Question Description
Question based on the following passage and supplementary material.This passage is adapted from Kevin Drum, “Americas Real Criminal Element: Lead" ©2013 Mother Jones.Experts often suggest that crime resemblesan epidemic. But what kind? Economicsprofessor Karl Smith has a good rule of thumbfor categorizing epidemics: If it spreads along(5) lines of communication, he says, the cause isinformation. Think Bieber Fever.* If it travelsalong major transportation routes, the cause ismicrobial. Think influenza. If it spreads out likea fan, the cause is an insect. Think malaria. But(10) if its everywhere, all at once—as both the rise ofcrime in the 60s and 70s and the fall of crime inthe 90s seemed to be—the cause is a molecule.A molecule? That sounds crazy. Whatmolecule could be responsible for a steep and(15) sudden decline in violent crime?Well, heres one possibility: Pb(CH2CH3)4.In 1994, Rick Nevin was a consultantworking for the US Department of Housing andUrban Development on the costs and benefits of(20) removing lead paint from old houses. A growingbody of research had linked lead exposure insmall children with a whole raft of complicationslater in life, including lower IQ, hyperactivity,behavioral problems, and learning disabilities.(25) A recent study had also suggested a linkbetween childhood lead exposure and juveniledelinquency later on. Maybe reducing leadexposure had an effect on violent crime too?That tip took Nevin in a different direction. The(30) biggest source of lead in the postwar era, it turnsout, wasnt paint, but leaded gasoline. If you chartthe rise and fall of atmospheric lead caused bythe rise and fall of leaded gasoline consumption,you get an upside-down U. Lead emissions from(35) tailpipes rose steadily from the early 40s throughthe early 70s, nearly quadrupling over that period.Then, as unleaded gasoline began to replace leadedgasoline, emissions plummeted.Intriguingly, violent crime rates followed the(40) same upside-down U pattern (see the graph). Theonly thing different was the time period. Crimerates rose dramatically in the 60s through the80s, and then began dropping steadily startingin the early 90s. The two curves looked eerily(45) identical, but were offset by about 20 years.So Nevin dug up detailed data on leademissions and crime rates to see if the similarityof the curves was as good as it seemed. It turnedout to be even better. In a 2000 paper he concluded(50) that if you add a lag time of 23 years, leademissions from automobiles explain 90 percent ofthe variation in violent crime in America. Toddlerswho ingested high levels of lead in the 40s and50s really were more likely to become violent(55) criminals in the 60s, 70s, and 80s.And with that we have our molecule: tetra-ethyl lead, the gasoline additive invented byGeneral Motors in the 1920s to prevent knockingand pinging in high-performance engines. As(60) auto sales boomed after World War II, and driversin powerful new cars increasingly asked servicestation attendants to “fill er up with ethyl,” theywere unwittingly creating a crime wave twodecades later.(65) It was an exciting conjecture, and itprompted an immediate wave of . . . nothing.Nevins paper was almost completely ignored,and in one sense its easy to see why—Nevin isan economist, not a criminologist, and his paper(70) was published in Environmental Research, not ajournal with a big readership in the criminologycommunity. Whats more, a single correlationbetween two curves isnt all that impressive,econometrically speaking. Sales of vinyl LPs rose(75) in the postwar period too, and then declined inthe 80s and 90s. No matter how good the fit, ifyou only have a single correlation it might just bea coincidence. You need to do something more toestablish causality.(80) So in 2007, Nevin collected lead data andcrime data for Australia, Canada, Great Britain,Finland, France, Italy, New Zealand and WestGermany. Every time, the two curves fit each otherastonishingly well.(85) The gasoline lead hypothesis helps explainsome things we might not have realized evenneeded explaining. For example, murder rateshave always been higher in big cities than intowns and small cities. Nevin suggests that,(90) because big cities have lots of cars in a smallarea, they also had high densities of atmosphericlead during the postwar era. But as lead levelsin gasoline decreased, the differences betweenbig and small cities largely went away. And guess(95) what? The difference in murder rates went awaytoo. Today, homicide rates are similar in citiesof all sizes. It may be that violent crime isnt aninevitable consequence of being a big city after all.*Enthusiasm for the music and person of Justin Bieber.Q.In line 49, “even better” most nearly meansa)less controversial.b)more correlative.c)easier to calculate.d)more aesthetically engaging.Correct answer is option 'B'. Can you explain this answer? for SAT 2025 is part of SAT preparation. The Question and answers have been prepared according to the SAT exam syllabus. Information about Question based on the following passage and supplementary material.This passage is adapted from Kevin Drum, “Americas Real Criminal Element: Lead" ©2013 Mother Jones.Experts often suggest that crime resemblesan epidemic. But what kind? Economicsprofessor Karl Smith has a good rule of thumbfor categorizing epidemics: If it spreads along(5) lines of communication, he says, the cause isinformation. Think Bieber Fever.