Test: Paragraph Construction - 1 - CAT MCQ

Reading the four sentences cursorily gives us a hint that they are about algorithm of collaborative filtering. Since the statement (d) introduces the topic and briefly explains collaborative algorithm, this is the first sentence in the sequence. The next sentence will be (a) because it gives the example of collaborative filtering along with the first hand experience to the readers. The next statement should talk about the problem with these algorithms. This statement is (b). The only one option is left now. This is option (c) and it follows the sequence by giving an example of the problem with these algorithms.

At its first glance all the five options look related. Therefore, we will begin sequencing each sentence step by step.
Statement (e) looks like the opening statement: For millennia, people with hearing impairments encountered marginalization because it was believed that language could only be learned by hearing the spoken word. The idea is further expanded in sentence (c).
Marginalization is a form of prejudice. So the next sentence will be option (d) which speaks against this prejudice: Pushback against this prejudice began in the 16th century when Pushback against this prejudice began in the 16th century when Pedro Ponce de León created a formal sign language for the hearing impaired.
The next sentence will be sentence (a) because it begins with ‘his’. It is used for Pedro Ponce de León. So the sentence will be: His idea to use sign language was not a completely new idea as Native Americans used hand gestures to communicate with other tribes.
From above, option (b) is left out as an odd one out. This will be our answer.

When we begin looking for an opening sentence, we find only sentence (d) appears like an opening sentence. The other sentences are in need of some meaningful claim before them. They are abrupt and not clear unless some meaningful sentence precedes them. The sentence (d) talks about three suffix as symbols. These three suffix as symbols are further explained in sentence (a). Therefore (d) and (a) will form a sequence. Something more on suffix is added by statement (e), that is, to gain the suffix was to acquire a proud and optimistic emblem of the electronic and atomic age. From here, we can see that something more is further added to explain or discuss suffix (morphemes). Thus the sequence we get is daec. Option (b) emerges as the odd one out. It is unrelated to the passage and speaks of something entirely different out of the blue. Therefore answer is (b).

1 could be either in the beginning or in the end because it is in the nature of introduction or conclusion. However, it will not come in the beginning because it starts off by differentiating print-reading and mind reading. We must have these terms explained before this sentence. If you notice the statement (d), it has discussed these terms. Therefore, it is clear that 1 will follow (d). That is (d) will come first and then (a) will be there. Therefore, we have (d, a) sequences. Our opening sentence can be either (b) or (c). It may be noted that (b) has a better introductory tone which should be followed by statement (c) because this statement explains what mind reading is. Immediately after mind reading, we have the statement on print reading, which should follow statement (c).
The final sequence we have now is (b, c, d, a). This is the correct answer.

The passage is about pure science and applied science with specific examples of physics and engineering. The passage makes a further claim that engineers may find some theories of physics useful even when they are not validated by physics. The passage also discusses about the challenges of validating a theory in physics.
Option (a) is completely off the mark. According to this option relationship between pure and applied science is strictly linear, with the pure science directing applied science. In the passage we actually find that pure science is not always directing the applied science. The theories that are false in pure science are used in the applied science. Option (c) does not capture the sense of the passage. It says “The unique task of the engineer is to identify, understand, and interpret the design constraints to produce a successful result.” This is not the complete sense of the passage because the passage talks about the relationship between the pure science and the applied science. Option (d) distorts the meaning of the passage. It says Engineering and physics fundamentally differ on matters like building a bridge or a nuclear reactor. The passage talks about the broad differences and the relationship between pure and applied science. Option (d) is just a specific example, so it can be eliminated.
Option (b) captures the essence of the passage. It says “Though engineering draws heavily from pure science, it contributes to knowledge, by incorporating the constraints and conditions in the real world.” Therefore, it is the correct choice.

If we read the passage carefully, we can tone it down to few essential elements. These are: 1. Language and displaced reference 2. Ability to think about distant things precedes the ability to speak about them. (c). Mental categories can be invoked even in the absence of immediate stimuli.
Option (a) This option makes the mistake of claiming that only humans have the ability to think about objects not present in their surroundings. Even if this claim is true, this assertion is nowhere made in the passage.
Option (c) This option can be ruled out because displaced reference is a distinguishing feature of language, not of humans. (For example: This may not have been true of primitive humans who had not developed a language).
Option (d) Option (d) can be ruled out because this option claims that thoughts precede all speech acts, while the passage claims that “Thought precedes meaningful referential communication”. There is a difference between the two. Option (b) This option is exact and to the point. It does not clash with anything made out in the passage.

