Reading and Writing Test - 3 - SAT MCQ

• Choice A is the best answer. The sentence effectively emphasizes the aim, or goal, of the research study (in other words, what the researchers hoped to learn from the study): Rogers and Russell wanted to know if woodland expansion is related to changes in climate.
• Choice B is incorrect. The sentence emphasizes the researchers’ findings; it doesn’t emphasize the aim of the study.
• Choice C is incorrect. The sentence emphasizes the results of the study; it doesn’t emphasize the aim.
• Choice D is incorrect. The sentence emphasizes the methodology of the study; it doesn’t emphasize the aim.

• Choice C is the best answer. The convention being tested is subject-verb agreement. The singular verb “outlines” agrees in number with the singular subject “document.”
• Choice A is incorrect because the plural verb “have outlined” doesn’t agree in number with the singular subject “document.”
• Choice B is incorrect because the plural verb “were outlining” doesn’t agree in number with the singular subject “document.”
• Choice D is incorrect because the plural verb “outline” doesn’t agree in number with the singular subject “document.”

• Choice A is the best answer. The convention being tested is subject-modifier placement. This choice makes the noun phrase “researcher Robert Losey” the subject of the sentence and places it immediately after the modifying phrase “since…Siberia.” In doing so, this choice clearly establishes that researcher Robert Losey— and not another noun in the sentence—is who uncovered fragments of a 2,000-year-old reindeer training harness in northern Siberia.
• Choice B is incorrect because it results in a dangling modifier. The placement of the noun phrase “researcher Robert Losey’s argument” immediately after the modifying phrase illogically suggests that the “argument” is what uncovered fragments of a 2,000-year-old reindeer training harness in northern Siberia.
• Choice C is incorrect because it results in a dangling modifier. The placement of the noun “domestication” immediately after the modifying phrase illogically suggests that “domestication” is what uncovered fragments of a 2,000-year-old reindeer training harness in northern Siberia.
• Choice D is incorrect because it results in a dangling modifier. The placement of the noun phrase “the argument” immediately after the modifying phrase illogically suggests that the “argument” is what uncovered fragments of a 2,000-year-old reindeer training harness in northern Siberia.

• Choice A is the best answer because it most logically completes the text’s discussion of the Moon’s surface. In this context, “reflect” means show or make apparent. The text states that because the surface of the Moon was softer when the Moon was still forming than it is now, early asteroid and meteoroid impacts “would have left less of an impression” and, as a result, evidence of them may no longer exist. This context supports the idea that the surface of the Moon may not accurately show signs of early impact events.
• Choice B is incorrect because it wouldn’t make sense to say that the surface of the Moon may not accurately “receive,” or acquire or experience, early impacts from asteroids or meteoroids. The text indicates that the impacts have already occurred, and it isn’t clear how the Moon’s surface could be accurate or inaccurate in experiencing them.
• Choice C is incorrect because it wouldn’t make sense to say that the surface of the Moon may not accurately “evaluate,” or determine the significance or condition of, early impacts from asteroids or meteoroids, since that would suggest that it’s possible for the Moon’s surface to make a decision of any kind.
• Choice D is incorrect. In this context, “mimic” would mean to deliberately simulate or closely imitate something. It wouldn’t make sense to say that the surface of the Moon may not accurately mimic early asteroid and meteoroid impacts, since that would suggest that it’s possible for the Moon to deliberately imitate something.

• Choice D is the best answer because it best describes the overall structure of the text. The speaker begins by stating that he has heard that others are accusing him of seeking to destroy institutions. The speaker then addresses this criticism by stating that he is “neither for nor against institutions.” Instead, the speaker states that his ultimate goal is to instill “the institution of the dear love of comrades” everywhere in the country. Therefore, the overall structure of the text is best described as an address of criticism followed by an announcement of a grand ambition.
• Choice A is incorrect. While the speaker does address an opinion of him that he believes to be untrue, he doesn’t indicate that this attitude has become increasingly prevalent. The speaker also concludes by explaining his goal for the future rather than his current worldview.
• Choice B is incorrect because the text doesn’t portray the speaker as isolated or regretful, and the speaker gestures toward a hope for societal change but doesn’t offer an explicit prediction that it will happen.
• Choice C is incorrect because the speaker addresses a criticism of him that he believes to be false; he doesn’t admit any personal shortcomings. Moreover, the speaker concludes by stating a goal he has rather than showcasing his achievements.

