SAT Suite Question Bank - Results Full Without A

 Question ID 18069
Assessment Test Cross-Test and Difficulty Primary Secondary Tertiary Passage Text
Subscore Dimension Dimension Dimension Complexity
SAT Reading Analysis in Information and Citing textual N/A Grades 11-CCR
History/ Social
Studies, Command Ideas evidence
of Evidence
Questions 11-21 are based on the following passage and supplementary material.
This passage is adapted from Francis J. Flynn and Gabrielle S. Adams, “Money Can't Buy Love: Asymmetric Beliefs about Gift
Price and Feelings of Appreciation.” ©2008 by Elsevier Inc.
Line Anthropologists describe gift-giving as a positive social process, serving various political, religious, and psychological functions.
Economists, however, offer a less favorable view. According to Waldfogel (1993), gift-giving represents an objective waste of resources.
People buy gifts that recipients would not choose to buy on their own, or at least not spend as much money to purchase (a phenomenon
referred to as “the deadweight loss of Christmas”). To wit, givers are likely to spend $100 to purchase a gift that receivers would spend only
5 $80 to buy themselves. This “deadweight loss” suggests that gift-givers are not very good at predicting what gifts others will appreciate.
That in itself is not surprising to social psychologists. Research has found that people often struggle to take account of others’
perspectives—their insights are subject to egocentrism, social projection, and multiple attribution errors.
What is surprising is that gift-givers have considerable experience acting as both gift-givers and gift-recipients, but nevertheless tend
to overspend each time they set out to purchase a meaningful gift. In the present research, we propose a unique psychological explanation
10 for this overspending problem—i.e., that gift-givers equate how much they spend with how much recipients will appreciate the gift (the
more expensive the gift, the stronger a gift-recipient’s feelings of appreciation). Although a link between gift price and feelings of
appreciation might seem intuitive to gift-givers, such an assumption may be unfounded. Indeed, we propose that gift-recipients will be
less inclined to base their feelings of appreciation on the magnitude of a gift than givers assume.
Why do gift-givers assume that gift price is closely linked to gift-recipients’ feelings of appreciation? Perhaps givers believe that bigger
15 (i.e., more expensive) gifts convey stronger signals of thoughtfulness and consideration. According to Camerer (1988) and others, gift-
giving represents a symbolic ritual, whereby gift-givers attempt to signal their positive attitudes toward the intended recipient and their
willingness to invest resources in a future relationship. In this sense, gift-givers may be motivated to spend more money on a gift in order
to send a “stronger signal” to their intended recipient. As for gift-recipients, they may not construe smaller and larger gifts as representing
smaller and larger signals of thoughtfulness and consideration.
20 The notion of gift-givers and gift-recipients being unable to account for the other party’s perspective seems puzzling because people
slip in and out of these roles every day, and, in some cases, multiple times in the course of the same day. Yet, despite the extensive
experience that people have as both givers and receivers, they often struggle to transfer information gained from one role (e.g., as a giver)
and apply it in another, complementary role (e.g., as a receiver). In theoretical terms, people fail to utilize information about their own
preferences and experiences in order to produce more efficient outcomes in their exchange relations. In practical terms, people spend
25 hundreds of dollars each year on gifts, but somehow never learn to calibrate their gift expenditures according to personal insight.
Which choice provides the best evidence for the answer to the previous question?
A. line 1 (“Many . . . peers”)
B. line 2-3 (“People . . . own”)
C. line 6 (“Research . . . perspectives”)
D. line 11-12 (“Although . . . unfounded”)
Question Difficulty: Easy

SAT Reading Analysis in Rhetoric Analyzing Analyzing Grades 11-CCR
History/ Social evidence
Studies, Command arguments
of Evidence
The authors refer to work by Camerer and others (line 15) in order to
A. offer an explanation.
B. introduce an argument.
C. question a motive.
D. support a conclusion.
Question Difficulty: Medium

SAT Reading Analysis in Information and Interpreting words N/A Grades 13-14
History/ Social
Studies, Words in Ideas and phrases in
Context context
Questions 32-41 are based on the following passage.

