The term "glass ceiling" as a discriminatory barrier limiting females

Question

New Project RC Butler 2019  -  Practice 2 RC Passages Everyday   
Passage # 309, Date : 04-Sep-2019
 This post is a part of New Project RC Butler 2019 .  Click here for Details

The term "glass ceiling" as a discriminatory barrier limiting females from reaching senior management positions was used in the early 1990s, around the time that females first surpassed males in annual university degrees obtained in the United States. Studies of employment in various, such as the 2003 study of employment data in Sweden conducted by Albrecht, Bjӧrklund, and Vroman, have found a consistent gap between men's and women's wages after these are controlled for gender differences in age, education level, education field, sector, industry, and occupation. However, empirical studies as early that of Powell and Butterfield in 1994 have suggested that gender, as a job-irrelevant variable in consideration of promotions to top management positions, may actually work to women's advantage. Whereas the gender gap in pay is strongly supported by data, the glass-ceiling notion itself as a discriminatory force has been harder to account for in empirically proven terms. 
 
Studies that have been considered by some a  partial repudiation of the glass-ceiling theory  have indicated that men and women differ in their preferences for competition and that such differences impact economic outcomes. If women are less likely to compete, they are less likely to enter competitive situations and hence likely to win. For example, in a laboratory experiment featuring a non-competitive option and a competitive incentive scheme, men selected the tournament twice as much as did women of equal ability. One explanation is that men are inherently more competitive; another is that the social influences limiting women's presence in executive leadership generally make their impact long before women are near the ceiling.   1 
 D 
 1. The passage suggests which of the following about gender as a job-irrelevant variable?

A. Gender should have qualified women more than men for promotions, but it favored men.
B. Gender should have qualified men more than women for promotions, but it favored women.
C. Gender should not have qualified either men or women better for promotions, but it favored men.
D. Gender should not have qualified either men or women better for promotions, but it favored women.
E. Gender should not have qualified either men or women better for promotions, and it favored neither men nor women.

2 
 B 
 2. Which of the following, if true, would most weaken the partial repudiation of the glass-ceiling theory mentioned in the  highlighted text ?

A. Industries in which competition for management positions is higher tend to award higher compensation, on average.
B. The average pay gap between men and women is larger in industries in which competition for management positions is lower.
C. Women who are compensated less than men working in similar positions are less likely to compete for management positions.
D. Women tend to achieve results equal to those of men when working according to non-competitive incentive schemes.
E. The pay gap between women who opt for competition and men is smaller than the pay gap between men and women in general.

3 
 C 
 3. The author of the passage would be most likely to describe the explanation provided by the glass-ceiling theory for women's relative scarcity in senior management positions as

A. well founded though incomplete
B. difficult to articulate
C. plausible but poorly substantiated
D. seriously flawed
E. contrary to recent research

Source:  GMAT Free  (11)
Difficulty Level:   700

PallabiKundu · Answer

Can someone explain Question 2 pls

Sajjad1994 · Answer

Official Explanation

2. Which of the following, if true, would most weaken the partial repudiation of the glass-ceiling theory mentioned in the  highlighted text ?

Explanation

This question asks about the  "partial repudiation."  The gist of that argument is that women prefer to be non-competitive, and that therefore, the lack of women in management positions is not due to discrimination, but preference. We can summarize the partial repudiation as

lower preference for competition -> less presence in senior management

The correct answer will weaken this argument by weakening its link.

Choice (A)  strengthens the argument, because it suggests that the partial repudiation could explain the gap in wages.  (A) is out.

Choice (B)  weakens the argument: the partial repudiation would expect the pay gap to be higher where competition is higher, so  (B)  would suggest there is a problem with that theory.  (B)  might be the answer.

Choice (C)  is more subtle, so we can come back to it.

Choice (D)  is out, because it focuses on non-competitive schemes, which are supposedly immaterial to the actual situation we are trying to explain.

