citizens of capitalistic countries choose not to revolt because they believe that they will experience a “natural” transition phase between poverty and wealth, meaning that they believe their economic status will improve, so this choice matches the Neo-Marxist explanation.

Choice B. Correct. If citizens of communist countries saw their standards of living decline following communist revolutions in their countries, then citizens of capitalistic countries who observed this phenomenon might well opt against revolution. This answer choice provides a reason for the lack of revolt in capitalistic countries that is different from the reason provided by the Neo-Marxists’ explanation and thus weakens their explanation.

Choice C: No. This choice may seem tempting due to the reference to more wealthy people in capitalistic countries. However, this choice is a reversal, because it is consistent with the Neo-Marxist explanation. Marx and Neo-Marxists assume that capitalistic countries will have many wealthy people, and that a revolution will result from the increasing divide between the owners and the workers. Therefore, this answer choice is consistent with the Neo-Marxists’ explanation and does not weaken it.

Choice D: No. The recycled language end of the twentieth century and North Korea and Cuba may make this choice seem tempting. However, this choice is recycled language. The passage states that North Korea and Cuba are no longer communist countries and that these countries have devolved into totalitarian kleptocracies. As such, the fact that these countries have a lower standard of living does not undermine the Neo-Marxists’ explanation, which is based on a comparison between communist and capitalist countries.

Choice E: No. This choice may seem tempting due to the reference to higher rates of literacy. However, this choice is based on the emotional appeal of literacy as a desirable quality. If literacy is a positive quality, and people in capitalistic countries have a higher rate of literacy, then people in capitalistic countries may not want to have a communist [revolution]. This choice is incorrect, because the passage itself does not provide a way to connect rates of literacy with a reason for the lack of communist revolutions.

The correct answer is choice B.

The phrase the passage suggests in the question stem indicates this is an inference question. The task of the question is indicated by the phrase differed…in which of the following ways. The subject of the question is how countries that actually had communist revolutions differed from the countries that Marx predicted would have communist revolutions. In order to answer the question, determine what the passage states about the subject and evaluate the answer choices, eliminating any choice which cannot be supported by the text. The passage states that Mark conceived of communism in the context of the industrial revolution. Due to improvements in productivity from industrialization, Marx predicted that an increasing divide between the owners and the workers would eventually necessitate a revolution. However, while Marx saw communism as emerging from contradictions in capitalist countries, all of these emerging communist states had pre-industrial, feudal economies. Thus, while Marx predicted that the industrialized countries would have communist revolutions, the countries that actually had them had pre-industrial, feudal economies.

Choice A: No. The phrase larger economies may make this choice seem tempting because the passage describes the emerging communist states as having pre-industrial, feudal economies. However, the passage provides no such comparison between the size of the economies, only the type of each economy.

Choice B: No. While the phrases communist revolutions, industrialized, and agricultural may make this choice seem appealing, this choice is a reversal. The passage states that, contrary to Marx’s expectations, all of these emerging communist states had pre-industrial, feudal economies.

Choice C: Correct. Marx predicted that industrialized countries would experience communist revolutions. The countries that had communist revolutions had pre-industrial, feudal economies, so their economies were of a different nature than Marx predicted.

Choice D: No. The recycled language social structures and inefficient may make this choice seem tempting. However, the passage provides no such comparison between the efficiency of the social structures of the different countries, other than to state that the social structures of industrialized countries grew more inefficient, which disagrees with the comparison in this choice.

Choice E: No. The recycled phrase false consciousness may make this choice seem tempting. However, this choice is a reversal. The passage states that false consciousness is an idea from the Neo-Marxists. At no point is this concept attributed to Marx.

The correct answer is choice C.

The phrase the author of the passage would most likely in the question stem indicates this is an inference question. The task of the question is indicated by the word describe. The subject of the question is the concept of false consciousness. In order to answer the question, consider how the author described false consciousness and whether the author took a side or expressed an opinion regarding false consciousness, then evaluate the answer choices, eliminating any choice which cannot be supported by the text. While the author states in the second paragraph that the concept is novel and is likely to accurately describe the mindset of many, the author also describes the theory as simplistic and entirely within the realm of conjecture.