• Choice A is the best answer. The convention being tested is the punctuation of a supplementary word or phrase between two main clauses. This choice correctly uses a comma to separate the supplementary adverb “however” from the preceding main clause (“Okinaka doesn’t…single-handedly”) and a semicolon to join the next main clause (“all…culture”) to the rest of the sentence. Further, placing the semicolon after “however” correctly indicates that the information in the preceding main clause (Okinaka doesn’t make such decisions singlehandedly) is contrary to what might be assumed from the information in the previous sentence (Okinaka sits on the review board that adds new sites to the Hawaii Register of Historic Places).
• Choice B is incorrect because placing the semicolon after “single-handedly” and the comma after “however” illogically indicates that the information in the next main clause (all historical designations must be approved by a group of experts) is contrary to the information in the previous clause (Okinaka doesn’t make such decisions single-handedly).
• Choice C is incorrect because it results in a comma splice. Commas can’t be used in this way to punctuate a supplementary word or phrase between two main clauses.
• Choice D is incorrect because it results in a run-on sentence. The two main clauses are fused without punctuation and/or a conjunction.

• Choice D is the best answer. The sentence emphasizes a difference between baking soda and baking powder, noting that baking soda needs to be mixed with an acidic ingredient to produce carbon dioxide but baking powder doesn’t.
• Choice A is incorrect. The sentence focuses on what bakers use to make batters rise; it doesn’t emphasize a difference between baking soda and baking powder.
• Choice B is incorrect. The sentence provides a general description of baking soda and baking powder; it doesn’t emphasize a difference between them.
• Choice C is incorrect. The sentence explains what baking soda and honey are; it doesn’t emphasize a difference between baking soda and baking powder.

• Choice C is the best answer because it most logically completes the text’s discussion of the legitimacy of the reigns of French monarchs such as Hugh Capet and Henry I. As used in this context, “buttress” means to strengthen or defend. The text indicates that regardless of whether a French monarch’s reign was significant or uneventful, each monarch faced questions about his right to the throne. The text goes on to say that in order to understand the path of a French monarch’s reign, it’s important to understand what contributed to the monarch’s ability to “hold the throne.” This context suggests that French monarchs such as Hugh Capet and Henry I had to buttress, or defend, their right to be monarch.
• Choice A is incorrect. Saying that a monarch who is faced with questions about the legitimacy of his reign was able to “reciprocate” his right to the French throne would mean that he either returned his right to the throne or that he responded in kind to the challenge. Neither of these meanings would make sense in context because the text focuses on people who did reign as French monarchs and defended their right to do so.
• Choice B is incorrect because it wouldn’t make sense in context to discuss factors that enabled a monarch to “annotate,” or add notes to or explain, his right to the French throne. Nothing in the text suggests that the monarchs were writing notes about their right to the throne; instead, faced with questions about the legitimacy of their reign, the monarchs defended their right.
• Choice D is incorrect because it wouldn’t make sense in context to discuss factors that enabled a monarch to “disengage,” or withdraw his right to the French throne. The text focuses on an examination of people who reigned as French monarchs, not on people who didn’t choose to rule.

• Choice D is the best answer because it uses data from the graph to effectively illustrate the text’s claim about general economic policy uncertainty in the United Kingdom. The graph presents values for economic policy uncertainty in tax and public spending policy, trade policy, and general economic policy in the UK from 2005 to 2010. The graph shows that in 2005, the value for general economic policy uncertainty (approximately 90) was substantially lower than the value for uncertainty about trade policy specifically (approximately 160). It also shows that in 2010, the value for general economic policy uncertainty (approximately 120) was substantially higher than the value for uncertainty about trade policy (approximately 70). The substantial differences between these values in 2005 and 2010 support the claim that a general measure may not fully reflect uncertainty about specific areas of policy.
• Choice A is incorrect because the graph shows that the level of general economic policy uncertainty was similar to the level of uncertainty about tax and public spending policy in both 2005 (with values of approximately 90 and 100, respectively) and 2009 (with values of approximately 80 and 75, respectively).
• Choice B is incorrect because the graph shows that general economic policy uncertainty was higher than uncertainty about tax and public spending policy in 2006, 2007, and 2009, not that it was lower each year from 2005 to 2010.
• Choice C is incorrect because the graph shows that general economic policy uncertainty reached its highest level in 2010, which was when uncertainty about tax and public spending policy also reached its highest level, not its lowest level.