This passage is adapted from Virginia Woolf, Three Guineas. ©1938 by Harcourt, Inc. Here, Woolf considers the situation of
women in English society.
Line There they go, our brothers who have been educated at public schools and universities, mounting those steps, passing in and out of
those doors, ascending those pulpits, preaching, teaching, administering justice, practising medicine, transacting business, making
money. It is a solemn sight always—a procession, like a caravanserai crossing a desert. . . . But now, for the past twenty years or so, it is
no longer a sight merely, a photograph, or fresco scrawled upon the walls of time, at which we can look with merely an esthetic
5 appreciation. For there, trapesing along at the tail end of the procession, we go ourselves. And that makes a difference. We who have
looked so long at the pageant in books, or from a curtained window watched educated men leaving the house at about nine-thirty to go
to an office, returning to the house at about six-thirty from an office, need look passively no longer. We too can leave the house, can
mount those steps, pass in and out of those doors, . . . make money, administer justice. . . . We who now agitate these humble pens may
in another century or two speak from a pulpit. Nobody will dare contradict us then; we shall be the mouthpieces of the divine spirit—a
10 solemn thought, is it not? Who can say whether, as time goes on, we may not dress in military uniform, with gold lace on our breasts,
swords at our sides, and something like the old family coal-scuttle on our heads, save that that venerable object was never decorated
with plumes of white horsehair. You laugh—indeed the shadow of the private house still makes those dresses look a little queer. We
have worn private clothes so long. . . . But we have not come here to laugh, or to talk of fashions—men’s and women’s. We are here, on
the bridge, to ask ourselves certain questions. And they are very important questions; and we have very little time in which to answer
15 them. The questions that we have to ask and to answer about that procession during this moment of transition are so important that
they may well change the lives of all men and women for ever. For we have to ask ourselves, here and now, do we wish to join that
procession, or don’t we? On what terms shall we join that procession? Above all, where is it leading us, the procession of educated
men? The moment is short; it may last five years; ten years, or perhaps only a matter of a few months longer. . . . But, you will object, you
have no time to think; you have your battles to fight, your rent to pay, your bazaars to organize. That excuse shall not serve you,
20 Madam. As you know from your own experience, and there are facts that prove it, the daughters of educated men have always done
their thinking from hand to mouth; not under green lamps at study tables in the cloisters of secluded colleges. They have thought
while they stirred the pot, while they rocked the cradle. It was thus that they won us the right to our brand-new sixpence. It falls to us
now to go on thinking; how are we to spend that sixpence? Think we must. Let us think in offices; in omnibuses; while we are standing
in the crowd watching Coronations and Lord Mayor’s Shows; let us think . . . in the gallery of the House of Commons; in the Law Courts;
25 let us think at baptisms and marriages and funerals. Let us never cease from thinking—what is this “civilization” in which we find
ourselves? What are these ceremonies and why should we take part in them? What are these professions and why should we make
money out of them? Where in short is it leading us, the procession of the sons of educated men?
Which choice most closely captures the meaning of the figurative “sixpence” referred to in line 22 and line 22?
A. Tolerance
B. Knowledge
C. Opportunity
D. Perspective

SAT Reading Analysis in Rhetoric Analyzing word N/A Grades 13-14
History/ Social
Studies, Words in choice
Context
Questions 32-41 are based on the following passage.