* If it travelsalong major transportation routes, the cause ismicrobial. Think influenza. If it spreads out likea fan, the cause is an insect. Think malaria. But(10) if its everywhere, all at once—as both the rise ofcrime in the 60s and 70s and the fall of crime inthe 90s seemed to be—the cause is a molecule.A molecule? That sounds crazy. Whatmolecule could be responsible for a steep and(15) sudden decline in violent crime?Well, heres one possibility: Pb(CH2CH3)4.In 1994, Rick Nevin was a consultantworking for the US Department of Housing andUrban Development on the costs and benefits of(20) removing lead paint from old houses. A growingbody of research had linked lead exposure insmall children with a whole raft of complicationslater in life, including lower IQ, hyperactivity,behavioral problems, and learning disabilities.(25) A recent study had also suggested a linkbetween childhood lead exposure and juveniledelinquency later on. Maybe reducing leadexposure had an effect on violent crime too?That tip took Nevin in a different direction. The(30) biggest source of lead in the postwar era, it turnsout, wasnt paint, but leaded gasoline. If you chartthe rise and fall of atmospheric lead caused bythe rise and fall of leaded gasoline consumption,you get an upside-down U. Lead emissions from(35) tailpipes rose steadily from the early 40s throughthe early 70s, nearly quadrupling over that period.Then, as unleaded gasoline began to replace leadedgasoline, emissions plummeted.Intriguingly, violent crime rates followed the(40) same upside-down U pattern (see the graph). Theonly thing different was the time period. Crimerates rose dramatically in the 60s through the80s, and then began dropping steadily startingin the early 90s. The two curves looked eerily(45) identical, but were offset by about 20 years.So Nevin dug up detailed data on leademissions and crime rates to see if the similarityof the curves was as good as it seemed. It turnedout to be even better. In a 2000 paper he concluded(50) that if you add a lag time of 23 years, leademissions from automobiles explain 90 percent ofthe variation in violent crime in America. Toddlerswho ingested high levels of lead in the 40s and50s really were more likely to become violent(55) criminals in the 60s, 70s, and 80s.And with that we have our molecule: tetra-ethyl lead, the gasoline additive invented byGeneral Motors in the 1920s to prevent knockingand pinging in high-performance engines. As(60) auto sales boomed after World War II, and driversin powerful new cars increasingly asked servicestation attendants to “fill er up with ethyl,” theywere unwittingly creating a crime wave twodecades later.(65) It was an exciting conjecture, and itprompted an immediate wave of . . . nothing.Nevins paper was almost completely ignored,and in one sense its easy to see why—Nevin isan economist, not a criminologist, and his paper(70) was published in Environmental Research, not ajournal with a big readership in the criminologycommunity. Whats more, a single correlationbetween two curves isnt all that impressive,econometrically speaking. Sales of vinyl LPs rose(75) in the postwar period too, and then declined inthe 80s and 90s. No matter how good the fit, ifyou only have a single correlation it might just bea coincidence. You need to do something more toestablish causality.(80) So in 2007, Nevin collected lead data andcrime data for Australia, Canada, Great Britain,Finland, France, Italy, New Zealand and WestGermany. Every time, the two curves fit each otherastonishingly well.(85) The gasoline lead hypothesis helps explainsome things we might not have realized evenneeded explaining. For example, murder rateshave always been higher in big cities than intowns and small cities. Nevin suggests that,(90) because big cities have lots of cars in a smallarea, they also had high densities of atmosphericlead during the postwar era. But as lead levelsin gasoline decreased, the differences betweenbig and small cities largely went away. And guess(95) what? The difference in murder rates went awaytoo. Today, homicide rates are similar in citiesof all sizes. It may be that violent crime isnt aninevitable consequence of being a big city after all.*Enthusiasm for the music and person of Justin Bieber.Q.In line 49, “even better” most nearly meansa)less controversial.b)more correlative.c)easier to calculate.d)more aesthetically engaging.Correct answer is option 'B'. Can you explain this answer? covers all topics & solutions for SAT 2025 Exam. Find important definitions, questions, meanings, examples, exercises and tests below for Question based on the following passage and supplementary material.This passage is adapted from Kevin Drum, “Americas Real Criminal Element: Lead" ©2013 Mother Jones.Experts often suggest that crime resemblesan epidemic. But what kind? Economicsprofessor Karl Smith has a good rule of thumbfor categorizing epidemics: If it spreads along(5) lines of communication, he says, the cause isinformation. Think Bieber Fever.* If it travelsalong major transportation routes, the cause ismicrobial. Think influenza. If it spreads out likea fan, the cause is an insect. Think malaria. But(10) if its everywhere, all at once—as both the rise ofcrime in the 60s and 70s and the fall of crime inthe 90s seemed to be—the cause is a molecule.A molecule? That sounds crazy. Whatmolecule could be responsible for a steep and(15) sudden decline in violent crime?Well, heres one possibility: Pb(CH2CH3)4.In 1994, Rick Nevin was a consultantworking for the US Department of Housing andUrban Development on the costs and benefits of(20) removing lead paint from old houses. A growingbody of research had linked lead exposure insmall children with a whole raft of complicationslater in life, including lower IQ, hyperactivity,behavioral problems, and learning disabilities.