If you read the options carefully, you will understand that you need to have a clear understanding of “hidden persuasion”, “subliminal level”, “supraliminal level” etc. You can find the essence of the passage in the conclusion, which is: “individuals do not always have access to their conscious thoughts and can be persuaded by supraliminal messages without their knowledge.” Now your task is to find the statement that is closest to this statement.
Option (a) talks about subliminal level, so we can eliminate it. Option (c) also talks about subliminal level, so we can eliminate it. Now the choice is between option (b) and option (d).
However, we will have to eliminate option (b) because it says that “the people targeted are aware of being persuaded,” while the truth according to the passage is “individuals do not always have access to their conscious thoughts and can be persuaded by supraliminal messages without their knowledge”. Option (d) is closest to this view because it maintains that “though the people targeted have no awareness of being persuaded.” So option (d) is the correct choice.

If you read the statements as given in the question, you will note that they are all about the phrase carpe diem. The first sentence therefore, has to be the one that explains the phrase. The statement (c) explains the phrase, so it will come first. The second sentence/statement has to be the one that digs its background or history. This statement is the second statement. That is (c) is followed by (b), so we get (cb). The next statement may be about its example or about the problems with phrases when translating from one language to the other. So, the next statement will be (d). The sequence we get now is (cbd). Since (a) is the only one left, it will automatically come there. We can also note that (a) is in the form of a conclusion or general statement. Therefore, the sequence we get now is (cbda).

If you read the four sentences randomly, you will realize it is about social media and our response to it. Statement (c) is the introductory sentence because it opens the discussion by making a claim that we must be open to legitimate criticism as we learn to live with social media. This is a sentence about what we need to learn. The next related sentence is also about what we need to learn more. This is about responding to feedbacks. This is given out in sentence (b). The next related sentence is about new norms emerging due to increased social media interaction. This is statement (d). Finally we are left with sentence one (a). This is in the form of the conclusion or a generalized statement. Therefore, the sequence is (cbda).

together, odd one out (a)
Statement (d) looks like an introductory sentence on the topic of identity.  Statement (c) is closely related to (d) as it expands the notion of identity by claiming that some organizations have complex and multidimensional identities. Therefore (d) and (c) will come together. The next sentence will be (e) because it explains the opinion of some people on complex identities and their advantages to an organization. Statement (b) follows (e) because it explains the opinion of others on complex identity and how it can be disadvantageous to an organization. Therefore, we are left with only (a). This statement is totally unrelated to the four statements that are related. So (a) is the odd one out.

When you read the four sentences, you can easily make out the first sentence by examining each of them. When you read the first sentence “Such a belief in harmony...” you can infer something comes before it that stands for “such a belief”. The next sentence begins with “these parts” and you can sense something should come before for which “these parts” stand. Similarly the fourth sentence begins with “it is an example”, so we can guess something must come before for which ‘it is an example’ works as a reference. The third sentence stands alone without the need of a prior sentence to make sense of it. So the first number is (c).
Sentence (d) follows next because we can infer “the notion of a balance of nature” is an example of an ancient belief system....So the sentence to follow (c) is (d). Sentence (d) ends with “component parts” and sentence (b) begins with “these parts”. So these two sentences are together with (b) following the (d). Finally we are left with (a) which naturally follows (b). Therefore, the right sequence is (c, d, b, a).

Read all the options or sentences. The first sentence is sentence (d) because this sentence is in the nature of introduction or simple definition of clock time which has been discussed at a more complex level in the other options. Sentence (d) talks of the representation of clock-time. The next sentence where there is reference of this representation with the use of the word representation is sentence (a). So the sequence we get is (d, a).
The next sentence will be sentence (c). Let us see how. Sentence (a) talks of deleterious effect which is harmful effect. The theme of negative or deleterious effect is further extended in sentence number (c) “it is found that caring time is often more focused on the clock than generally theorised” We are now left with sentence number (b), which is a form of conclusion to the introduction of an article as evident from “this article argues....” in the sentence number (b). So the right sequence is (d, a, c, b).

