JarvisR
Hi Piyush,
I took around 9:20 mins. P1 stumped me and I was not very clear about the topic until i reached last of 1 para.And by 2nd Para, I was comfortable with wht i was reading
All correct except last question Q4.
Could you please help me to understand how to infer E. [I am more inclined toward B and C but none of them are completely true.]
Regards.
Hi JarvisR,
Answer of last question lies in the last paragraph of the passage.
"A possible explanation for this inconsistency is that legitimation and competitive forces transcend national boundaries, while studies typically restrict their analysis to the national level. "
"Many industries are or are becoming international, and since media and information easily cross national borders, so should legitimation and its effects on overseas foundings. For example, if a type of firm becomes established in the United States, that information transcends borders, reduces uncertainties, and helps foundings of that type of firm in other countries. Even within national contexts, studies have found more support for the density dependence model when they employ broader geographic units of analysis--for example, finding that the model's operation is seen more clearly at the state and national levels than at city levels."
Author is raising question on the studies that, in current scenario in which many companies operating internationally, information or impact of their international operations were not included in these studies. Author is taking side of dependence model.
4. The primary purpose of the passage is to
E. explain why an economic model remains valid despite inconsistent research results.
Further we can outline entire passage per paragraph:
1. (GDDM) General density dependence model's importance to specialized firms and how legitimation and competitive forces react to density.
2. Defending GDDM and justifying that it works fine.
4. The primary purpose of the passage is to
A. question the validity of an economic model --- no author is not questioning, instead s/he is defending.
B. point out some inconsistencies within an economic model --- narrow scope -- s/he is also defending.
C. outline an economic model and suggest revisions to it --- not suggesting revision.
D. describe an economic model and provide specific examples to illustrate its use -- no examples illustrated
E. explain why an economic model remains valid despite inconsistent research results --- so we left with E.
I hope it helps.