Choice A: No. Although the word compelling may make this choice tempting because the passage states that the concept is likely to accurately describe the mindset of many, the phrase impossible to substantiate is extreme language. The author does describe false consciousness as entirely within the realm of conjecture, but never goes so far as to claim it is impossible to substantiate.

Choice B: No. The large amount of historical references in the passage may make this choice seem tempting. However, the phrase supported by history makes this choice a reversal, since the author actually describes the concept of false consciousness as entirely within the realm of conjecture, meaning that it has no evidence or support.

Choice C: No. Although the recycled language inefficient and inevitable may make this choice seem tempting, this choice is a reversal of fact. The passage uses these words in reference to Marx’s predictions about communist revolutions, not about the Neo-Marxist concept of false consciousness.

Choice D: Correct. The author states that the concept of false consciousness is novel and accurately describes the mindset of many, while also describing it as simplistic and entirely within the realm of conjecture. Thus, this answer choice accurately expresses the author’s view that false consciousness has some merit but has not been proven to be true.

Choice E: No. Although the recycled language accurate may make this answer choice tempting because the passage states that the concept is likely to accurately describe the mindset of many, the word unfortunate is too extreme. The description of the view as simplistic does indicate a negative tone, but the author does not indicate that the view is unfortunate.

The correct answer is choice D.

Use your Bottom Line of the passage to help you to evaluate the choices. The correct answer will describe the main point of the passage.
A. No. While the passage does mention that consumers sometimes get enjoyment from advertisements, this is not the main point of the passage.
B. No. The passage argues that consumers understand and recognize forces of persuasion and do not passively react to them.
C. Yes. This accurately paraphrases the Bottom Line.
D. No. While this answer choice is tempting, the author discusses only Marcuse’s critique of advertising and does not generalize to what other critics typically do.
E. No. The author’s criticism of Marcuse does not focus on the distinction between real and false needs; rather, it targets the assumption that people are unwittingly manipulated by advertising.

The correct answer will be directly supported by evidence in the passage. The author discusses what Marcuse believed in the first and second paragraphs.
A. No. The passage never mentions psychological research findings.
B. Yes. The author attributes this to Marcuse in lines 17–21.
C. No. This is something the author believes, not something that Marcuse believed.
D. No. The passage does not discuss what Marcuse believe dabout independent decision making.
E. No. The passage says that Marcuse accused advertisers of creating false needs, but there is no mention of whether advertisers accept or deny that accusation.

The question is asking how the first paragraph fits into the passage as a whole. The correct answer should reflect that the first paragraph introduces Marcuse’s theory.
A. No. The first paragraph does not discuss political or economic context.
B. No. This is discussed in the second paragraph.
C. No. This is not discussed in the passage.
D. No. The first paragraph discusses only one view.
E. Yes. This accurately captures the main point and purpose of the first paragraph.

The correct answer will be directly supported by evidence in the passage. The author discusses what Marcuse believed in the first and second paragraphs.
A. Yes. The author attributes this to Marcuse in lines 6–9.
B. No. The passage does not discuss earlier societies.
C. No. This is more in line with what the author believes than with what Marcuse believes.
D. No. While Marcuse does think that advertising can be a tool of oppression, there is no discussion of totalitarian political regimes.
E. No. Marcuse criticizes false needs, not real needs.

The term “forces of persuasion” likely describes:

• Manipulative influences that go unnoticed by those affected.

This interpretation aligns with theories that suggest individuals may not recognise the subtle ways in which they are influenced by external factors. Such influences can shape thoughts and behaviours without the individual's awareness.

Use your Bottom Line of the passage to help you to evaluate the choices. The correct answer will summarize the author’s argument.
A. Yes. This accurately captures that the author disagrees with Marcuse but does not take a position on whether advertising is actually harmful.
B. No. The author does not agree that Marcusian claims are justified.
C. No. This is outside the scope of the passage. The authordoes not discuss the perception of human nature held by corporate leaders.
D. No. The author does not claim that advertising has numerous social benefits. There is only a minor mention that some advertising can be entertaining.
E. No. The author does not argue that advertisers exert economic power.