• Choice D is the best answer. The convention being tested is punctuation use between sentences. In this choice, the period after “walls” is used correctly to mark the boundary between the first sentence (“In...walls”) and the second sentence (“With…techniques”), which starts with a supplementary phrase.
• Choice A is incorrect because it results in a comma splice. A comma can’t be used in this way to mark the boundary between sentences.
• Choice B is incorrect because it results in a run-on sentence. The sentences (“In...walls” and “with... paintings”) are fused without punctuation and/or a conjunction.
• Choice C is incorrect. Without a comma preceding it, the conjunction “so” can’t be used in this way to join sentences.

• Choice B is the best answer. The sentence emphasizes a similarity between the two ways a magnificent frigatebird acquires food, noting that neither way requires the seabird to dive into the water.
• Choice A is incorrect. The sentence describes how a magnificent frigatebird captures prey without diving into water; it doesn’t emphasize a similarity between the two ways the seabird acquires food.
• Choice C is incorrect. The sentence notes the term used to describe one of the two ways that magnificent frigatebirds acquire food; it doesn’t emphasize a similarity between the two ways.
• Choice D is incorrect. The sentence describes the two ways that a magnificent frigatebird acquires food; it doesn’t emphasize a similarity between the two ways.

• Choice D is the best answer. The convention being tested is subject-verb agreement. The plural verb “represent” agrees in number with the plural subject “references.”
• Choice A is incorrect because the singular verb “represents” doesn’t agree in number with the plural subject “references.”
• Choice B is incorrect because the singular verb “has represented” doesn’t agree in number with the plural subject “references.”
• Choice C is incorrect because the singular verb “was representing” doesn’t agree in number with the plural subject “references.” 

• Choice B is the best answer. “Conversely” logically signals that the information in this sentence—that countries with proportional-representation electoral systems tend toward multi-partyism—contrasts with the previous information about countries with single-ballot majoritarian elections, which tend to have two-party systems.
• Choice A is incorrect because “subsequently” illogically signals that the information in this sentence about countries with proportional-representation electoral systems occurs later in a chronological sequence of events than the information in the previous sentence. Instead, it contrasts with the previous information.
• Choice C is incorrect because “for instance” illogically signals that the information in this sentence about countries with proportional-representation electoral systems is an example supporting the previous statement about countries with single-ballot majoritarian elections. Instead, it contrasts with the previous statement.
• Choice D is incorrect because “in other words” illogically signals that the information in this sentence about countries with proportionalrepresentation electoral systems is a paraphrase or restatement of the previous information about countries with single-ballot majoritarian elections. Instead, it contrasts with the previous information.

• Choice C is the best answer because it most accurately describes how the underlined sentence functions in the text as a whole. In the text, Harris tells stories about his previous boat trip across the English Channel, when conditions were so rough that others onboard became seasick. According to the text, Harris’s accounts vary somewhat but generally involve him and only one other man not growing ill. The underlined sentence then adds that if it was “not [Harris] and another man” who didn’t develop seasickness, “then it was [Harris] by himself.” That is, some versions of the story even involve Harris being the only person onboard who resisted seasickness. Therefore, the underlined sentence emphasizes that Harris always boasts about his own constitution, or physical wellbeing, when speaking of a previous boat trip.
• Choice A is incorrect because the text doesn’t portray Harris as being eager to resume traveling; instead, it shows Harris boasting of how he didn’t become seasick on a previous boat trip when most or all of the other people onboard did.
• Choice B is incorrect because there’s nothing in the text to suggest that Harris felt excluded from activities during an earlier boat trip. The text suggests that Harris experienced isolation during that trip because others onboard had grown ill, not because Harris had wanted to join certain activities but felt left out.
• Choice D is incorrect because the text doesn’t portray Harris as either enjoying company or claiming to prefer solitude. The text suggests that Harris experienced some degree of isolation during a previous boat trip, but the reason provided by the text has nothing to do with a preference for either solitude or the opposite; rather, the reason, according to Harris, is that most or all of the other people onboard were sick.

