Question:
Passage: Roughly 40 percent of the African American population of the Southern United States left the South between 1915 and 1960, primarily for the industrial cities of the North. While there was some African American migration to the North during the nineteenth century, most accounts point to 1915 as the start of what historians call the Great Migration. There were at least three catalysts of the Great Migration. First, World War I increased labor demand in the industrial North. Second, the war in Europe cut off immigration, which led many Northern employers to send labor agents to recruit African American labor in the South. Finally,a boll weevil infestation mined cotton crops and reduced labor demand in much of the South in the 1910s and 1920s. In short, the Great Migration began in 1915 and not earlier, because it was only then that the North-South income gap became large enough to start such a large-scale migration. Less dear, however, is why migration continued, and even accelerated, in subsequent decades, at the same time that North-South income differences were narrowing. We propose that once started, migration develops momentum over time as current migration reduces the difficulty and cost of future migration. Economists have typically assumed that people migrate if then- expected earnings in the destination exceed those of the origin enough to outweigh the difficulties and one-time costs of migration. Previous research suggests that the difficulties and costs arise from several sources. First, the uncertainty that potential migrants face concerning housing and labor-market conditions in the destination presents a significant hindrance. Second, there is the simple cost in terms of time and money of physically moving from the origin to the destination. Third, new migrants must familiarize themselves with local labor- and housing-market institutions once they arrive; they must find housing and work, and they must often adapt to a new culture or language. Empirical studies show that during the Great Migration, information was passed through letters that were often read by dozens of people and through conversation when migrants made trips back to their home communities. Thus early migrants provided information about labor- and housing-market conditions to friends and relatives who had not yet made the trip. First-time African American migrants often traveled with earlier migrants returning to the North after a visit to the South, which reduced physical costs. Additionally, previous migrants reduced new migrants * cost of adapting to a new locale and culture by providing them with temporary housing, food, and even credit. Previous migrants also provided a cultural cushion for later migrants, so that they did not have to struggle as hard with then- new surroundings.
Q: Which one of the following most accurately expresses the main point of the passage?
Choices:
A.) Although the Great Migration was initially triggered by the income differential between the North and South, other factors must be cited in order to explain its duration over several decades
B.) Approximately 40 percent of the African American population left the Southern U.S. between 1915 and 1960-an event historians refer to as the Great Migration.
C.) In migration movements, earlier migrants reduce the physical costs of moving and provide a cultural and linguistic cushion for later migrants.
D.) Because earlier migrants helped defray the financial costs of migration for later migrants, African American migration to the Nortii accelerated at a time when income differences were narrowing.
Answer:

Choices:
- A
- B
- C
- D


Question:
Passage: Roughly 40 percent of the African American population of the Southern United States left the South between 1915 and 1960, primarily for the industrial cities of the North. While there was some African American migration to the North during the nineteenth century, most accounts point to 1915 as the start of what historians call the Great Migration. There were at least three catalysts of the Great Migration. First, World War I increased labor demand in the industrial North. Second, the war in Europe cut off immigration, which led many Northern employers to send labor agents to recruit African American labor in the South. Finally,a boll weevil infestation mined cotton crops and reduced labor demand in much of the South in the 1910s and 1920s. In short, the Great Migration began in 1915 and not earlier, because it was only then that the North-South income gap became large enough to start such a large-scale migration. Less dear, however, is why migration continued, and even accelerated, in subsequent decades, at the same time that North-South income differences were narrowing. We propose that once started, migration develops momentum over time as current migration reduces the difficulty and cost of future migration. Economists have typically assumed that people migrate if then- expected earnings in the destination exceed those of the origin enough to outweigh the difficulties and one-time costs of migration. Previous research suggests that the difficulties and costs arise from several sources. First, the uncertainty that potential migrants face concerning housing and labor-market conditions in the destination presents a significant hindrance. Second, there is the simple cost in terms of time and money of physically moving from the origin to the destination. Third, new migrants must familiarize themselves with local labor- and housing-market institutions once they arrive; they must find housing and work, and they must often adapt to a new culture or language. Empirical studies show that during the Great Migration, information was passed through letters that were often read by dozens of people and through conversation when migrants made trips back to their home communities. Thus early migrants provided information about labor- and housing-market conditions to friends and relatives who had not yet made the trip. First-time African American migrants often traveled with earlier migrants returning to the North after a visit to the South, which reduced physical costs. Additionally, previous migrants reduced new migrants * cost of adapting to a new locale and culture by providing them with temporary housing, food, and even credit. Previous migrants also provided a cultural cushion for later migrants, so that they did not have to struggle as hard with then- new surroundings.
Q: According to the passage, the Great Migration did not start earlier than 1915 because
Choices:
A.) the cost of living in the North was prohibitively high before World War I
B.) the income gap between the North and South was not large enough to induce people to migrate
C.) agricultural jobs in the South paid very well before the boll weevil infestation
D.) previous migration had yet to develop sufficient momentum to induce further migration
Answer:

Choices:
- A
- B
- C
- D


Question:
Passage: Roughly 40 percent of the African American population of the Southern United States left the South between 1915 and 1960, primarily for the industrial cities of the North. While there was some African American migration to the North during the nineteenth century, most accounts point to 1915 as the start of what historians call the Great Migration. There were at least three catalysts of the Great Migration. First, World War I increased labor demand in the industrial North. Second, the war in Europe cut off immigration, which led many Northern employers to send labor agents to recruit African American labor in the South. Finally,a boll weevil infestation mined cotton crops and reduced labor demand in much of the South in the 1910s and 1920s. In short, the Great Migration began in 1915 and not earlier, because it was only then that the North-South income gap became large enough to start such a large-scale migration. Less dear, however, is why migration continued, and even accelerated, in subsequent decades, at the same time that North-South income differences were narrowing. We propose that once started, migration develops momentum over time as current migration reduces the difficulty and cost of future migration. Economists have typically assumed that people migrate if then- expected earnings in the destination exceed those of the origin enough to outweigh the difficulties and one-time costs of migration. Previous research suggests that the difficulties and costs arise from several sources. First, the uncertainty that potential migrants face concerning housing and labor-market conditions in the destination presents a significant hindrance. Second, there is the simple cost in terms of time and money of physically moving from the origin to the destination. Third, new migrants must familiarize themselves with local labor- and housing-market institutions once they arrive; they must find housing and work, and they must often adapt to a new culture or language. Empirical studies show that during the Great Migration, information was passed through letters that were often read by dozens of people and through conversation when migrants made trips back to their home communities. Thus early migrants provided information about labor- and housing-market conditions to friends and relatives who had not yet made the trip. First-time African American migrants often traveled with earlier migrants returning to the North after a visit to the South, which reduced physical costs. Additionally, previous migrants reduced new migrants * cost of adapting to a new locale and culture by providing them with temporary housing, food, and even credit. Previous migrants also provided a cultural cushion for later migrants, so that they did not have to struggle as hard with then- new surroundings.
Q: The third and fourth paragraphs of the passage function primarily to
Choices:
A.) answer a question raised in the second paragraph about a historical event
B.) provide additional evidence for historical claims made in the first paragraph
C.) survey the repercussions of a historical event described in the first two paragraphs
D.) cast doubt upon a historical explanation presented in the first paragraph
Answer:

Choices:
- A
- B
- C
- D


Question:
Passage: Roughly 40 percent of the African American population of the Southern United States left the South between 1915 and 1960, primarily for the industrial cities of the North. While there was some African American migration to the North during the nineteenth century, most accounts point to 1915 as the start of what historians call the Great Migration. There were at least three catalysts of the Great Migration. First, World War I increased labor demand in the industrial North. Second, the war in Europe cut off immigration, which led many Northern employers to send labor agents to recruit African American labor in the South. Finally,a boll weevil infestation mined cotton crops and reduced labor demand in much of the South in the 1910s and 1920s. In short, the Great Migration began in 1915 and not earlier, because it was only then that the North-South income gap became large enough to start such a large-scale migration. Less dear, however, is why migration continued, and even accelerated, in subsequent decades, at the same time that North-South income differences were narrowing. We propose that once started, migration develops momentum over time as current migration reduces the difficulty and cost of future migration. Economists have typically assumed that people migrate if then- expected earnings in the destination exceed those of the origin enough to outweigh the difficulties and one-time costs of migration. Previous research suggests that the difficulties and costs arise from several sources. First, the uncertainty that potential migrants face concerning housing and labor-market conditions in the destination presents a significant hindrance. Second, there is the simple cost in terms of time and money of physically moving from the origin to the destination. Third, new migrants must familiarize themselves with local labor- and housing-market institutions once they arrive; they must find housing and work, and they must often adapt to a new culture or language. Empirical studies show that during the Great Migration, information was passed through letters that were often read by dozens of people and through conversation when migrants made trips back to their home communities. Thus early migrants provided information about labor- and housing-market conditions to friends and relatives who had not yet made the trip. First-time African American migrants often traveled with earlier migrants returning to the North after a visit to the South, which reduced physical costs. Additionally, previous migrants reduced new migrants * cost of adapting to a new locale and culture by providing them with temporary housing, food, and even credit. Previous migrants also provided a cultural cushion for later migrants, so that they did not have to struggle as hard with then- new surroundings.
Q: The authors of the passage would be most likely to agree with which one of the following statements?
Choices:
A.) A complete explanation of the Great Migration must begin with an account of what triggered nineteenth-century migrations to the North.
B.) Expected financial gains alone may not be are liable indicator of the likelihood that an individual will migrate.
C.) The Great Migration is not parallel in its broadest patterns to most other known migration movements.
D.) Most large-scale migrations can be adequately explained in terms of the movement of people from lower- to higher-income regions.
Answer:

Choices:
- A
- B
- C
- D


Question:
Passage: Roughly 40 percent of the African American population of the Southern United States left the South between 1915 and 1960, primarily for the industrial cities of the North. While there was some African American migration to the North during the nineteenth century, most accounts point to 1915 as the start of what historians call the Great Migration. There were at least three catalysts of the Great Migration. First, World War I increased labor demand in the industrial North. Second, the war in Europe cut off immigration, which led many Northern employers to send labor agents to recruit African American labor in the South. Finally,a boll weevil infestation mined cotton crops and reduced labor demand in much of the South in the 1910s and 1920s. In short, the Great Migration began in 1915 and not earlier, because it was only then that the North-South income gap became large enough to start such a large-scale migration. Less dear, however, is why migration continued, and even accelerated, in subsequent decades, at the same time that North-South income differences were narrowing. We propose that once started, migration develops momentum over time as current migration reduces the difficulty and cost of future migration. Economists have typically assumed that people migrate if then- expected earnings in the destination exceed those of the origin enough to outweigh the difficulties and one-time costs of migration. Previous research suggests that the difficulties and costs arise from several sources. First, the uncertainty that potential migrants face concerning housing and labor-market conditions in the destination presents a significant hindrance. Second, there is the simple cost in terms of time and money of physically moving from the origin to the destination. Third, new migrants must familiarize themselves with local labor- and housing-market institutions once they arrive; they must find housing and work, and they must often adapt to a new culture or language. Empirical studies show that during the Great Migration, information was passed through letters that were often read by dozens of people and through conversation when migrants made trips back to their home communities. Thus early migrants provided information about labor- and housing-market conditions to friends and relatives who had not yet made the trip. First-time African American migrants often traveled with earlier migrants returning to the North after a visit to the South, which reduced physical costs. Additionally, previous migrants reduced new migrants * cost of adapting to a new locale and culture by providing them with temporary housing, food, and even credit. Previous migrants also provided a cultural cushion for later migrants, so that they did not have to struggle as hard with then- new surroundings.
Q: The primary purpose of the last sentence of the second paragraph is to
Choices:
A.) present a fact about the Great Migration that the authors seek to explain
B.) indicate why previous research on the Great Migration has been misguided
C.) extend the authors' explanation of the causes of the Great Migration to include later events
D.) challenge the traditional view that Northern wages were higher than Southern wages prior to 1915
Answer:

Choices:
- A
- B
- C
- D


Question:
Passage: Roughly 40 percent of the African American population of the Southern United States left the South between 1915 and 1960, primarily for the industrial cities of the North. While there was some African American migration to the North during the nineteenth century, most accounts point to 1915 as the start of what historians call the Great Migration. There were at least three catalysts of the Great Migration. First, World War I increased labor demand in the industrial North. Second, the war in Europe cut off immigration, which led many Northern employers to send labor agents to recruit African American labor in the South. Finally,a boll weevil infestation mined cotton crops and reduced labor demand in much of the South in the 1910s and 1920s. In short, the Great Migration began in 1915 and not earlier, because it was only then that the North-South income gap became large enough to start such a large-scale migration. Less dear, however, is why migration continued, and even accelerated, in subsequent decades, at the same time that North-South income differences were narrowing. We propose that once started, migration develops momentum over time as current migration reduces the difficulty and cost of future migration. Economists have typically assumed that people migrate if then- expected earnings in the destination exceed those of the origin enough to outweigh the difficulties and one-time costs of migration. Previous research suggests that the difficulties and costs arise from several sources. First, the uncertainty that potential migrants face concerning housing and labor-market conditions in the destination presents a significant hindrance. Second, there is the simple cost in terms of time and money of physically moving from the origin to the destination. Third, new migrants must familiarize themselves with local labor- and housing-market institutions once they arrive; they must find housing and work, and they must often adapt to a new culture or language. Empirical studies show that during the Great Migration, information was passed through letters that were often read by dozens of people and through conversation when migrants made trips back to their home communities. Thus early migrants provided information about labor- and housing-market conditions to friends and relatives who had not yet made the trip. First-time African American migrants often traveled with earlier migrants returning to the North after a visit to the South, which reduced physical costs. Additionally, previous migrants reduced new migrants * cost of adapting to a new locale and culture by providing them with temporary housing, food, and even credit. Previous migrants also provided a cultural cushion for later migrants, so that they did not have to struggle as hard with then- new surroundings.
Q: The passage provides the most support for which one of the following statements?
Choices:
A.) The overall cost of migrating from the South to the North in the twentieth century was lower for the earliest migrants because there were more of the highest-paying jobs available for them to choose from.
B.) The North-South income gap increased around 1915 because of the increase in demand for labor in the North and the decrease in demand for labor in the South.
C.) Most migrants in the Great Migration made at least one trip back to the South to provide help and information to other people who were considering migrating as well.
D.) The highest-paying agricultural jobs in the South prior to 1915 did not pay more than the lowest-paying manufacturing jobs in the North.
Answer:

Choices:
- A
- B
- C
- D


Question:
Passage: Roughly 40 percent of the African American population of the Southern United States left the South between 1915 and 1960, primarily for the industrial cities of the North. While there was some African American migration to the North during the nineteenth century, most accounts point to 1915 as the start of what historians call the Great Migration. There were at least three catalysts of the Great Migration. First, World War I increased labor demand in the industrial North. Second, the war in Europe cut off immigration, which led many Northern employers to send labor agents to recruit African American labor in the South. Finally,a boll weevil infestation mined cotton crops and reduced labor demand in much of the South in the 1910s and 1920s. In short, the Great Migration began in 1915 and not earlier, because it was only then that the North-South income gap became large enough to start such a large-scale migration. Less dear, however, is why migration continued, and even accelerated, in subsequent decades, at the same time that North-South income differences were narrowing. We propose that once started, migration develops momentum over time as current migration reduces the difficulty and cost of future migration. Economists have typically assumed that people migrate if then- expected earnings in the destination exceed those of the origin enough to outweigh the difficulties and one-time costs of migration. Previous research suggests that the difficulties and costs arise from several sources. First, the uncertainty that potential migrants face concerning housing and labor-market conditions in the destination presents a significant hindrance. Second, there is the simple cost in terms of time and money of physically moving from the origin to the destination. Third, new migrants must familiarize themselves with local labor- and housing-market institutions once they arrive; they must find housing and work, and they must often adapt to a new culture or language. Empirical studies show that during the Great Migration, information was passed through letters that were often read by dozens of people and through conversation when migrants made trips back to their home communities. Thus early migrants provided information about labor- and housing-market conditions to friends and relatives who had not yet made the trip. First-time African American migrants often traveled with earlier migrants returning to the North after a visit to the South, which reduced physical costs. Additionally, previous migrants reduced new migrants * cost of adapting to a new locale and culture by providing them with temporary housing, food, and even credit. Previous migrants also provided a cultural cushion for later migrants, so that they did not have to struggle as hard with then- new surroundings.
Q: Which one of the following, if true, would provide the most support for the authors! analysis of the Great Migration?
Choices:
A.) The average amount of time it took new migrants to find employment in the North grew at a steady rate between 1915 and 1960.
B.) There was a large-scale reverse migration of African Americans back to Southern locations later in the twentieth century.
C.) In general, communities of African Americans in the North consisted largely of individuals who shared a common geographic place of origin in the South.
D.) Housing prices in the North fluctuated between high and low extremes from 1915 to 1960, while housing prices in the South remained relatively constant.
Answer:

Choices:
- A
- B
- C
- D


Question:
Passage: Passage A Insider-trading law makes it a crime to make stock transactions, or help others make stock transactions, based on information you have ahead of the general public because of your special position within a company. However, trading based on information you have that everyone else doesn't-isn't this part of the very definition of a functioning stock market? The entire field of stock brokering is based on people gaining knowledge that others don't have and then using it to profit themselves or their clients. If you analyze a stock, decide that it is overvalued, and sell it, you are taking advantage of knowledge that many others don?t have. That doesn't make you a criminal; it means you've done your homework. Stock markets work best when all the relevant information about a company is spread as widely as possible, as quickly as possible. Stock prices represent a constantly shifting amalgamation of everyone's information about and evaluations of a company's value. It helps when those who have accurate information about changing circumstances are permitted to act so that stock prices reflect them. Someone selling a stock because they know something will happen soon that will lower the stock's value helps spread the knowledge that the price ought to be dropping. Such actions help ensure that stock prices do reflect a more accurate assessment of all the relevant facts. That's good for everyone in the stock market. When contemplating insider-trading law, it helps to consider a far more widespread practice: "insider nontrading"-stock sales or purchases that would have been made, but aren't because of inside knowledge. This is certainly happening every day, and rightfully so. No one would think to lock someone up for it. Passage B One of the basic principles of the stock market is transparency. In a transparent market, information that influences trading decisions is available to all participants at the same time. Success in the market can then be gained only by skill in analyzing the information and making good investing decisions. In a transparent stock market-everyone has the same chance of making a good investment, and success is based on individual merit and skill. In insider-trading situations, some people make investment decisions based on information that other people don't have. People who don't have access to the inside information can make similarly informed investment decisions. That unfairly compromises the market: people with inside information can make informed trade decisions far before everyone else, making it difficult or impossible for other people to earn money in the stock market. This, in turn, causes a loss of investor confidence and could ultimately destroy the market. People invest in the stock market because they believe they can make money. The whole point of capital investments is to make good investing decisions and make money over time. If investors believe they can't make money, they won't invest. Undermining investor confidence would thus deny companies access to the funds they need to grow and be successful, and it could ultimately lead to widespread financial repercussions.
Q: Both passages are primarily concerned with answering which one of the following questions?
Choices:
A.) What is the best means of regulatinginsider trading?
B.) Should there be severer penalties for insider trading?
C.) Is insider trading harmful to the stock market?
D.) How is insider trading defined?
Answer:

Choices:
- A
- B
- C
- D


Question:
Passage: Passage A Insider-trading law makes it a crime to make stock transactions, or help others make stock transactions, based on information you have ahead of the general public because of your special position within a company. However, trading based on information you have that everyone else doesn't-isn't this part of the very definition of a functioning stock market? The entire field of stock brokering is based on people gaining knowledge that others don't have and then using it to profit themselves or their clients. If you analyze a stock, decide that it is overvalued, and sell it, you are taking advantage of knowledge that many others don?t have. That doesn't make you a criminal; it means you've done your homework. Stock markets work best when all the relevant information about a company is spread as widely as possible, as quickly as possible. Stock prices represent a constantly shifting amalgamation of everyone's information about and evaluations of a company's value. It helps when those who have accurate information about changing circumstances are permitted to act so that stock prices reflect them. Someone selling a stock because they know something will happen soon that will lower the stock's value helps spread the knowledge that the price ought to be dropping. Such actions help ensure that stock prices do reflect a more accurate assessment of all the relevant facts. That's good for everyone in the stock market. When contemplating insider-trading law, it helps to consider a far more widespread practice: "insider nontrading"-stock sales or purchases that would have been made, but aren't because of inside knowledge. This is certainly happening every day, and rightfully so. No one would think to lock someone up for it. Passage B One of the basic principles of the stock market is transparency. In a transparent market, information that influences trading decisions is available to all participants at the same time. Success in the market can then be gained only by skill in analyzing the information and making good investing decisions. In a transparent stock market-everyone has the same chance of making a good investment, and success is based on individual merit and skill. In insider-trading situations, some people make investment decisions based on information that other people don't have. People who don't have access to the inside information can make similarly informed investment decisions. That unfairly compromises the market: people with inside information can make informed trade decisions far before everyone else, making it difficult or impossible for other people to earn money in the stock market. This, in turn, causes a loss of investor confidence and could ultimately destroy the market. People invest in the stock market because they believe they can make money. The whole point of capital investments is to make good investing decisions and make money over time. If investors believe they can't make money, they won't invest. Undermining investor confidence would thus deny companies access to the funds they need to grow and be successful, and it could ultimately lead to widespread financial repercussions.
Q: In their attitudes toward stock trades based on inside information, the author of passage A and the author of passage B,respectively, may be most accurately described as
Choices:
A.) neutral and negative
B.) neutral and neutral
C.) negative and negative
D.) positive and negative
Answer:

Choices:
- A
- B
- C
- D


Question:
Passage: Passage A Insider-trading law makes it a crime to make stock transactions, or help others make stock transactions, based on information you have ahead of the general public because of your special position within a company. However, trading based on information you have that everyone else doesn't-isn't this part of the very definition of a functioning stock market? The entire field of stock brokering is based on people gaining knowledge that others don't have and then using it to profit themselves or their clients. If you analyze a stock, decide that it is overvalued, and sell it, you are taking advantage of knowledge that many others don?t have. That doesn't make you a criminal; it means you've done your homework. Stock markets work best when all the relevant information about a company is spread as widely as possible, as quickly as possible. Stock prices represent a constantly shifting amalgamation of everyone's information about and evaluations of a company's value. It helps when those who have accurate information about changing circumstances are permitted to act so that stock prices reflect them. Someone selling a stock because they know something will happen soon that will lower the stock's value helps spread the knowledge that the price ought to be dropping. Such actions help ensure that stock prices do reflect a more accurate assessment of all the relevant facts. That's good for everyone in the stock market. When contemplating insider-trading law, it helps to consider a far more widespread practice: "insider nontrading"-stock sales or purchases that would have been made, but aren't because of inside knowledge. This is certainly happening every day, and rightfully so. No one would think to lock someone up for it. Passage B One of the basic principles of the stock market is transparency. In a transparent market, information that influences trading decisions is available to all participants at the same time. Success in the market can then be gained only by skill in analyzing the information and making good investing decisions. In a transparent stock market-everyone has the same chance of making a good investment, and success is based on individual merit and skill. In insider-trading situations, some people make investment decisions based on information that other people don't have. People who don't have access to the inside information can make similarly informed investment decisions. That unfairly compromises the market: people with inside information can make informed trade decisions far before everyone else, making it difficult or impossible for other people to earn money in the stock market. This, in turn, causes a loss of investor confidence and could ultimately destroy the market. People invest in the stock market because they believe they can make money. The whole point of capital investments is to make good investing decisions and make money over time. If investors believe they can't make money, they won't invest. Undermining investor confidence would thus deny companies access to the funds they need to grow and be successful, and it could ultimately lead to widespread financial repercussions.
Q: The authors would be most likely to agree that
Choices:
A.) insider nontrading should be regulated to the same extent as insider trading
B.) it is appropriate for investors to seek to gain an advantage by superior stock analysis
C.) insider trading tends to undermine investor confidence in the stock market
D.) all information should be available to all market participants at the same time
Answer:

Choices:
- A
- B
- C
- D


Question:
Passage: Passage A Insider-trading law makes it a crime to make stock transactions, or help others make stock transactions, based on information you have ahead of the general public because of your special position within a company. However, trading based on information you have that everyone else doesn't-isn't this part of the very definition of a functioning stock market? The entire field of stock brokering is based on people gaining knowledge that others don't have and then using it to profit themselves or their clients. If you analyze a stock, decide that it is overvalued, and sell it, you are taking advantage of knowledge that many others don?t have. That doesn't make you a criminal; it means you've done your homework. Stock markets work best when all the relevant information about a company is spread as widely as possible, as quickly as possible. Stock prices represent a constantly shifting amalgamation of everyone's information about and evaluations of a company's value. It helps when those who have accurate information about changing circumstances are permitted to act so that stock prices reflect them. Someone selling a stock because they know something will happen soon that will lower the stock's value helps spread the knowledge that the price ought to be dropping. Such actions help ensure that stock prices do reflect a more accurate assessment of all the relevant facts. That's good for everyone in the stock market. When contemplating insider-trading law, it helps to consider a far more widespread practice: "insider nontrading"-stock sales or purchases that would have been made, but aren't because of inside knowledge. This is certainly happening every day, and rightfully so. No one would think to lock someone up for it. Passage B One of the basic principles of the stock market is transparency. In a transparent market, information that influences trading decisions is available to all participants at the same time. Success in the market can then be gained only by skill in analyzing the information and making good investing decisions. In a transparent stock market-everyone has the same chance of making a good investment, and success is based on individual merit and skill. In insider-trading situations, some people make investment decisions based on information that other people don't have. People who don't have access to the inside information can make similarly informed investment decisions. That unfairly compromises the market: people with inside information can make informed trade decisions far before everyone else, making it difficult or impossible for other people to earn money in the stock market. This, in turn, causes a loss of investor confidence and could ultimately destroy the market. People invest in the stock market because they believe they can make money. The whole point of capital investments is to make good investing decisions and make money over time. If investors believe they can't make money, they won't invest. Undermining investor confidence would thus deny companies access to the funds they need to grow and be successful, and it could ultimately lead to widespread financial repercussions.
Q: Which one of the following laws would conform most closely to the position articulated by the author of passage A but not that articulated by the author of passage B?
Choices:
A.) a law that prohibits trading that could reasonably be expected to undermine investors' confidence in the stock market
B.) a law that legalizes selling based on inside information that a stock's price ought to be dropping but prohibits buying based on inside information that it should be rising
C.) a law that permits trading based on information gained from analysis of a stock but prohibits trading based on information obtained from one's position within a company
D.) a law that legalizes trading based on inside information, as long as that information is not acquired by theft or other unlawful means
Answer:

Choices:
- A
- B
- C
- D


Question:
Passage: Passage A Insider-trading law makes it a crime to make stock transactions, or help others make stock transactions, based on information you have ahead of the general public because of your special position within a company. However, trading based on information you have that everyone else doesn't-isn't this part of the very definition of a functioning stock market? The entire field of stock brokering is based on people gaining knowledge that others don't have and then using it to profit themselves or their clients. If you analyze a stock, decide that it is overvalued, and sell it, you are taking advantage of knowledge that many others don?t have. That doesn't make you a criminal; it means you've done your homework. Stock markets work best when all the relevant information about a company is spread as widely as possible, as quickly as possible. Stock prices represent a constantly shifting amalgamation of everyone's information about and evaluations of a company's value. It helps when those who have accurate information about changing circumstances are permitted to act so that stock prices reflect them. Someone selling a stock because they know something will happen soon that will lower the stock's value helps spread the knowledge that the price ought to be dropping. Such actions help ensure that stock prices do reflect a more accurate assessment of all the relevant facts. That's good for everyone in the stock market. When contemplating insider-trading law, it helps to consider a far more widespread practice: "insider nontrading"-stock sales or purchases that would have been made, but aren't because of inside knowledge. This is certainly happening every day, and rightfully so. No one would think to lock someone up for it. Passage B One of the basic principles of the stock market is transparency. In a transparent market, information that influences trading decisions is available to all participants at the same time. Success in the market can then be gained only by skill in analyzing the information and making good investing decisions. In a transparent stock market-everyone has the same chance of making a good investment, and success is based on individual merit and skill. In insider-trading situations, some people make investment decisions based on information that other people don't have. People who don't have access to the inside information can make similarly informed investment decisions. That unfairly compromises the market: people with inside information can make informed trade decisions far before everyone else, making it difficult or impossible for other people to earn money in the stock market. This, in turn, causes a loss of investor confidence and could ultimately destroy the market. People invest in the stock market because they believe they can make money. The whole point of capital investments is to make good investing decisions and make money over time. If investors believe they can't make money, they won't invest. Undermining investor confidence would thus deny companies access to the funds they need to grow and be successful, and it could ultimately lead to widespread financial repercussions.
Q: Passage A, unlike passage B, seeks to advance its argument by
Choices:
A.) applying general principles to particular examples
B.) showing how a specific activity relates to a larger context
C.) examining the motivations of an activity's participants
D.) pointing out similarities between a controversial activity and uncontroversial ones
Answer:

Choices:
- A
- B
- C
- D


Question:
Passage: Passage A Insider-trading law makes it a crime to make stock transactions, or help others make stock transactions, based on information you have ahead of the general public because of your special position within a company. However, trading based on information you have that everyone else doesn't-isn't this part of the very definition of a functioning stock market? The entire field of stock brokering is based on people gaining knowledge that others don't have and then using it to profit themselves or their clients. If you analyze a stock, decide that it is overvalued, and sell it, you are taking advantage of knowledge that many others don?t have. That doesn't make you a criminal; it means you've done your homework. Stock markets work best when all the relevant information about a company is spread as widely as possible, as quickly as possible. Stock prices represent a constantly shifting amalgamation of everyone's information about and evaluations of a company's value. It helps when those who have accurate information about changing circumstances are permitted to act so that stock prices reflect them. Someone selling a stock because they know something will happen soon that will lower the stock's value helps spread the knowledge that the price ought to be dropping. Such actions help ensure that stock prices do reflect a more accurate assessment of all the relevant facts. That's good for everyone in the stock market. When contemplating insider-trading law, it helps to consider a far more widespread practice: "insider nontrading"-stock sales or purchases that would have been made, but aren't because of inside knowledge. This is certainly happening every day, and rightfully so. No one would think to lock someone up for it. Passage B One of the basic principles of the stock market is transparency. In a transparent market, information that influences trading decisions is available to all participants at the same time. Success in the market can then be gained only by skill in analyzing the information and making good investing decisions. In a transparent stock market-everyone has the same chance of making a good investment, and success is based on individual merit and skill. In insider-trading situations, some people make investment decisions based on information that other people don't have. People who don't have access to the inside information can make similarly informed investment decisions. That unfairly compromises the market: people with inside information can make informed trade decisions far before everyone else, making it difficult or impossible for other people to earn money in the stock market. This, in turn, causes a loss of investor confidence and could ultimately destroy the market. People invest in the stock market because they believe they can make money. The whole point of capital investments is to make good investing decisions and make money over time. If investors believe they can't make money, they won't invest. Undermining investor confidence would thus deny companies access to the funds they need to grow and be successful, and it could ultimately lead to widespread financial repercussions.
Q: The passages' references to the analysis of information about stocks (lines 11-14, lines 40-42) are related in which one of the following ways?
Choices:
A.) Passage A presents it as comparable to the acquisition of inside information, whereas passage B contrasts it with the acquisition of inside information.
B.) Passage A treats it as an option available only to brokers and other stock-market professionals, whereas passage B treats it as an option available to ordinary investors as well.
C.) Passage A presents it as unnecessary, since all relevant information is already reflected in stock prices, whereas passage B presents it as necessary for making sound investment decisions.
D.) Passage A presents it as an activity that gives some investors an unfair advantage over others, whereas passage B presents it as an activity that increases the transparency of the market.
Answer:

Choices:
- A
- B
- C
- D


Question:
Passage: There are some basic conceptual problems hovering about the widespread use of brain scans as pictures of mental activity. As applied to medical diagnosis (for example, in diagnosing a brain tumor), a brain scan is similar in principle to an X-ray: it is a way of seeing inside the body. Its value is straightforward and indubitable. However, the use of neuroimaging in psychology is a fundamentally different kind of enterprise. It is a research method the validity of which depends on a premise: that the mind can be analyzed into separate and distinct modules, or components, and further that these modules are instantiated in localized brain regions. This premise is known as the modular theory of mind. It may in fact be that neither mental activity, nor the physical processes that constitute it, are decomposable into independent modules. Psychologist William Uttal contends that rather than distinct entities, the various mental processes are likely to be properties of a more general mental activity that is distributed throughout the brain. It cannot be said, for instance, that the amygdala is the seat of emotion and the prefrontal cortex is the seat of reason, as the popular press sometimes claims. For when I get angry, I generally do so for a reason. To cleanly separate emotion from reason-giving makes a hash of human experience. But if this critique of the modular theory of mind is valid, how can one account for the fact that brain scans do, in fact, reveal well-defined areas that "light up," in response to various cognitive tasks? In the case of functional magnetic resonance imaging (FMRI), what you are seeing when you look at a brain scan is actually the result of a subtraction. The FMRI is usually interpreted as a map of the rate of oxygen use in different parts of the brain, which stands as a measure of metabolic activity. But what it actually depicts is the differential rate of oxygen use: one first takes a baseline measurement in the control condition, then a second measurement while the subject is performing some cognitive task. The baseline measurement is then subtracted from the on-task measurement. The reasoning, seemingly plausible, is that whatever remains after the subtraction represents the metabolic activity associated solely with the cognitive task in question. One immediately obvious (but usually unremarked) problem is that this method obscures the fact that the entire brain is active in both conditions. A false impression of neat functional localization is given by differential brain scans that subtract out all the distributed brain functions. This subtractive method produces striking images of the brain at work. But isn't the modular theory of mind ultimately attractive in part because it is illustrated so well by the products of the subtractive method?
Q: Which one of the following most accurately states the main point of the passage?
Choices:
A.) In spite of troubling conceptual problems surrounding brain scan technology, its use in psychological research on mental activity has grown rapidly.
B.) The modular theory of mind has gained wide currency precisely because it is illustrated effectively by the images produced by the subtractive method.
C.) The use of brain scans to depict mental activity relies on both a questionable premise and a misleading methodological approach.
D.) Although the FMRI is usually interpreted as a measure of metabolic activity in the brain, this interpretation is misguided and therefore leads to false results.
Answer:

Choices:
- A
- B
- C
- D


Question:
Passage: There are some basic conceptual problems hovering about the widespread use of brain scans as pictures of mental activity. As applied to medical diagnosis (for example, in diagnosing a brain tumor), a brain scan is similar in principle to an X-ray: it is a way of seeing inside the body. Its value is straightforward and indubitable. However, the use of neuroimaging in psychology is a fundamentally different kind of enterprise. It is a research method the validity of which depends on a premise: that the mind can be analyzed into separate and distinct modules, or components, and further that these modules are instantiated in localized brain regions. This premise is known as the modular theory of mind. It may in fact be that neither mental activity, nor the physical processes that constitute it, are decomposable into independent modules. Psychologist William Uttal contends that rather than distinct entities, the various mental processes are likely to be properties of a more general mental activity that is distributed throughout the brain. It cannot be said, for instance, that the amygdala is the seat of emotion and the prefrontal cortex is the seat of reason, as the popular press sometimes claims. For when I get angry, I generally do so for a reason. To cleanly separate emotion from reason-giving makes a hash of human experience. But if this critique of the modular theory of mind is valid, how can one account for the fact that brain scans do, in fact, reveal well-defined areas that "light up," in response to various cognitive tasks? In the case of functional magnetic resonance imaging (FMRI), what you are seeing when you look at a brain scan is actually the result of a subtraction. The FMRI is usually interpreted as a map of the rate of oxygen use in different parts of the brain, which stands as a measure of metabolic activity. But what it actually depicts is the differential rate of oxygen use: one first takes a baseline measurement in the control condition, then a second measurement while the subject is performing some cognitive task. The baseline measurement is then subtracted from the on-task measurement. The reasoning, seemingly plausible, is that whatever remains after the subtraction represents the metabolic activity associated solely with the cognitive task in question. One immediately obvious (but usually unremarked) problem is that this method obscures the fact that the entire brain is active in both conditions. A false impression of neat functional localization is given by differential brain scans that subtract out all the distributed brain functions. This subtractive method produces striking images of the brain at work. But isn't the modular theory of mind ultimately attractive in part because it is illustrated so well by the products of the subtractive method?
Q: According to the modular theory of mind, as described in the passage, mental activity
Choices:
A.) generally involves some sort of reason-giving
B.) is localized in the amygdala and the prefrontal cortex
C.) consists of distinct components in localized areas of the brain
D.) involves physical processes over which people have only limited control
Answer:

Choices:
- A
- B
- C
- D


Question:
Passage: There are some basic conceptual problems hovering about the widespread use of brain scans as pictures of mental activity. As applied to medical diagnosis (for example, in diagnosing a brain tumor), a brain scan is similar in principle to an X-ray: it is a way of seeing inside the body. Its value is straightforward and indubitable. However, the use of neuroimaging in psychology is a fundamentally different kind of enterprise. It is a research method the validity of which depends on a premise: that the mind can be analyzed into separate and distinct modules, or components, and further that these modules are instantiated in localized brain regions. This premise is known as the modular theory of mind. It may in fact be that neither mental activity, nor the physical processes that constitute it, are decomposable into independent modules. Psychologist William Uttal contends that rather than distinct entities, the various mental processes are likely to be properties of a more general mental activity that is distributed throughout the brain. It cannot be said, for instance, that the amygdala is the seat of emotion and the prefrontal cortex is the seat of reason, as the popular press sometimes claims. For when I get angry, I generally do so for a reason. To cleanly separate emotion from reason-giving makes a hash of human experience. But if this critique of the modular theory of mind is valid, how can one account for the fact that brain scans do, in fact, reveal well-defined areas that "light up," in response to various cognitive tasks? In the case of functional magnetic resonance imaging (FMRI), what you are seeing when you look at a brain scan is actually the result of a subtraction. The FMRI is usually interpreted as a map of the rate of oxygen use in different parts of the brain, which stands as a measure of metabolic activity. But what it actually depicts is the differential rate of oxygen use: one first takes a baseline measurement in the control condition, then a second measurement while the subject is performing some cognitive task. The baseline measurement is then subtracted from the on-task measurement. The reasoning, seemingly plausible, is that whatever remains after the subtraction represents the metabolic activity associated solely with the cognitive task in question. One immediately obvious (but usually unremarked) problem is that this method obscures the fact that the entire brain is active in both conditions. A false impression of neat functional localization is given by differential brain scans that subtract out all the distributed brain functions. This subtractive method produces striking images of the brain at work. But isn't the modular theory of mind ultimately attractive in part because it is illustrated so well by the products of the subtractive method?
Q: The author of the passage would be most likely to agree with which one of the following statements regarding the subtractive method?
Choices:
A.) The subtractive method results in images that strongly support Uttal's view that mental processes are simply properties of a more general mental activity.
B.) The subtractive method seems to strongly support the modular theory of mind because it creates an illusion that brain functions are localized.
C.) Because the subtractive method masks distributed brain functions, empirical results derived using the method are invalid for medical applications.
D.) The view that the subtractive method depicts differential rates of oxygen use in the brain is based on a fundamental misconception of the method.
Answer:

Choices:
- A
- B
- C
- D


Question:
Passage: There are some basic conceptual problems hovering about the widespread use of brain scans as pictures of mental activity. As applied to medical diagnosis (for example, in diagnosing a brain tumor), a brain scan is similar in principle to an X-ray: it is a way of seeing inside the body. Its value is straightforward and indubitable. However, the use of neuroimaging in psychology is a fundamentally different kind of enterprise. It is a research method the validity of which depends on a premise: that the mind can be analyzed into separate and distinct modules, or components, and further that these modules are instantiated in localized brain regions. This premise is known as the modular theory of mind. It may in fact be that neither mental activity, nor the physical processes that constitute it, are decomposable into independent modules. Psychologist William Uttal contends that rather than distinct entities, the various mental processes are likely to be properties of a more general mental activity that is distributed throughout the brain. It cannot be said, for instance, that the amygdala is the seat of emotion and the prefrontal cortex is the seat of reason, as the popular press sometimes claims. For when I get angry, I generally do so for a reason. To cleanly separate emotion from reason-giving makes a hash of human experience. But if this critique of the modular theory of mind is valid, how can one account for the fact that brain scans do, in fact, reveal well-defined areas that "light up," in response to various cognitive tasks? In the case of functional magnetic resonance imaging (FMRI), what you are seeing when you look at a brain scan is actually the result of a subtraction. The FMRI is usually interpreted as a map of the rate of oxygen use in different parts of the brain, which stands as a measure of metabolic activity. But what it actually depicts is the differential rate of oxygen use: one first takes a baseline measurement in the control condition, then a second measurement while the subject is performing some cognitive task. The baseline measurement is then subtracted from the on-task measurement. The reasoning, seemingly plausible, is that whatever remains after the subtraction represents the metabolic activity associated solely with the cognitive task in question. One immediately obvious (but usually unremarked) problem is that this method obscures the fact that the entire brain is active in both conditions. A false impression of neat functional localization is given by differential brain scans that subtract out all the distributed brain functions. This subtractive method produces striking images of the brain at work. But isn't the modular theory of mind ultimately attractive in part because it is illustrated so well by the products of the subtractive method?
Q: A central fiction of the final paragraph of the passage is to
Choices:
A.) suggest that the position articulated in the first paragraph needs to be modified to accommodate the results outlined in the third paragraph
B.) show why the type of empirical evidence discussed in the third paragraph does not defeat the argument presented in the second paragraph
C.) argue that the empirical research outlined in the third paragraph points to the inadequacy of the competing views described in the first two paragraphs
D.) contend that the research method detailed in the third paragraph relies upon an outdated theoretical model described in the second paragraph
Answer:

Choices:
- A
- B
- C
- D


Question:
Passage: There are some basic conceptual problems hovering about the widespread use of brain scans as pictures of mental activity. As applied to medical diagnosis (for example, in diagnosing a brain tumor), a brain scan is similar in principle to an X-ray: it is a way of seeing inside the body. Its value is straightforward and indubitable. However, the use of neuroimaging in psychology is a fundamentally different kind of enterprise. It is a research method the validity of which depends on a premise: that the mind can be analyzed into separate and distinct modules, or components, and further that these modules are instantiated in localized brain regions. This premise is known as the modular theory of mind. It may in fact be that neither mental activity, nor the physical processes that constitute it, are decomposable into independent modules. Psychologist William Uttal contends that rather than distinct entities, the various mental processes are likely to be properties of a more general mental activity that is distributed throughout the brain. It cannot be said, for instance, that the amygdala is the seat of emotion and the prefrontal cortex is the seat of reason, as the popular press sometimes claims. For when I get angry, I generally do so for a reason. To cleanly separate emotion from reason-giving makes a hash of human experience. But if this critique of the modular theory of mind is valid, how can one account for the fact that brain scans do, in fact, reveal well-defined areas that "light up," in response to various cognitive tasks? In the case of functional magnetic resonance imaging (FMRI), what you are seeing when you look at a brain scan is actually the result of a subtraction. The FMRI is usually interpreted as a map of the rate of oxygen use in different parts of the brain, which stands as a measure of metabolic activity. But what it actually depicts is the differential rate of oxygen use: one first takes a baseline measurement in the control condition, then a second measurement while the subject is performing some cognitive task. The baseline measurement is then subtracted from the on-task measurement. The reasoning, seemingly plausible, is that whatever remains after the subtraction represents the metabolic activity associated solely with the cognitive task in question. One immediately obvious (but usually unremarked) problem is that this method obscures the fact that the entire brain is active in both conditions. A false impression of neat functional localization is given by differential brain scans that subtract out all the distributed brain functions. This subtractive method produces striking images of the brain at work. But isn't the modular theory of mind ultimately attractive in part because it is illustrated so well by the products of the subtractive method?
Q: The author draws an analogy between brain scans and X-rays primarily in order to
Choices:
A.) show how brain scan technology evolved from older technologies such as X-rays
B.) contrast a valid use of brain scans with one of more doubtful value
C.) argue that X-ray images undermine a theory that brain scans are often used to support
D.) suggest that new technology can influence the popularity of a scientific theory
Answer:

Choices:
- A
- B
- C
- D


Question:
Passage: There are some basic conceptual problems hovering about the widespread use of brain scans as pictures of mental activity. As applied to medical diagnosis (for example, in diagnosing a brain tumor), a brain scan is similar in principle to an X-ray: it is a way of seeing inside the body. Its value is straightforward and indubitable. However, the use of neuroimaging in psychology is a fundamentally different kind of enterprise. It is a research method the validity of which depends on a premise: that the mind can be analyzed into separate and distinct modules, or components, and further that these modules are instantiated in localized brain regions. This premise is known as the modular theory of mind. It may in fact be that neither mental activity, nor the physical processes that constitute it, are decomposable into independent modules. Psychologist William Uttal contends that rather than distinct entities, the various mental processes are likely to be properties of a more general mental activity that is distributed throughout the brain. It cannot be said, for instance, that the amygdala is the seat of emotion and the prefrontal cortex is the seat of reason, as the popular press sometimes claims. For when I get angry, I generally do so for a reason. To cleanly separate emotion from reason-giving makes a hash of human experience. But if this critique of the modular theory of mind is valid, how can one account for the fact that brain scans do, in fact, reveal well-defined areas that "light up," in response to various cognitive tasks? In the case of functional magnetic resonance imaging (FMRI), what you are seeing when you look at a brain scan is actually the result of a subtraction. The FMRI is usually interpreted as a map of the rate of oxygen use in different parts of the brain, which stands as a measure of metabolic activity. But what it actually depicts is the differential rate of oxygen use: one first takes a baseline measurement in the control condition, then a second measurement while the subject is performing some cognitive task. The baseline measurement is then subtracted from the on-task measurement. The reasoning, seemingly plausible, is that whatever remains after the subtraction represents the metabolic activity associated solely with the cognitive task in question. One immediately obvious (but usually unremarked) problem is that this method obscures the fact that the entire brain is active in both conditions. A false impression of neat functional localization is given by differential brain scans that subtract out all the distributed brain functions. This subtractive method produces striking images of the brain at work. But isn't the modular theory of mind ultimately attractive in part because it is illustrated so well by the products of the subtractive method?
Q: According to the passage, psychologist William Uttal contends that the various mental processes are likely to be
Choices:
A.) generally uniform in their rates of oxygen use
B.) features of a general mental activity that is spread throughout the brain
C.) detectable using brain scans enhanced by means of the subtractive method
D.) independent modules that are based in different areas of the brain
Answer:

Choices:
- A
- B
- C
- D


Question:
Passage: There are some basic conceptual problems hovering about the widespread use of brain scans as pictures of mental activity. As applied to medical diagnosis (for example, in diagnosing a brain tumor), a brain scan is similar in principle to an X-ray: it is a way of seeing inside the body. Its value is straightforward and indubitable. However, the use of neuroimaging in psychology is a fundamentally different kind of enterprise. It is a research method the validity of which depends on a premise: that the mind can be analyzed into separate and distinct modules, or components, and further that these modules are instantiated in localized brain regions. This premise is known as the modular theory of mind. It may in fact be that neither mental activity, nor the physical processes that constitute it, are decomposable into independent modules. Psychologist William Uttal contends that rather than distinct entities, the various mental processes are likely to be properties of a more general mental activity that is distributed throughout the brain. It cannot be said, for instance, that the amygdala is the seat of emotion and the prefrontal cortex is the seat of reason, as the popular press sometimes claims. For when I get angry, I generally do so for a reason. To cleanly separate emotion from reason-giving makes a hash of human experience. But if this critique of the modular theory of mind is valid, how can one account for the fact that brain scans do, in fact, reveal well-defined areas that "light up," in response to various cognitive tasks? In the case of functional magnetic resonance imaging (FMRI), what you are seeing when you look at a brain scan is actually the result of a subtraction. The FMRI is usually interpreted as a map of the rate of oxygen use in different parts of the brain, which stands as a measure of metabolic activity. But what it actually depicts is the differential rate of oxygen use: one first takes a baseline measurement in the control condition, then a second measurement while the subject is performing some cognitive task. The baseline measurement is then subtracted from the on-task measurement. The reasoning, seemingly plausible, is that whatever remains after the subtraction represents the metabolic activity associated solely with the cognitive task in question. One immediately obvious (but usually unremarked) problem is that this method obscures the fact that the entire brain is active in both conditions. A false impression of neat functional localization is given by differential brain scans that subtract out all the distributed brain functions. This subtractive method produces striking images of the brain at work. But isn't the modular theory of mind ultimately attractive in part because it is illustrated so well by the products of the subtractive method?
Q: Which one of the following statements is most strongly supported by the passage?
Choices:
A.) During the performance of certain cognitive tasks, the areas of the brain that are most metabolically active show a rate of oxygen use that is higher than that of the rest of the brain.
B.) The baseline measurements of oxygen use taken for use in the subtractive method show that some regions of the brain have high metabolic activity at all times,
C.) When a brain scan subject experiences anger,the subtractive method shows several regions of the brain as "lit up" with metabolic activity.
D.) Although there are important exceptions, most cognition does in fact depend on independent modules located in specific regions of the brain.
Answer:

Choices:
- A
- B
- C
- D