If you read the options, you will realize all of them are correct but we have to choose the best among them, and the best among them is the one that puts across the idea succinctly without missing out on original elements in the passage. Let us begin with the option (a). This is correct and it carries the idea of intention of the inventors of wall free office spaces and the reason why they did not work out.
Option (b) is also correct but instead of directly stating the reason why wall free offices did not work, it has been stated indirectly that companies did not care for worker’s satisfaction. The reason in the passage is “But companies took up their idea less out of a democratic ideology than a desire to pack in as many workers as they could.” Even though this answer is correct the first option is preferable.
Option (c) is correct but it does not explain the reason why wall free office did not work as has been done in the option (a). So option (c) is also rejected.
Option (d) is also correct but to say that the companies did not believe in democratic ideology would be incorrect where as the fact is the companies took up their ideas less out of a democratic ideology than a desire to pack as many workers as they could. There is a difference between companies not believing in democratic ideology and less out of democratic ideology. So this option is also rejected. Therefore, option (a) is the best choice.

In this question you have to read the passage and then decide which is the best one sentence summary of the passage out of the given options. After you read the passage and the options, you will find all the options nearly summarize the passage. So you can try to find the options in which one or more crucial elements may be missing or something new may have been added.
Option (a) is correct because an autapomorphy is a distinctive feature, known as a derived trait. However, we will have to see, if there is some more options with improvements over this one. Option is more specific, accurate and captures all essential information. Option (c) is also correct but it fails to capture the essence such as evolved, features of cognitive process such as memory. Option (d) is also correct but it does not capture the essence of the paragraph. It merely mentions one characteristic or fact.

If you read the sentences, you will realize they all talk about plastic or ocean plastic. So we will find out which sentences should go together. Sentence number (e) “Eating plastic has a number of negative consequences....” is related to sentence number (c) “Aside from clogging up the digestive tract...” Both these sentences talk about the negative aspects of plastic and the consequences for marine animals who eat plastic. Sentence number (a) also talks about the problems with ocean plastic because marine animals eat it. So sentence number (a),(e) and (c) are in sequence. Now we have to choose between (d) and (b). Sentence number (d) is a better choice because it talks about plastic in ocean as an environmental problem. So the sequence is (d, a, e, c), while (b) is the odd man out.

While all the four options go on to say something or the other as summary of the passage, most of them are not balanced and take merely one side or factor into account. The summary is one that succinctly captures the essence of the passage. The passage concludes that it is easy to mobilize people into a movement from hybrid organizations in comparison to the non-hybrid organizations. Option (a) is correct. In the passage too the following statement is there: “Studies of the post-9/11 U.S. antiwar movement show that individuals with past involvement in non-anti-war movements are more likely to join hybrid organizations” So we will retain this option for now. Option (b) is also correct as can be seen in the very first sentence of the passage: “Social movement organizations often struggle to mobilize supporters from allied movements in their efforts to achieve critical mass”.
Option (c) is also correct as can be seen from the following sentence in the passage: “In addition, they show that organizations with hybrid identities occupy relatively more central positions in inter-organizational contact networks within the antiwar movement and thus recruit significantly more participants”.
Similarly option (d) is also correct. However, we have to identify the best one among them. The best option will be the most general response because it has to capture the essence of the passage and that is not based on one example here and there.
Option (a) is rejected because it is a specific 9/11 statement rather than a generalized statement. Option (b) is rejected because it is a statement taken from a passage rather than the summary.
Option (c) also suffers from the same deficiency, that is, it is a statement randomly taken from the passage.
However, option (d) is the summary and the right choice because it is the conclusion of the passage and represents the broad essence of the passage. So this is the correct choice.

In this question, you only need to find out the sentence that does not fit with the rest of the sentences which are related in some way. As a first step read all the sentences without caring for their order so as to find a common theme. You will find that the idea of ‘rumination’ has been introduced. (c) and (d) sentences have the word ‘rumination’ in them. So they are related. Sentence (e) begins with ‘the idea is that...”. There is a suggestion of alternative idea as opposed to rumination becauserumination can be harmful. The alternative idea is suggested by the word ‘illeism’. Therefore we can see the direct link between (e) and (b).  Therefore, (d, c, b, e) are related and make a coherent paragraph while option (a) is left out which is the answer.