• Choice B is the best answer because it describes data from the table that support Persad and her colleagues’ conclusion. The text explains that, according to some climate models, precipitation in the western United States will become concentrated into fewer, more intense rain and snow events. According to the text, Persad and her colleagues concluded that more irrigation will consequently be needed but that the change in irrigation output will be highly sensitive to, or greatly affected by, the baseline concentration of precipitation in an area. This conclusion is supported by data from the researchers’ simulations of changes in annual irrigation output in two different scenarios—one in which an area’s annual precipitation is already somewhat concentrated and one in which its annual precipitation is evenly distributed. The table shows that if baseline precipitation is somewhat concentrated, water use for irrigation will increase only slightly, whereas if baseline precipitation is evenly distributed, water use for irrigation will increase much more—9.0% for surface water and 7.9% for groundwater. This difference illustrates the researchers’ conclusion that the amount of additional water needed for irrigation will vary greatly depending on how concentrated or spread out the annual precipitation in an area already is.
• Choice A is incorrect because it compares changes in the amount of water being used for irrigation to changes in the amount of water entering aquifers. Persad and her colleagues’ conclusion doesn’t focus on changes to the amount of water entering aquifers; rather, the researchers’ conclusion focuses on changes to irrigation output relative to how concentrated or spread out the annual precipitation in an area is.
• Choice C is incorrect because it supports only part of Persad and her colleagues’ conclusion. According to the text, the researchers concluded that the concentration of precipitation into fewer events will trigger more irrigation but that this change in irrigation output will be highly sensitive to an area’s baseline concentration of annual precipitation. The data in this choice support the idea that more irrigation will be needed, but to support the rest of the researchers’ conclusion, additional data from the table are required to show that the increases in water use for irrigation will vary depending on how concentrated or spread out the annual precipitation in an area already is.
• Choice D is incorrect because data in the table indicate no declines in water use for irrigation, showing only increases in the form of positive values.

• Choice C is the best answer. The convention being tested is subject-verb agreement. The plural verb “underlie” agrees in number with the plural subject “frameworks.”
• Choice A is incorrect because the singular verb “underlies” doesn’t agree in number with the plural subject “frameworks.”
• Choice B is incorrect because the singular verb “is underlying” doesn’t agree in number with the plural subject “frameworks.”
• Choice D is incorrect because the singular verb “has been underlying” doesn’t agree in number with the plural subject “frameworks.”

• Choice C is the best answer. The convention being tested is the use of verb forms within a sentence. This choice pairs the comma after “Serra” with the comma after “environment” and uses the nonfinite present participle “intending” to correctly form a supplementary phrase describing the reaction Serra intends his sculptures to provoke. This supplementary phrase appears between the noun phrase that it modifies (“American abstract artist Richard Serra”) and the finite present tense verb (“assembles”), which functions as the sentence’s main verb and describes what Serra does.
• Choice A is incorrect because it results in an ungrammatical sentence. The finite present continuous tense verb “is intending” can’t be used in this way in conjunction with the finite present tense verb “assembles,” which already functions as the main verb in the sentence.
• Choice B is incorrect because it results in an ungrammatical sentence. The finite present tense verb “intends” can’t be used in this way to supplement the noun phrase “American abstract artist Richard Serra.”
• Choice D is incorrect because it results in an ungrammatical sentence. The finite present tense verb “intends” can’t be used in this way in conjunction with the finite present tense verb “assembles,” which already functions as the main verb in the sentence.

• Choice A is the best answer. The sentence specifies when al-Biruni published his landmass theory, indicating that it was published in the year 1037 CE.
• Choice B is incorrect. While the sentence notes that al-Biruni published a landmass theory, it doesn’t specify when the theory was published.
• Choice C is incorrect. The sentence identifies al-Biruni as a scholar of Earth’s physical features; it doesn’t specify when he published his landmass theory.
• Choice D is incorrect. The sentence describes al-Biruni’s landmass theory; it doesn’t specify when the theory was published.

• Choice D is the best answer because it most accurately states the main purpose of the text, which is to describe an experiment whose results cast doubt on an established hypothesis. The text begins by noting that researchers have long believed that woolly mammoths were hunted to extinction in North America by humans using spears with Clovis points. The text then describes an experiment conducted by an anthropologist to test this hypothesis. According to the text, the results of the experiment led the anthropologist to conclude that hunters using spears with Clovis points likely weren’t the primary cause of the extinction. The anthropologist’s results cast doubt on the long-held hypothesis presented at the beginning of the text and suggest that woolly mammoths may have become extinct in North America due to some other cause.
• Choice A is incorrect because there’s nothing in the text to suggest that researchers have been involved in an ongoing debate. On the contrary, the text suggests that most researchers agree on the cause of the woolly mammoth’s extinction in North America.
• Choice B is incorrect because the text never mentions any advantages or disadvantages of the method used in the experiment, focusing instead on the results achieved using that method.
• Choice C is incorrect because the text addresses only one hypothesis, that mammoths were hunted to extinction in North America by humans using spears with Clovis points. Rather than present a competing hypothesis, the text explains how one anthropologist designed an experiment to test this long-held hypothesis.