(25) A recent study had also suggested a linkbetween childhood lead exposure and juveniledelinquency later on. Maybe reducing leadexposure had an effect on violent crime too?That tip took Nevin in a different direction. The(30) biggest source of lead in the postwar era, it turnsout, wasnt paint, but leaded gasoline. If you chartthe rise and fall of atmospheric lead caused bythe rise and fall of leaded gasoline consumption,you get an upside-down U. Lead emissions from(35) tailpipes rose steadily from the early 40s throughthe early 70s, nearly quadrupling over that period.Then, as unleaded gasoline began to replace leadedgasoline, emissions plummeted.Intriguingly, violent crime rates followed the(40) same upside-down U pattern (see the graph). Theonly thing different was the time period. Crimerates rose dramatically in the 60s through the80s, and then began dropping steadily startingin the early 90s. The two curves looked eerily(45) identical, but were offset by about 20 years.So Nevin dug up detailed data on leademissions and crime rates to see if the similarityof the curves was as good as it seemed. It turnedout to be even better. In a 2000 paper he concluded(50) that if you add a lag time of 23 years, leademissions from automobiles explain 90 percent ofthe variation in violent crime in America. Toddlerswho ingested high levels of lead in the 40s and50s really were more likely to become violent(55) criminals in the 60s, 70s, and 80s.And with that we have our molecule: tetra-ethyl lead, the gasoline additive invented byGeneral Motors in the 1920s to prevent knockingand pinging in high-performance engines. As(60) auto sales boomed after World War II, and driversin powerful new cars increasingly asked servicestation attendants to “fill er up with ethyl,” theywere unwittingly creating a crime wave twodecades later.(65) It was an exciting conjecture, and itprompted an immediate wave of . . . nothing.Nevins paper was almost completely ignored,and in one sense its easy to see why—Nevin isan economist, not a criminologist, and his paper(70) was published in Environmental Research, not ajournal with a big readership in the criminologycommunity. Whats more, a single correlationbetween two curves isnt all that impressive,econometrically speaking. Sales of vinyl LPs rose(75) in the postwar period too, and then declined inthe 80s and 90s. No matter how good the fit, ifyou only have a single correlation it might just bea coincidence. You need to do something more toestablish causality.(80) So in 2007, Nevin collected lead data andcrime data for Australia, Canada, Great Britain,Finland, France, Italy, New Zealand and WestGermany. Every time, the two curves fit each otherastonishingly well.(85) The gasoline lead hypothesis helps explainsome things we might not have realized evenneeded explaining. For example, murder rateshave always been higher in big cities than intowns and small cities. Nevin suggests that,(90) because big cities have lots of cars in a smallarea, they also had high densities of atmosphericlead during the postwar era. But as lead levelsin gasoline decreased, the differences betweenbig and small cities largely went away. And guess(95) what? The difference in murder rates went awaytoo. Today, homicide rates are similar in citiesof all sizes. It may be that violent crime isnt aninevitable consequence of being a big city after all.*Enthusiasm for the music and person of Justin Bieber.Q.In line 49, “even better” most nearly meansa)less controversial.b)more correlative.c)easier to calculate.d)more aesthetically engaging.Correct answer is option 'B'. Can you explain this answer?.

Solutions for Question based on the following passage and supplementary material.This passage is adapted from Kevin Drum, “Americas Real Criminal Element: Lead" ©2013 Mother Jones.Experts often suggest that crime resemblesan epidemic. But what kind? Economicsprofessor Karl Smith has a good rule of thumbfor categorizing epidemics: If it spreads along(5) lines of communication, he says, the cause isinformation. Think Bieber Fever.* If it travelsalong major transportation routes, the cause ismicrobial. Think influenza. If it spreads out likea fan, the cause is an insect. Think malaria. But(10) if its everywhere, all at once—as both the rise ofcrime in the 60s and 70s and the fall of crime inthe 90s seemed to be—the cause is a molecule.A molecule? That sounds crazy. Whatmolecule could be responsible for a steep and(15) sudden decline in violent crime?Well, heres one possibility: Pb(CH2CH3)4.In 1994, Rick Nevin was a consultantworking for the US Department of Housing andUrban Development on the costs and benefits of(20) removing lead paint from old houses. A growingbody of research had linked lead exposure insmall children with a whole raft of complicationslater in life, including lower IQ, hyperactivity,behavioral problems, and learning disabilities.