This passage is adapted from Virginia Woolf, Three Guineas. ©1938 by Harcourt, Inc. Here, Woolf considers the situation of
women in English society.
Line There they go, our brothers who have been educated at public schools and universities, mounting those steps, passing in and out of
those doors, ascending those pulpits, preaching, teaching, administering justice, practising medicine, transacting business, making
money. It is a solemn sight always—a procession, like a caravanserai crossing a desert. . . . But now, for the past twenty years or so, it is
no longer a sight merely, a photograph, or fresco scrawled upon the walls of time, at which we can look with merely an esthetic
5 appreciation. For there, trapesing along at the tail end of the procession, we go ourselves. And that makes a difference. We who have
looked so long at the pageant in books, or from a curtained window watched educated men leaving the house at about nine-thirty to go
to an office, returning to the house at about six-thirty from an office, need look passively no longer. We too can leave the house, can
mount those steps, pass in and out of those doors, . . . make money, administer justice. . . . We who now agitate these humble pens may
in another century or two speak from a pulpit. Nobody will dare contradict us then; we shall be the mouthpieces of the divine spirit—a
10 solemn thought, is it not? Who can say whether, as time goes on, we may not dress in military uniform, with gold lace on our breasts,
swords at our sides, and something like the old family coal-scuttle on our heads, save that that venerable object was never decorated
with plumes of white horsehair. You laugh—indeed the shadow of the private house still makes those dresses look a little queer. We
have worn private clothes so long. . . . But we have not come here to laugh, or to talk of fashions—men’s and women’s. We are here, on
the bridge, to ask ourselves certain questions. And they are very important questions; and we have very little time in which to answer
15 them. The questions that we have to ask and to answer about that procession during this moment of transition are so important that
they may well change the lives of all men and women for ever. For we have to ask ourselves, here and now, do we wish to join that
procession, or don’t we? On what terms shall we join that procession? Above all, where is it leading us, the procession of educated
men? The moment is short; it may last five years; ten years, or perhaps only a matter of a few months longer. . . . But, you will object, you
have no time to think; you have your battles to fight, your rent to pay, your bazaars to organize. That excuse shall not serve you,
20 Madam. As you know from your own experience, and there are facts that prove it, the daughters of educated men have always done
their thinking from hand to mouth; not under green lamps at study tables in the cloisters of secluded colleges. They have thought
while they stirred the pot, while they rocked the cradle. It was thus that they won us the right to our brand-new sixpence. It falls to us
now to go on thinking; how are we to spend that sixpence? Think we must. Let us think in offices; in omnibuses; while we are standing
in the crowd watching Coronations and Lord Mayor’s Shows; let us think . . . in the gallery of the House of Commons; in the Law Courts;
25 let us think at baptisms and marriages and funerals. Let us never cease from thinking—what is this “civilization” in which we find
ourselves? What are these ceremonies and why should we take part in them? What are these professions and why should we make
money out of them? Where in short is it leading us, the procession of the sons of educated men?
Woolf uses the word “we” throughout the passage mainly to
A. reflect the growing friendliness among a group of people.
B. advance the need for candor among a group of people.
C. establish a sense of solidarity among a group of people.
D. reinforce the need for respect among a group of people.

SAT Reading Analysis in Information and Reading closely Determining Grades 11-CCR
History/ Social implicit meanings
Studies Ideas
This passage is adapted from Francesca Gino, “The Surprising Benefits of Sarcasm.” ©2016 by Scientific American, a Division of
Nature America, Inc.