When you read the 4 sentences randomly, you cannot make a head or tail out of it. All the sentences appear independent and unrelated. It is difficult to find the first sentence, but if you try to make sense of the sentences, you will realize that the author is trying to answer questions about structure, category and adaptive behaviour. Next, he takes each of these concepts once by one. So the first sentence begins by explaining or defining what is adaptive behaviour. Then the next sentence is about category. This is followed by the structure and order. The sentence adaptive behaviour comes first because it contains the word object. The next sentence explains the object. The third sentence informs us about structure (each object has structure). The last sentence is like a conclusion or general statement that says about correlational structure. So the sequence is (b, d, c, a).

You have to find out the sentence that does not go with the rest. So, read all the options randomly one by one. As you read the sentences, you realize all of them have the common theme of single-panel, humor, cartoon etc. Let us try to sequence the sentences. The first sentence is either the first number or the second number sentence because it answers the question what makes the single panel comic so engaging in one complete sentence. Sentence number one gives us an interesting example of inference. For now we will keep both of them.
The next sentence is (e) which explain further what is single panel (a series of panels out of which cartoonist chose one). Sentence number (d) talks about having to figure out the missing panels to get the joke. This has to do with inference, so we can keep the sentence number (a). Sentence number (c) is about you having to figure out what happened before and after the panel that was shown to you. Therefore, you have to infer something. So this is another reason to keep sentence number (a). Therefore, (a, c, d, e) forms a coherent paragraph while (b) is the odd man out.

You can decide which sentence should come first by taking note of the word that a sentence begins with. The first sentence of a meaningful paragraph should not generally start with words like “To”, “After”, and “However”. So the first sentence should be number (b) statement. In addition, the beginning sentence must define a concept if the concept has been used in the para. The next sentence should give out the meaning or definition further or give an example. Therefore, it will be followed by number (a). Next, a contrary idea or condition should explicate it further, which is explicated by number (d). Finally, the number (c) is left out which will come in the end and its correct position may be confirmed by its nature as a conclusive statement. The right sequence that we get is (b, a, d, c). 

Artificial embryo twinning is low-tech and mimetic of the natural development of genetically identical twins from the embryo after fertilization The paragraph says that artificial embryo twinning is low-tech which means use of technology in the process is minimum; and it ‘is mimetic of’ or mimics or exactly copies the natural process of the embryo splitting into two individuals after fertilisation. So, it is neither ‘unlike’ (option A) nor ‘close to’ (option B)the natural process, rather exactly like it. Option D is incorrect as it says the twinning takes place ‘during’ fertilisation rather than after.

Sentences 1534, in that order, form a paragraph on comparison between translators and bumblebees.
1. Translators are like bumblebees.
5. In 1934, the French entomologist August Magnan pronounced the flight of the bumblebee to be aerodynamically impossible.
3. Similar pronouncements about the impossibility of translation have dogged practitioners since Leonardo Bruni’s De interpretatione recta, published in 1424.
4. Bees, unaware of these deliberations, have continued to flit from flower to flower, and translators continue to translate.
Sentence 1 states the intended comparison. 5 speaks of bumblebees, while 3, of translators, but its connecting phrase ‘similar pronouncements’ forms the link 5-3.  Sentence 4 is a concluding remark.
A factoid is an unreliable information reported and repeated so often that it becomes accepted as a fact. Since, only a comparison is made here, it cannot be termed a factoid. So, sentence 2 is odd in the paragraph.

The coherent paragraph forms as follows:
1. The woodland’s canopy receives most of the sunlight that falls on the trees.
4. Hundreds of thousands of insects fly in the sunshine up above the canopy, some falling prey to swifts and swallows.
3. With their streamlined bodies, swifts are agile flyers, ideally adapted to twisting and turning through the air as they chase flying insects – the creatures that form their staple diet.
2. Swifts do not confine themselves to woodlands, but hunt wherever there are insects in the air.
The link of nouns is thus: woodland’s canopy—insects— swifts. The next sentence states how swifts hunt insects, their staple diet; and the succeeding one is linked with the birds’ general spot for hunting insects.