(25) A recent study had also suggested a linkbetween childhood lead exposure and juveniledelinquency later on. Maybe reducing leadexposure had an effect on violent crime too?That tip took Nevin in a different direction. The(30) biggest source of lead in the postwar era, it turnsout, wasnt paint, but leaded gasoline. If you chartthe rise and fall of atmospheric lead caused bythe rise and fall of leaded gasoline consumption,you get an upside-down U. Lead emissions from(35) tailpipes rose steadily from the early 40s throughthe early 70s, nearly quadrupling over that period.Then, as unleaded gasoline began to replace leadedgasoline, emissions plummeted.Intriguingly, violent crime rates followed the(40) same upside-down U pattern (see the graph). Theonly thing different was the time period. Crimerates rose dramatically in the 60s through the80s, and then began dropping steadily startingin the early 90s. The two curves looked eerily(45) identical, but were offset by about 20 years.So Nevin dug up detailed data on leademissions and crime rates to see if the similarityof the curves was as good as it seemed. It turnedout to be even better. In a 2000 paper he concluded(50) that if you add a lag time of 23 years, leademissions from automobiles explain 90 percent ofthe variation in violent crime in America. Toddlerswho ingested high levels of lead in the 40s and50s really were more likely to become violent(55) criminals in the 60s, 70s, and 80s.And with that we have our molecule: tetra-ethyl lead, the gasoline additive invented byGeneral Motors in the 1920s to prevent knockingand pinging in high-performance engines. As(60) auto sales boomed after World War II, and driversin powerful new cars increasingly asked servicestation attendants to “fill er up with ethyl,” theywere unwittingly creating a crime wave twodecades later.(65) It was an exciting conjecture, and itprompted an immediate wave of . . . nothing.Nevins paper was almost completely ignored,and in one sense its easy to see why—Nevin isan economist, not a criminologist, and his paper(70) was published in Environmental Research, not ajournal with a big readership in the criminologycommunity. Whats more, a single correlationbetween two curves isnt all that impressive,econometrically speaking. Sales of vinyl LPs rose(75) in the postwar period too, and then declined inthe 80s and 90s. No matter how good the fit, ifyou only have a single correlation it might just bea coincidence. You need to do something more toestablish causality.(80) So in 2007, Nevin collected lead data andcrime data for Australia, Canada, Great Britain,Finland, France, Italy, New Zealand and WestGermany. Every time, the two curves fit each otherastonishingly well.(85) The gasoline lead hypothesis helps explainsome things we might not have realized evenneeded explaining. For example, murder rateshave always been higher in big cities than intowns and small cities. Nevin suggests that,(90) because big cities have lots of cars in a smallarea, they also had high densities of atmosphericlead during the postwar era. But as lead levelsin gasoline decreased, the differences betweenbig and small cities largely went away. And guess(95) what? The difference in murder rates went awaytoo. Today, homicide rates are similar in citiesof all sizes. It may be that violent crime isnt aninevitable consequence of being a big city after all.*Enthusiasm for the music and person of Justin Bieber.Q.In line 49, “even better” most nearly meansa)less controversial.b)more correlative.c)easier to calculate.d)more aesthetically engaging.Correct answer is option 'B'. Can you explain this answer? in English & in Hindi are available as part of our courses for SAT. Download more important topics, notes, lectures and mock test series for SAT Exam by signing up for free.

Here you can find the meaning of Question based on the following passage and supplementary material.This passage is adapted from Kevin Drum, “Americas Real Criminal Element: Lead" ©2013 Mother Jones.Experts often suggest that crime resemblesan epidemic. But what kind? Economicsprofessor Karl Smith has a good rule of thumbfor categorizing epidemics: If it spreads along(5) lines of communication, he says, the cause isinformation. Think Bieber Fever.* If it travelsalong major transportation routes, the cause ismicrobial. Think influenza. If it spreads out likea fan, the cause is an insect. Think malaria. But(10) if its everywhere, all at once—as both the rise ofcrime in the 60s and 70s and the fall of crime inthe 90s seemed to be—the cause is a molecule.A molecule? That sounds crazy. Whatmolecule could be responsible for a steep and(15) sudden decline in violent crime?Well, heres one possibility: Pb(CH2CH3)4.In 1994, Rick Nevin was a consultantworking for the US Department of Housing andUrban Development on the costs and benefits of(20) removing lead paint from old houses. A growingbody of research had linked lead exposure insmall children with a whole raft of complicationslater in life, including lower IQ, hyperactivity,behavioral problems, and learning disabilities.(25) A recent study had also suggested a linkbetween childhood lead exposure and juveniledelinquency later on. Maybe reducing leadexposure had an effect on violent crime too?That tip took Nevin in a different direction. The(30) biggest source of lead in the postwar era, it turnsout, wasnt paint, but leaded gasoline. If you chartthe rise and fall of atmospheric lead caused bythe rise and fall of leaded gasoline consumption,you get an upside-down U. Lead emissions from(35) tailpipes rose steadily from the early 40s throughthe early 70s, nearly quadrupling over that period.Then, as unleaded gasoline began to replace leadedgasoline, emissions plummeted.Intriguingly, violent crime rates followed the(40) same upside-down U pattern (see the graph). Theonly thing different was the time period. Crimerates rose dramatically in the 60s through the80s, and then began dropping steadily startingin the early 90s. The two curves looked eerily(45) identical, but were offset by about 20 years.So Nevin dug up detailed data on leademissions and crime rates to see if the similarityof the curves was as good as it seemed. It turnedout to be even better. In a 2000 paper he concluded(50) that if you add a lag time of 23 years, leademissions from automobiles explain 90 percent ofthe variation in violent crime in America. Toddlerswho ingested high levels of lead in the 40s and50s really were more likely to become violent(55) criminals in the 60s, 70s, and 80s.And with that we have our molecule: tetra-ethyl lead, the gasoline additive invented byGeneral Motors in the 1920s to prevent knockingand pinging in high-performance engines. As(60) auto sales boomed after World War II, and driversin powerful new cars increasingly asked servicestation attendants to “fill er up with ethyl,” theywere unwittingly creating a crime wave twodecades later.