Line Sarcasm involves constructing or exposing contradictions between intended meanings. It is the most common form of verbal irony—
that is, allowing people to say exactly what they do not mean. Often we use it to humorously convey disapproval or scorn. “Pat, don’t work
so hard!” a boss might say, for example, on catching his assistant surfing the Web.
And yet behavioral scientists Li Huang of INSEAD business school, Adam D. Galinsky of Columbia University and I have found that
5 sarcasm may also offer an unexpected psychological payoff: greater creativity. The use of sarcasm, in fact, appears to promote creativity
for those on both the giving and receiving end of the exchange. Instead of avoiding snarky remarks completely, our research suggests
that, used with care and in moderation, clever quips can trigger creative sparks.
Early research into how people interpret sarcastic statements revealed, as one might expect, that most perceive such comments as
critical compared with more direct utterances. In one study, published in 1997, 32 participants read scenarios in which, for instance, one
10 person did something that could be viewed negatively, and a second person commented on the behavior to the first person, either literally
or sarcastically. Consistently, participants rated sarcasm to be more condemning than literal statements.
And sarcasm can be easily misinterpreted, particularly when it is communicated electronically, according to a 2005 study by Jason
Parker and Zhi-Wen Ng of the University of Illinois at Urbana-Champaign. They gave 30 pairs of university students a list of statements,
half of which were sarcastic and half serious. Some students relayed messages via e-mail and others via voice recordings. Participants
15 who received the voice messages accurately gleaned the sarcasm (or lack thereof) 73 percent of the time, but those who received the
statements via e-mail did so only 56 percent of the time, hardly better than chance.
The e-mailers had anticipated that 78 percent of the participants would pick up on the sarcasm inherent in their messages. That is,
they badly overestimated their ability to communicate the tenor of these statements via e-mail. And the recipients of the sarcastic e-
mails were even more overconfident. They guessed they would correctly interpret the tone of the e-mail messages about 90 percent of the
20 time.
In 2015 my colleagues and I discovered an upside to this otherwise negative picture of sarcasm. In one study, we asked 56 participants
to choose a script that was sarcastic, sincere or neutral and then engage in simulated conversation with another subject, who was
unaware of the script.
Immediately after our participants enacted the dialogue, we presented them with tasks testing their creativity. For instance, they had
25 to think of a word that was logically linked to a set of three provided words (for example, “manners,” “round” and “tennis” linked to
“table”). We also presented them with a short questionnaire about their perceived sense of conflict during the conversation.
Not surprisingly, the participants exposed to sarcasm reported more interpersonal conflict than those in other groups. More
interestingly, those pairs who had engaged in a sarcastic conversation fared better on the creativity tasks. This effect emerged for both
the deliverer and recipient in the simulated conversation but only when the recipient had picked up on the sarcasm in the script.
30 Why might verbal irony enhance creativity? Sarcasm’s challenge is that the message sounds serious but should not be taken literally.
One way to overcome this is through tone—as when exaggerated speech indicates the facetiousness of a message. We need to think
outside the box to generate and decipher ironic comments.
Adapted from Li Huang, Francesca Gino, and Adam D. Galinsky, “The Highest Form of Intelligence: Sarcasm Increases Creativity for
Both Expressers and Recipients.” ©2015 by Elsevier Inc.
The passage suggests that before the author’s research, the “negative picture of sarcasm” (line 20) emerged because
sarcasm can
A. emphasize people’s differences rather than their similarities.
B. obscure the actual intention of a communication.
C. appear more prevalent in some cultures than it does in others.
D. introduce humor inappropriately at otherwise solemn occasions.