According to Anne, the weak point in Reva’s claim is that it

• fails to consider the possibility that many potential dropouts in West Virginia may not possess driving licences.
• doesn’t provide specific figures regarding the dropout rate in West Virginia before and during the programme.
• ignores evidence showing that parents and employers have effectively used extrinsic incentives for years.
• assumes that a positive incentive, such as a reward, is no more effective than a negative incentive like revoking a driving licence.
• is based solely on the West Virginia programme, which may not represent the typical situation.

The question aims to identify which factor is least relevant for understanding why Bleach-O Green failed in the market.

• Effectiveness: The effectiveness of Bleach-O Green as a detergent is crucial. If it did not perform well, consumers would likely choose alternatives.
• Market Competition: The number of other eco-friendly detergents available could influence consumer choice. If many options exist, Bleach-O Green might struggle to stand out.
• Manufacturing Costs: Understanding the manufacturing costs of Bleach-O Green compared to regular detergents helps assess pricing strategies and profitability.
• Consumer Acceptance: The extent to which consumers accepted the claims about Bleach-O Green's environmental benefits can reveal the effectiveness of its marketing.
• Advertising Effectiveness: Evaluating how well Bleach-O Green was marketed is vital. Poor advertising could lead to low consumer awareness and interest.

Among these factors, the question about how much more Bleach-O Green cost to manufacture than ordinary detergents is the least relevant to understanding its market failure. While costs can impact pricing, they do not directly address consumer preferences or perceived value, which are critical in this context.

Argument : The burden of maintaining the U.S. highway system falls disproportionately on the trucking industry. Trucks represent only about 10 percent of the vehicles on U.S. roads. Yet road use taxes assessed on trucks amount to almost half the taxes paid for highway upkeep and repair.

Conclusion : The burden of maintaining the U.S. highway system falls disproportionately on the trucking industry
Reasoning author gives or premise:
1. Truck 10% of all vehicles on road.
2. And road uses almost half of the taxes collected from trucks in upkeep and repair.

Question: Weaken the argument
Prethinking: lets think about when authors conclusion will break? when can we say that the burden is not disproportionate?
what if truck are causing more damage to roads compared to author vehicle. so proportionally they should pay more in upkeep and repair?

The assumption made in the passage is that a Socialist party government in Ganelon is more likely to oppose the United States than a non-Socialist party government.

• This reflects the concern that a shift in government could lead to a break in political ties.
• The passage implies that the Socialist party's ideology may not align with U.S. interests.
• This assumption is crucial for understanding the potential impact on U.S.-Ganelon relations.

The conclusion that a common language is essential for national unity can be effectively challenged by several points:

• Economic and political factors: Conflicts in Canada may arise from economic and political differences, not just linguistic ones.
• Multilingual societies: Countries like Switzerland have thrived despite having multiple official languages, indicating that unity can exist without a single tongue.
• Diverse linguistic populations: India successfully operates with hundreds of languages, showing that unity is possible even with significant linguistic diversity.

Which of the following, if true, would most strengthen the conclusion above?

To strengthen the argument that Grayson is the right choice to chair the new council on business-labour relations, the following points are relevant:

• Grayson's experience as a former head of a major labour union indicates he understands labour issues.
• His established good relations with business leaders suggests he can bridge gaps between both sides.
• Effective communication with labour leaders is crucial for the success of the council.
• The presence of business management representatives on the council may require a chair who can negotiate well with both parties.

Overall, highlighting Grayson’s ability to facilitate cooperation between labour and business will reinforce his suitability for the role.

Based on the statements, the author believes:

• I. Excessive job security can negatively impact worker performance.
• II. There is a need for the dismissal of some government employees.
• III. A majority of government workers are Civil Service employees.

The author implies that:

• Job security may lead to complacency among employees, supporting statement I.
• While the author hints at inefficiency, they do not explicitly state that more workers should be dismissed, making II less certain.
• Since the context revolves around Civil Service employees, statement III is likely true.

Thus, the most accurate inference is:

• I and III only.