(65) It was an exciting conjecture, and itprompted an immediate wave of . . . nothing.Nevins paper was almost completely ignored,and in one sense its easy to see why—Nevin isan economist, not a criminologist, and his paper(70) was published in Environmental Research, not ajournal with a big readership in the criminologycommunity. Whats more, a single correlationbetween two curves isnt all that impressive,econometrically speaking. Sales of vinyl LPs rose(75) in the postwar period too, and then declined inthe 80s and 90s. No matter how good the fit, ifyou only have a single correlation it might just bea coincidence. You need to do something more toestablish causality.(80) So in 2007, Nevin collected lead data andcrime data for Australia, Canada, Great Britain,Finland, France, Italy, New Zealand and WestGermany. Every time, the two curves fit each otherastonishingly well.(85) The gasoline lead hypothesis helps explainsome things we might not have realized evenneeded explaining. For example, murder rateshave always been higher in big cities than intowns and small cities. Nevin suggests that,(90) because big cities have lots of cars in a smallarea, they also had high densities of atmosphericlead during the postwar era. But as lead levelsin gasoline decreased, the differences betweenbig and small cities largely went away. And guess(95) what? The difference in murder rates went awaytoo. Today, homicide rates are similar in citiesof all sizes. It may be that violent crime isnt aninevitable consequence of being a big city after all.*Enthusiasm for the music and person of Justin Bieber.Q.In line 49, “even better” most nearly meansa)less controversial.b)more correlative.c)easier to calculate.d)more aesthetically engaging.Correct answer is option 'B'. Can you explain this answer? defined & explained in the simplest way possible. Besides giving the explanation of Question based on the following passage and supplementary material.This passage is adapted from Kevin Drum, “Americas Real Criminal Element: Lead" ©2013 Mother Jones.Experts often suggest that crime resemblesan epidemic. But what kind? Economicsprofessor Karl Smith has a good rule of thumbfor categorizing epidemics: If it spreads along(5) lines of communication, he says, the cause isinformation. Think Bieber Fever.* If it travelsalong major transportation routes, the cause ismicrobial. Think influenza. If it spreads out likea fan, the cause is an insect. Think malaria. But(10) if its everywhere, all at once—as both the rise ofcrime in the 60s and 70s and the fall of crime inthe 90s seemed to be—the cause is a molecule.A molecule? That sounds crazy. Whatmolecule could be responsible for a steep and(15) sudden decline in violent crime?Well, heres one possibility: Pb(CH2CH3)4.In 1994, Rick Nevin was a consultantworking for the US Department of Housing andUrban Development on the costs and benefits of(20) removing lead paint from old houses. A growingbody of research had linked lead exposure insmall children with a whole raft of complicationslater in life, including lower IQ, hyperactivity,behavioral problems, and learning disabilities.(25) A recent study had also suggested a linkbetween childhood lead exposure and juveniledelinquency later on. Maybe reducing leadexposure had an effect on violent crime too?That tip took Nevin in a different direction. The(30) biggest source of lead in the postwar era, it turnsout, wasnt paint, but leaded gasoline. If you chartthe rise and fall of atmospheric lead caused bythe rise and fall of leaded gasoline consumption,you get an upside-down U. Lead emissions from(35) tailpipes rose steadily from the early 40s throughthe early 70s, nearly quadrupling over that period.Then, as unleaded gasoline began to replace leadedgasoline, emissions plummeted.Intriguingly, violent crime rates followed the(40) same upside-down U pattern (see the graph). Theonly thing different was the time period. Crimerates rose dramatically in the 60s through the80s, and then began dropping steadily startingin the early 90s. The two curves looked eerily(45) identical, but were offset by about 20 years.So Nevin dug up detailed data on leademissions and crime rates to see if the similarityof the curves was as good as it seemed. It turnedout to be even better. In a 2000 paper he concluded(50) that if you add a lag time of 23 years, leademissions from automobiles explain 90 percent ofthe variation in violent crime in America. Toddlerswho ingested high levels of lead in the 40s and50s really were more likely to become violent(55) criminals in the 60s, 70s, and 80s.And with that we have our molecule: tetra-ethyl lead, the gasoline additive invented byGeneral Motors in the 1920s to prevent knockingand pinging in high-performance engines. As(60) auto sales boomed after World War II, and driversin powerful new cars increasingly asked servicestation attendants to “fill er up with ethyl,” theywere unwittingly creating a crime wave twodecades later.