SAT Reading Analysis in Information and Interpreting words N/A Grades 11-CCR
History/ Social
Studies, Words in Ideas and phrases in
Context context
In line 1, the word “ambivalent” most nearly means
A. unrealistic.
B. conflicted.
C. apprehensive.
D. supportive.

SAT Reading Analysis in Information and Citing textual N/A Grades 11-CCR
History/ Social
Studies, Command Ideas evidence
of Evidence
Which choice provides the best evidence for the answer to the previous question?
A. line 14-15 (“Perhaps . . . consideration”)
B. line 15-17 (“According . . . relationship”)
C. line 18-19 (“As . . . consideration”)
D. line 23-24 (“In . . . relations”)
Question Difficulty: Hard

SAT Reading Analysis in Information and Reading closely Determining Grades 11-CCR
History/ Social implicit meanings
Studies Ideas
This passage is adapted from Philip E. Tetlock and Dan Gardner, Superforecasting: The Art and Science of Prediction. ©2015 by
Philip Tetlock Consulting, Inc., and Connaught Street, Inc.
Line Human beings have coped with uncertainty for as long as we have been recognizably human. And for almost all that time we didn’t
have access to statistical models of uncertainty because they didn’t exist. It was remarkably late in history—arguably as late as the 1713
publication of Jakob Bernoulli’s Ars Conjectandi—before the best minds started to think seriously about probability.
Before that, people had no choice but to rely on the tip-of-your-nose perspective. You see a shadow moving in the long grass. Should
5 you worry about lions? You try to think of an example of a lion attacking from the long grass. If the example comes to mind easily, run! If
the response is strong enough, it can produce a binary conclusion: “Yes, it’s a lion,” or “No, it’s not a lion.” But if it’s weaker, it can produce
an unsettling middle possibility: “Maybe it’s a lion.” What the tip-of-your-nose perspective will not deliver is a judgment so fine grained
that it can distinguish between, say, a 60% chance that it is a lion and an 80% chance. That takes slow, conscious, careful thought. Of
course, when you were dealing with the pressing existential problems our ancestors faced, it was rarely necessary to make such fine
10 distinctions. It may not even have been desirable. A three-setting dial gives quick, clear directions. Is that a lion? YES = run! MAYBE = stay
alert! NO = relax. The ability to distinguish between a 60% probability and an 80% probability would add little. In fact, a more fine-grained
analysis could slow you down—and get you killed.
In this light, the preference for two- and three-setting mental dials makes sense. And lots of research underscores the point. Why is a
decline from 5% to 0% so much more valuable than a decline from 10% to 5%? Because it delivers more than a 5% reduction in risk. It
15 delivers certainty. Both 0% and 100% weigh far more heavily in our minds than the mathematical models of economists say they should.
Again, this is not surprising if you think about the world in which our brain evolved. There was always at least a tiny chance a lion was
lurking in the vicinity. Or a snake. Or any of the countless other threats people faced. But our ancestors couldn’t maintain a state of
constant alert. The cognitive cost would have been too great. They needed worry-free zones. The solution? Ignore small chances and use
the two-setting dial as much as possible. Either it is a lion or it isn’t. Only when something undeniably falls between those two settings—
20 only when we are compelled—do we turn the mental dial to maybe.
We want answers. A confident yes or no is satisfying in a way that maybe never is, a fact that helps to explain why the media so often
turn to hedgehogs [single-minded people] who are sure they know what is coming no matter how bad their forecasting records may be. Of
course it’s not always wrong to prefer a confident judgment. All else being equal, our answers to questions like “Does France have more
people than Italy?” are likelier to be right when we are confident they are right than when we are not. Confidence and accuracy are
25 positively correlated. But research shows we exaggerate the size of the correlation. For instance, people trust more confident financial
advisers over those who are less confident even when their track records are identical. And people equate confidence and competence,
which makes the forecaster who says something has a middling probability of happening less worthy of respect. As one study noted,
people “took such judgments as indications the forecasters were either generally incompetent, ignorant of the facts in a given case, or
lazy, unwilling to expend the effort required to gather information that would justify greater confidence.”
Adapted from J. Frank Yates et al., “Good Probabilistic Forecasters: The ‘Consumer’s’ Perspective.”
©1996 by Elsevier Science B. V.

The passage implies that probabilistic thinking did not become useful until
A. the problem of daily survival became a less pressing issue than it had been in the past.
B. sophisticated technology was devised that was able to provide fine measurement distinctions.
C. people realized it could be used to enhance common defensive maneuvers.
D. assessing the confidence levels of others became important to daily life.
Question Difficulty: Hard

SAT Suite Question Bank - Results Full Without A

Uploaded by

Document Information

Original Title

Copyright

Available Formats

Share this document

Share or Embed Document

Sharing Options

Did you find this document useful?

Is this content inappropriate?

Copyright:

Available Formats

SAT Suite Question Bank - Results Full Without A

Uploaded by

Copyright:

Available Formats

 Question ID 18069

A. line 1 (“Many . . . peers”)

B. line 2-3 (“People . . . own”)

C. line 6 (“Research . . . perspectives”)

D. line 11-12 (“Although . . . unfounded”)

Question Difficulty: Easy

Question Difficulty: Medium

Questions 32-41 are based on the following passage.

Question Difficulty: Medium

Questions 32-41 are based on the following passage.

Woolf uses the word “we” throughout the passage mainly to

A. reflect the growing friendliness among a group of people.

B. advance the need for candor among a group of people.

C. establish a sense of solidarity among a group of people.

D. reinforce the need for respect among a group of people.

Question Difficulty: Medium

outside the box to generate and decipher ironic comments.

A. emphasize people’s differences rather than their similarities.

B. obscure the actual intention of a communication.

C. appear more prevalent in some cultures than it does in others.

D. introduce humor inappropriately at otherwise solemn occasions.

Question Difficulty: Medium

Question Difficulty: Medium

smaller and larger signals of thoughtfulness and consideration.

A. line 14-15 (“Perhaps . . . consideration”)

B. line 15-17 (“According . . . relationship”)

C. line 18-19 (“As . . . consideration”)

D. line 23-24 (“In . . . relations”)

Question Difficulty: Hard

analysis could slow you down—and get you killed.

©1996 by Elsevier Science B. V.

C. people realized it could be used to enhance common defensive maneuvers.

D. assessing the confidence levels of others became important to daily life.

Question Difficulty: Hard

You might also like