• Choice C is the best answer because it states a conclusion the researchers likely agree with, given the details in the text. The text explains that a biosignature gas is a gas that can be used as an indicator that a planet harbors some form of life and some astronomers have proposed that NH₃ could serve as a biosignature gas. The researchers evaluating this claim found that the atmosphere of rocky planets would be unlikely to reach “detectably high levels” of NH₃ without biological activity, which would support the proposal of NH₃ serving as a biosignature gas. However, the text also states that mini-Neptune planets can produce NH₃ in the absence of biological activity. Thus, the text is structured to lead to the conclusion that detectable levels of NH₃ in the atmospheres of rocky planets could constitute a biosignature, but that is not the case for detectable levels of the gas in the atmospheres of mini-Neptune planets.
• Choice A is incorrect because the text indicates that biological activity likely accounts for detectable levels of NH₃ in the atmospheres of rocky planets but mini-Neptune planets can have detectable levels of NH₃ in their atmospheres in the absence of biological activity. Therefore, both rocky planets and miniNeptune planets can have detectable levels of atmospheric NH₃.
• Choice B is incorrect because the text states that for NH₃ to reach detectable levels in the atmospheres of rocky planets likely means they harbor biological activity, meaning that rocky planets with detectable NH₃ usually harbor biological activity. However, that does not entail that every rocky planet with biological activity will have detectable levels of NH₃ in their atmospheres.
• Choice D is incorrect because the text claims only that some astronomers have proposed using NH₃ as a biosignature gas without mentioning a minimum concentration of atmospheric NH₃ that must be met for it to function as a biosignature gas.

• Choice A is the best answer because it most logically completes the text’s discussion of the potential effects of logging on forest conservation. The text begins by stating that logging practices are often thought of as being contrary to forest conservation efforts. Then, the text presents the results of a research study examining the effect of limited logging practices on specific forest plots, finding that the plots with limited logging may be “more robust” (healthier) than the plots that hadn’t been logged at all. Given these results, it follows that logging may be a useful practice for maintaining healthy forests if it is practiced in a limited way.
• Choice B is incorrect because the study referenced in the text only provides information on limited logging as a potential forest management strategy. There is no information in the text about how other forest management strategies support forest conservation efforts. Therefore, the text does not support the assertion that other forest management strategies are more successful than limited logging.
• Choice C is incorrect because the text presents a research study with findings that specific plots of forest with limited logging may be more robust than the forest plots that were not logged. Rather than suggesting that it is hard to know whether limited logging might be beneficial, the text suggests that the practice could be useful in forest conservation efforts.
• Choice D is incorrect. The text discusses the results of a research study that compares the health of forest plots with limited logging to forest plots that were not logged. It does not take a position on the best way to support forest health but rather presents a research study with findings that question conventionally held thoughts regarding the practice of logging.

• Choice C is the best answer. The convention being tested is the coordination of main clauses within a sentence. This choice uses a semicolon in a conventional way to join the first main clause (“Clear… through”) and the second main clause (“wax…through”).
• Choice A is incorrect because it results in a comma splice. Without a conjunction following it, a comma can’t be used in this way to join two main clauses.
• Choice B is incorrect because it results in a run-on sentence. The two main clauses (“Clear…through” and “wax…through”) are fused without punctuation and/or a conjunction. Furthermore, it results in a confusing and illogical sentence that suggests clear glass allows light to pass through wax paper, which doesn’t make sense in this context.
• Choice D is incorrect because when coordinating two longer main clauses such as these, it’s conventional to use a comma before the coordinating conjunction.

• Choice B is the best answer. The sentence emphasizes the sample collected from Serra de Itatiaia, noting that Bandeira collected a Polytrichum juniperinum sample there in 1925.
• Choice A is incorrect. The sentence introduces Bandeira to an audience unfamiliar with her work; it doesn’t emphasize the sample she collected from Serra de Itatiaia.
• Choice C is incorrect. While the sentence mentions the sample Bandeira collected from Serra de Itatiaia, it doesn’t emphasize this sample over the sample from Ponte do Inferno.
• Choice D is incorrect. The sentence provides examples of the botanical samples Bandeira collected; it doesn’t emphasize the sample collected from Serra de Itatiaia.