(65) It was an exciting conjecture, and itprompted an immediate wave of . . . nothing.Nevins paper was almost completely ignored,and in one sense its easy to see why—Nevin isan economist, not a criminologist, and his paper(70) was published in Environmental Research, not ajournal with a big readership in the criminologycommunity. Whats more, a single correlationbetween two curves isnt all that impressive,econometrically speaking. Sales of vinyl LPs rose(75) in the postwar period too, and then declined inthe 80s and 90s. No matter how good the fit, ifyou only have a single correlation it might just bea coincidence. You need to do something more toestablish causality.(80) So in 2007, Nevin collected lead data andcrime data for Australia, Canada, Great Britain,Finland, France, Italy, New Zealand and WestGermany. Every time, the two curves fit each otherastonishingly well.(85) The gasoline lead hypothesis helps explainsome things we might not have realized evenneeded explaining. For example, murder rateshave always been higher in big cities than intowns and small cities. Nevin suggests that,(90) because big cities have lots of cars in a smallarea, they also had high densities of atmosphericlead during the postwar era. But as lead levelsin gasoline decreased, the differences betweenbig and small cities largely went away. And guess(95) what? The difference in murder rates went awaytoo. Today, homicide rates are similar in citiesof all sizes. It may be that violent crime isnt aninevitable consequence of being a big city after all.*Enthusiasm for the music and person of Justin Bieber.Q.In line 49, “even better” most nearly meansa)less controversial.b)more correlative.c)easier to calculate.d)more aesthetically engaging.Correct answer is option 'B'. Can you explain this answer?, a detailed solution for Question based on the following passage and supplementary material.This passage is adapted from Kevin Drum, “Americas Real Criminal Element: Lead" ©2013 Mother Jones.Experts often suggest that crime resemblesan epidemic. But what kind? Economicsprofessor Karl Smith has a good rule of thumbfor categorizing epidemics: If it spreads along(5) lines of communication, he says, the cause isinformation. Think Bieber Fever.* If it travelsalong major transportation routes, the cause ismicrobial. Think influenza. If it spreads out likea fan, the cause is an insect. Think malaria. But(10) if its everywhere, all at once—as both the rise ofcrime in the 60s and 70s and the fall of crime inthe 90s seemed to be—the cause is a molecule.A molecule? That sounds crazy. Whatmolecule could be responsible for a steep and(15) sudden decline in violent crime?Well, heres one possibility: Pb(CH2CH3)4.In 1994, Rick Nevin was a consultantworking for the US Department of Housing andUrban Development on the costs and benefits of(20) removing lead paint from old houses. A growingbody of research had linked lead exposure insmall children with a whole raft of complicationslater in life, including lower IQ, hyperactivity,behavioral problems, and learning disabilities.(25) A recent study had also suggested a linkbetween childhood lead exposure and juveniledelinquency later on. Maybe reducing leadexposure had an effect on violent crime too?That tip took Nevin in a different direction. The(30) biggest source of lead in the postwar era, it turnsout, wasnt paint, but leaded gasoline. If you chartthe rise and fall of atmospheric lead caused bythe rise and fall of leaded gasoline consumption,you get an upside-down U. Lead emissions from(35) tailpipes rose steadily from the early 40s throughthe early 70s, nearly quadrupling over that period.Then, as unleaded gasoline began to replace leadedgasoline, emissions plummeted.Intriguingly, violent crime rates followed the(40) same upside-down U pattern (see the graph). Theonly thing different was the time period. Crimerates rose dramatically in the 60s through the80s, and then began dropping steadily startingin the early 90s. The two curves looked eerily(45) identical, but were offset by about 20 years.So Nevin dug up detailed data on leademissions and crime rates to see if the similarityof the curves was as good as it seemed. It turnedout to be even better. In a 2000 paper he concluded(50) that if you add a lag time of 23 years, leademissions from automobiles explain 90 percent ofthe variation in violent crime in America. Toddlerswho ingested high levels of lead in the 40s and50s really were more likely to become violent(55) criminals in the 60s, 70s, and 80s.And with that we have our molecule: tetra-ethyl lead, the gasoline additive invented byGeneral Motors in the 1920s to prevent knockingand pinging in high-performance engines. As(60) auto sales boomed after World War II, and driversin powerful new cars increasingly asked servicestation attendants to “fill er up with ethyl,” theywere unwittingly creating a crime wave twodecades later.(65) It was an exciting conjecture, and itprompted an immediate wave of . . . nothing.Nevins paper was almost completely ignored,and in one sense its easy to see why—Nevin isan economist, not a criminologist, and his paper(70) was published in Environmental Research, not ajournal with a big readership in the criminologycommunity. Whats more, a single correlationbetween two curves isnt all that impressive,econometrically speaking. Sales of vinyl LPs rose(75) in the postwar period too, and then declined inthe 80s and 90s. No matter how good the fit, ifyou only have a single correlation it might just bea coincidence. You need to do something more toestablish causality.