The coherent paragraph forms as follows:
1. In many cases, time inconsistency is what prevents our going from intention to action. 3. In the specific case of immunization, however, it is hard to believe that time inconsistency by itself would be sufficient to make people permanently postpone the decision if they were fully cognizant of its benefits.2. For people to continuously postpone getting their children immunized, they would need to be constantly fooled by themselves. 5. Not only do they have to think that they prefer to spend time going to the camp next month rather than today, they also have to believe that they will indeed go next month. Sentence 1 opens the paragraph with the general term ‘In many cases...’ it is linked to the succeeding ‘specific cases’ of 3. Sentences 1325, in that order, form a coherent paragraph. ‘Time inconsistency’ is the factor that prevents action; but, in the specific case of immunisation, this factor cannot be held sufficient for postponement if people were ‘fully cognizant of’ the benefits of immunisation. If people are continuously postponing immunisation despite knowing its benefits it would mean, they are ’fooled by themselves’ about ’time inconsistency.’ Cost is not a factor considered here; so, sentence 4— In most cases, even a small cost of immunization was large enough to discourage most people — is odd.

Sentence 4 introduces the subject Cathy Perkins; 2 goes on to say that neither she nor her GP (general practitioner) knew what that lump was; 1 says that it was finally diagnosed as skin cancer and treated successfully, 3 says that later, a routine scan showed it had returned and spread to her lungs.

The coherent paragraph  3245 runs thus: 3. The nature of displacement in Bengal makes it an interesting case study. 2. A factor of displacement in Bengal is the shifting course of the Ganges leading to erosion of river banks. 4. Since displacement due to erosion is well spread over a long period of time, it remains invisible. 5. Rapid displacement would have helped sensitize the public to its human costs.
Displacement is clearly the theme noun as it appears in all sentences. Sentence 3 is the opener as it mentions a case study to be brought up next. Sentence 2 follows as it mentions a factor of displacement—erosion of river banks. Sentence 4 is linked as it elaborates on the issue of erosion that it is spread over time. Sentence 5 is the logical follower offering the effect if erosion had been rapid. ‘Thus’ in sentence 1 suggests it might have been the concluding sentence, but it is in fact out of context as ‘magnitude’ of erosion is not being discussed here.  

The logical paragraph is formed thus: 1. Impartiality and objectivity are fiendishly difficult concepts that can cause all sorts of injustices even if transparently implemented. 3. Twitter’s website says that “tweets you are likely to care about most will show up first in your timeline…based on accounts you interact with most, tweets you engage with, and much more.” 2. It encourages us into bubbles of people we know and like, while blinding us to different perspectives, but the deeper problem of ‘transparency’ lies in the words “…and much more”. 4. We are only told some of the basic principles, and we can’t see the algorithm itself, making it hard for citizens to analyse the system sensibly or fairly or be convinced of its impartiality and objectivity.
The paragraph discusses that even transparency does not guarantee objectivity and impartiality. Sentence 1 is the opener as it introduces the topic. Link 3-2 is established as the former quotes Twitter website; and the latter expresses problem of ‘transparency’ with the words “… and much more” in it, because it leaves many things still under wraps. Sentence 4 elaborates this further.

The three-dimensional understanding of the organism in Europe led to a similar approach towards the understanding of landscape.
The paragraph says that conceptualization of landscape as a geometric object in Europe was historically related to three-dimensional geometric conceptualization of the human body; and Renaissance artists such as Leonardo da Vinci contributed to the understanding of both of these. So, option D presents the best summary. 

The logical paragraph is formed thus: 2. Democracy and high levels of inequality of the kind that have come to characterize the United States are simply incompatible. 4. Very rich people will always use money to maintain their political and economic power. 1. But now we have another group: the unwitting enablers. 3. Believing these people are working for a better world, they are, actually, at most, chipping away at the margins, making slight course corrections, ensuring the system goes on as it is, uninterrupted. The pronoun ’these people’ in sentence 3, and connecting phrase ‘But now’ in 1 rule them out as opening sentence. Between the rest, 2 talks of inequality and 4 exemplifies how the rich who always enjoy power on account of their money, institutionalise this inequality. So, 2-4 link is established. Now, 1 follows 4 by mentioning about ‘the unwitting enablers’ of inequality.

Professions-approach aims at the institutionalization of knowledge but restricts knowledge production as a function of a select few The paragraph argues that professions perspective focuses on the institutionalization of a body of knowledge; but concretises institutional power structures with links between knowledge and authority wherein knowledge production is restricted to the select members of the professional community.