Choice D is the best answer because this quotation would best support the student’s assertion that the escape of transgenic fish from Brazilian fish farms into the wild may have significant negative long-term ecological effects. The text explains that transgenic fish have DNA that includes genetic material from other species, that some transgenic fish have genes from jellyfish that make them glow in the dark, and that glow-in-the-dark transgenic fish can now be found in the wild in Brazilian creeks. The quotation indicates why the escape of these fish may have negative long-term ecological effects: glow-in-the-dark transgenic fish might introduce fluorescence into wild fish populations by breeding with wild fish, causing wild fish to glow in the dark and thereby allowing predators to prey on them much more easily.
Choice A is incorrect because this quotation doesn’t mention any negative effects of the introduction of fluorescent transgenic fish into the wild. The quotation merely compares the ratio of females to males at two sites in the wild where transgenic fish have been observed.
Choice B is incorrect because this quotation doesn’t support the idea that the escape of fluorescent transgenic fish from Brazilian fish farms may have significant negative long-term ecological effects. Rather, the quotation suggests that more research is needed to understand the effects.
Choice C is incorrect because this quotation supports the idea that transgenic fish may be present in more ecosystems than has been observed; it doesn’t address whether the presence of fluorescent transgenic fish affects these ecosystems.

Choice A is the best answer because it presents a quotation about Elizabeth Catlett that supports the student’s claim that this artist had a talent for unifying various traditions and styles in her work. The quotation explains that to create the work, Catlett combined Indigenous sculpture with the visual aesthetic of modern muralists from Mexico as well as that of German artist Kathe Kollwitz. In other words, Catlett was able to unify several artistic traditions and styles within a single sculpture.
Choice B is incorrect because in discussing the technique and subject matter of Catlett’s collage, the quotation makes no reference to particular traditions or styles.
Choice C is incorrect because in describing the sculpture, the quotation doesn’t mention any artistic traditions or styles that Catlett may have synthesized to create the work.
Choice D is incorrect because in discussing Catlett’s prints of notable African American women, the quotation doesn’t characterize those prints as having fused different traditions or styles.

Choice A is the best answer. The convention being tested is colon use within a sentence. A colon used in this way introduces information that illustrates or explains information that has come before it. In this case, the colon introduces the following explanation of why some roundworms in the Southern Hemisphere move in the opposite direction of Earth’s magnetic field.
Choice B is incorrect because it results in a comma splice. A comma can’t be used in this way to join two long independent clauses (“Researchers…food” and “in…sources”) such as these.
Choice C is incorrect because it results in a run-on sentence. The two clauses (“Researchers…food” and “in…sources”) are fused without punctuation. Furthermore, the conjunction “while” fails to indicate that what follows is an explanation of why some roundworms in the Southern Hemisphere move in the opposite direction of Earth’s magnetic field.
Choice D is incorrect because it results in a run-on sentence. The two clauses (“Researchers…food” and “in…sources”) are fused without punctuation and/or a conjunction

Choice C is the best answer because it presents the quotation that best illustrates the claim that the speaker is determined to experience the countryside around her. In the quotation, the speaker makes it clear that she plans to walk somewhere based on her own wishes (“where my own nature would be leading”) rather than follow anything else (“another guide”), and that she’ll walk “in ferny glens” alongside the mountain. Choice A is incorrect because this quotation suggests that the speaker wants to avoid pursuing money and education (“busy chase of wealth and learning”) and instead return to some earlier interests (her “first feelings”); the quotation doesn’t address her determination to experience the countryside. Choice B is incorrect because the speaker is describing the circumstances under which she won’t walk, which doesn’t address her determination to experience the countryside. Choice D is incorrect because rather than conveying her determination to experience the countryside, the speaker is explaining a particular thing she won’t do (“seek not the shadowy region”).