(80) So in 2007, Nevin collected lead data andcrime data for Australia, Canada, Great Britain,Finland, France, Italy, New Zealand and WestGermany. Every time, the two curves fit each otherastonishingly well.(85) The gasoline lead hypothesis helps explainsome things we might not have realized evenneeded explaining. For example, murder rateshave always been higher in big cities than intowns and small cities. Nevin suggests that,(90) because big cities have lots of cars in a smallarea, they also had high densities of atmosphericlead during the postwar era. But as lead levelsin gasoline decreased, the differences betweenbig and small cities largely went away. And guess(95) what? The difference in murder rates went awaytoo. Today, homicide rates are similar in citiesof all sizes. It may be that violent crime isnt aninevitable consequence of being a big city after all.*Enthusiasm for the music and person of Justin Bieber.Q.In line 49, “even better” most nearly meansa)less controversial.b)more correlative.c)easier to calculate.d)more aesthetically engaging.Correct answer is option 'B'. Can you explain this answer? has been provided alongside types of Question based on the following passage and supplementary material.This passage is adapted from Kevin Drum, “Americas Real Criminal Element: Lead" ©2013 Mother Jones.Experts often suggest that crime resemblesan epidemic. But what kind? Economicsprofessor Karl Smith has a good rule of thumbfor categorizing epidemics: If it spreads along(5) lines of communication, he says, the cause isinformation. Think Bieber Fever.* If it travelsalong major transportation routes, the cause ismicrobial. Think influenza. If it spreads out likea fan, the cause is an insect. Think malaria. But(10) if its everywhere, all at once—as both the rise ofcrime in the 60s and 70s and the fall of crime inthe 90s seemed to be—the cause is a molecule.A molecule? That sounds crazy. Whatmolecule could be responsible for a steep and(15) sudden decline in violent crime?Well, heres one possibility: Pb(CH2CH3)4.In 1994, Rick Nevin was a consultantworking for the US Department of Housing andUrban Development on the costs and benefits of(20) removing lead paint from old houses. A growingbody of research had linked lead exposure insmall children with a whole raft of complicationslater in life, including lower IQ, hyperactivity,behavioral problems, and learning disabilities.(25) A recent study had also suggested a linkbetween childhood lead exposure and juveniledelinquency later on. Maybe reducing leadexposure had an effect on violent crime too?That tip took Nevin in a different direction. The(30) biggest source of lead in the postwar era, it turnsout, wasnt paint, but leaded gasoline. If you chartthe rise and fall of atmospheric lead caused bythe rise and fall of leaded gasoline consumption,you get an upside-down U. Lead emissions from(35) tailpipes rose steadily from the early 40s throughthe early 70s, nearly quadrupling over that period.Then, as unleaded gasoline began to replace leadedgasoline, emissions plummeted.Intriguingly, violent crime rates followed the(40) same upside-down U pattern (see the graph). Theonly thing different was the time period. Crimerates rose dramatically in the 60s through the80s, and then began dropping steadily startingin the early 90s. The two curves looked eerily(45) identical, but were offset by about 20 years.So Nevin dug up detailed data on leademissions and crime rates to see if the similarityof the curves was as good as it seemed. It turnedout to be even better. In a 2000 paper he concluded(50) that if you add a lag time of 23 years, leademissions from automobiles explain 90 percent ofthe variation in violent crime in America. Toddlerswho ingested high levels of lead in the 40s and50s really were more likely to become violent(55) criminals in the 60s, 70s, and 80s.And with that we have our molecule: tetra-ethyl lead, the gasoline additive invented byGeneral Motors in the 1920s to prevent knockingand pinging in high-performance engines. As(60) auto sales boomed after World War II, and driversin powerful new cars increasingly asked servicestation attendants to “fill er up with ethyl,” theywere unwittingly creating a crime wave twodecades later.(65) It was an exciting conjecture, and itprompted an immediate wave of . . . nothing.Nevins paper was almost completely ignored,and in one sense its easy to see why—Nevin isan economist, not a criminologist, and his paper(70) was published in Environmental Research, not ajournal with a big readership in the criminologycommunity. Whats more, a single correlationbetween two curves isnt all that impressive,econometrically speaking. Sales of vinyl LPs rose(75) in the postwar period too, and then declined inthe 80s and 90s. No matter how good the fit, ifyou only have a single correlation it might just bea coincidence. You need to do something more toestablish causality.(80) So in 2007, Nevin collected lead data andcrime data for Australia, Canada, Great Britain,Finland, France, Italy, New Zealand and WestGermany. Every time, the two curves fit each otherastonishingly well.(85) The gasoline lead hypothesis helps explainsome things we might not have realized evenneeded explaining. For example, murder rateshave always been higher in big cities than intowns and small cities. Nevin suggests that,(90) because big cities have lots of cars in a smallarea, they also had high densities of atmosphericlead during the postwar era. But as lead levelsin gasoline decreased, the differences betweenbig and small cities largely went away. And guess(95) what? The difference in murder rates went awaytoo. Today, homicide rates are similar in citiesof all sizes. It may be that violent crime isnt aninevitable consequence of being a big city after all.*Enthusiasm for the music and person of Justin Bieber.Q.In line 49, “even better” most nearly meansa)less controversial.b)more correlative.c)easier to calculate.d)more aesthetically engaging.Correct answer is option 'B'. Can you explain this answer? theory, EduRev gives you an ample number of questions to practice Question based on the following passage and supplementary material.This passage is adapted from Kevin Drum, “Americas Real Criminal Element: Lead" ©2013 Mother Jones.Experts often suggest that crime resemblesan epidemic. But what kind? Economicsprofessor Karl Smith has a good rule of thumbfor categorizing epidemics: If it spreads along(5) lines of communication, he says, the cause isinformation. Think Bieber Fever.* If it travelsalong major transportation routes, the cause ismicrobial. Think influenza. If it spreads out likea fan, the cause is an insect. Think malaria. But(10) if its everywhere, all at once—as both the rise ofcrime in the 60s and 70s and the fall of crime inthe 90s seemed to be—the cause is a molecule.A molecule? That sounds crazy. Whatmolecule could be responsible for a steep and(15) sudden decline in violent crime?Well, heres one possibility: Pb(CH2CH3)4.In 1994, Rick Nevin was a consultantworking for the US Department of Housing andUrban Development on the costs and benefits of(20) removing lead paint from old houses. A growingbody of research had linked lead exposure insmall children with a whole raft of complicationslater in life, including lower IQ, hyperactivity,behavioral problems, and learning disabilities.(25) A recent study had also suggested a linkbetween childhood lead exposure and juveniledelinquency later on. Maybe reducing leadexposure had an effect on violent crime too?That tip took Nevin in a different direction. The(30) biggest source of lead in the postwar era, it turnsout, wasnt paint, but leaded gasoline. If you chartthe rise and fall of atmospheric lead caused bythe rise and fall of leaded gasoline consumption,you get an upside-down U. Lead emissions from(35) tailpipes rose steadily from the early 40s throughthe early 70s, nearly quadrupling over that period.Then, as unleaded gasoline began to replace leadedgasoline, emissions plummeted.Intriguingly, violent crime rates followed the(40) same upside-down U pattern (see the graph). Theonly thing different was the time period. Crimerates rose dramatically in the 60s through the80s, and then began dropping steadily startingin the early 90s. The two curves looked eerily(45) identical, but were offset by about 20 years.So Nevin dug up detailed data on leademissions and crime rates to see if the similarityof the curves was as good as it seemed. It turnedout to be even better. In a 2000 paper he concluded(50) that if you add a lag time of 23 years, leademissions from automobiles explain 90 percent ofthe variation in violent crime in America. Toddlerswho ingested high levels of lead in the 40s and50s really were more likely to become violent(55) criminals in the 60s, 70s, and 80s.And with that we have our molecule: tetra-ethyl lead, the gasoline additive invented byGeneral Motors in the 1920s to prevent knockingand pinging in high-performance engines. As(60) auto sales boomed after World War II, and driversin powerful new cars increasingly asked servicestation attendants to “fill er up with ethyl,” theywere unwittingly creating a crime wave twodecades later.(65) It was an exciting conjecture, and itprompted an immediate wave of . . . nothing.Nevins paper was almost completely ignored,and in one sense its easy to see why—Nevin isan economist, not a criminologist, and his paper(70) was published in Environmental Research, not ajournal with a big readership in the criminologycommunity. Whats more, a single correlationbetween two curves isnt all that impressive,econometrically speaking. Sales of vinyl LPs rose(75) in the postwar period too, and then declined inthe 80s and 90s. No matter how good the fit, ifyou only have a single correlation it might just bea coincidence. You need to do something more toestablish causality.(80) So in 2007, Nevin collected lead data andcrime data for Australia, Canada, Great Britain,Finland, France, Italy, New Zealand and WestGermany. Every time, the two curves fit each otherastonishingly well.(85) The gasoline lead hypothesis helps explainsome things we might not have realized evenneeded explaining. For example, murder rateshave always been higher in big cities than intowns and small cities. Nevin suggests that,(90) because big cities have lots of cars in a smallarea, they also had high densities of atmosphericlead during the postwar era. But as lead levelsin gasoline decreased, the differences betweenbig and small cities largely went away. And guess(95) what? The difference in murder rates went awaytoo. Today, homicide rates are similar in citiesof all sizes. It may be that violent crime isnt aninevitable consequence of being a big city after all.*Enthusiasm for the music and person of Justin Bieber.Q.In line 49, “even better” most nearly meansa)less controversial.b)more correlative.c)easier to calculate.d)more aesthetically engaging.Correct answer is option 'B'. Can you explain this answer? tests, examples and also practice SAT tests.