• Choice B is the best answer because it most logically completes the text’s discussion of Yaszek’s introduction to her science fiction anthology. In this context “overtly” means openly or without concealment. The text draws a contrast between the lack of “deliberately signaled” political themes in womenauthored science fiction from the 1920s to the 1960s and what Yaszek notes about women-authored science fiction from the 1970s. This contrast implies that the work from the 1970s did clearly reflect feminist political themes. In other words, the text indicates that unlike women who wrote science fiction in the 1920s to the 1960s, the women who wrote science fiction in the 1970s expressed overtly feminist themes.
• Choice A is incorrect. In this context “prudently” would mean cautiously, which might plausibly describe the women who wrote science fiction from the 1920s to the 1960s, in that they tended to avoid revealing their political views; however, the text contrasts these authors with the women writing science fiction in the 1970s, thereby suggesting that the authors writing in the 1970s were not restrained in that way.
• Choice C is incorrect because in this context “cordially” would mean politely, and nothing in the text indicates that politeness was a significant factor for women writing science fiction either from the 1920s to the 1960s or in the 1970s. The text draws a contrast between the lack of “deliberately signaled” political themes in women-authored science fiction from the 1920s to the 1960s and what Yaszek notes about women-authored science fiction from the 1970s. It’s unclear how “less deliberately signaled” politics and an increasing sense of politeness toward feminism would constitute a meaningful contrast.
• Choice D is incorrect because in this context, “inadvertently” would mean unintentionally, and nothing in the text suggests that Yaszek thought the feminist elements of the women-authored science fiction from the 1970s arose without deliberate effort.

• Choice B is the best answer because it most accurately describes the main purpose of the text, which is to establish that pianist Martha Argerich’s performances appear easy because of her work to prepare for them. The text begins by stating that Argerich plays in such a way that it looks like the music is coming to her naturally in the moment, without planning. It goes on to point out that despite her skill and experience, Argerich works tirelessly and treats each piece of music as if it is new each time she performs it, and that it is this preparation that causes her playing to appear relaxed and natural. These details establish that the purpose of the text is to assert that Argerich’s performances look effortless because of how she prepares for them.
• Choice A is incorrect because the text doesn’t address how Argerich selects the music she’ll perform; instead, it describes how she approaches a piece of music in preparation for a performance.
• Choice C is incorrect because the text doesn’t discuss kinds of music beyond stating that Argerich is a classical pianist, and it doesn’t mention Argerich actually encountering any music for the first time; it indicates only that she approaches a piece of music she is going to perform as if she has never played it before.
• Choice D is incorrect because the text doesn’t mention music that Argerich is actually performing for the first time, only that Argerich approaches the pieces she performs as if they are new each time; further, the text doesn’t characterize this approach as unique, or something only Argerich does.

• Choice D is the best answer because it most logically completes the text’s discussion of the Cretaceous pterosaur Tupandactylus navigans. The text first describes what paleontologists initially speculated to be true of T. navigans based on observing only fossilized skulls of the pterosaur rather than complete skeletons—namely, that T. navigans had an oversized head crest and that, like other pterosaurs, its main mode of movement must have been flight. The text goes on to describe what researcher Victor Beccari and his team concluded based on studying a nearly complete fossilized skeleton of T. navigans, which provided additional information that fossilized skulls alone could not. Beccari and colleagues determined that T. navigans had long hind legs, short wings, and an unusually long neck, in addition to the oversized head crest previously observed by paleontologists. Taken together, these characteristics would have made sustained flight difficult and upright walking comfortable, which would make T. navigans different from other pterosaurs that moved mainly through flight. Thus, Beccari and colleagues suggest that previously held speculations of paleontologists are inaccurate: that instead of moving mainly through powered flight, T. navigans likely flew for shorter distances and spent more time walking than researchers previously thought.
• Choice A is incorrect because Beccari and his team determined, based on their examination of a nearly complete skeleton, that T. navigans would have found “sustained flight difficult,” which would differentiate it from most other pterosaurs that moved mainly through flight. Therefore, Beccari’s team would not suggest that T. navigans flew for longer distances than did other pterosaur species with large head crests.
• Choice B is incorrect because the fossilized skeleton studied by Beccari and colleagues was notable for its short wings, and because no indication in the text is made that other pterosaurs were thought by paleontologists to be comfortable walking. Therefore, Beccari’s team would not suggest that T. navigans had longer wings than other pterosaur species considered to have been comfortable walking.
• Choice C is incorrect because the text indicates that Beccari and his team agree with the paleontologists mentioned earlier in the text that T. navigans had a large-crested head. Therefore, Beccari’s team would not suggest that T. navigans had a smaller head than researchers previously expected.