Choice (E)  would strengthen the argument, because it would strengthen the link between opting for competition and getting paid more.

Back to (C) , which probably has an objective defect. Imagining this situation, we see women and men competing for management positions. The women get paid less, but compete less. They could compete less because they are already getting paid less, or they could be getting paid less because the argument is correct. The impact on the argument is unclear. Therefore,  (C) is out.

The correct answer is (B).

Hope it helps

ankushahuja · Answer

Hi team - is it possible to get the explanation for Q1, please? Thank you so much.

Sajjad1994 · Answer

Official Explanation

1. The passage suggests which of the following about gender as a job-irrelevant variable?

Difficulty Level:   700

Explanation

This question mentions a phrase that appears only once in the passage: gender is a  "job-irrelevant variable"  in  line 11 . The point of both studies described in the  first paragraph  is that they are trying to show a gender effect in cases where there should be none. That's why gender is  "job-irrelevant" : men and women should be equally well qualified. With an eye on the answer choices, we can see that we have ruled out  (A) and (B)  and narrowed down to  (C) through (E) . Moreover, the passage is clear that in the study, women were favored. This is presented in the passage not as a completely unassailable truth, but nevertheless as a piece of evidence, and there's no other evidence on the matter.

Therefore, the correct answer is (D).

Hope it helps

Alpha14 · Answer

SajjadAhmad  Pls Provide solution For Q3 ?

Sajjad1994 · Answer

Official Explanation

3. The author of the passage would be most likely to describe the explanation provided by the glass-ceiling theory for women's relative scarcity in senior management positions as

Difficulty Level:   700

Explanation

This question asks for the author's opinion on the glass-ceiling theory, and we haven't gotten a lot of opinion from the author in the passage. The author ends the passage with two possible explanations, not a decisive conclusion. The strongest statement we get from the author is that  "the glass-ceiling notion... has been harder to account for in empirically proven terms."  Let's look for an answer choice along those lines.

Choice (C)  hits on that point: we have a problem with a lack of proof or substance. And, if that's the main problem, then presumably the theory is at least somewhat plausible.

The correct answer is (C) .

Hope it helps

arora1 · Answer

SajjadAhmad  : Are the questions from source "Gmat Free" official Gmat question, provided by Gmac?

Sajjad1994 · Answer

No, this is a private prep company.

Gknight5603 · Answer

how is option C incorrect in q2

causality is clearly reversed ......

because of gap ........women are not opting for competition

Sajjad1994 · Answer

Read the explanation in the post in the link below https://gmatclub.com/forum/the-term-gla ... l#p2352949 Good Luck!

manish8242 · Answer

may actually work to women's advantage. This is mentioned in the passage. Where it has been said that 'it was advantageous to women? There is a difference between 'may be advantageous' and 'were advantageous'. I rejected this option on this basis.

manish8242 · Answer

Why B is not correct? The author mentions 'its difficult to account' then why not B the answer? Also opt C says plausible... means author finds it correct to some extent but author never seems to agree with the theory

egmat · Answer

manish8242  You're right to notice the difference between "may be" and "were" - that's good critical thinking! However, in GMAT RC, we need to understand what the  studies suggested , not what definitively happened.

The passage states:  "empirical studies... have suggested that gender... may actually work to women's advantage"

Key insight:  The studies' finding IS that gender "may actually work to women's advantage." The "may" is part of what the studies concluded, not the author hedging about whether the studies said this.

Think of it this way:
- The studies  definitively suggested  something
- What they suggested was that gender  may favor  women
- So option D correctly captures what the studies suggested

egmat · Answer

manish8242   "Difficult to account for" vs. "Difficult to articulate"

This is a crucial distinction in GMAT RC:

"Difficult to account for in empirically proven terms"  means:
- Hard to  prove with data/evidence 
- Lacks empirical support
- Cannot be substantiated with facts

"Difficult to articulate"  means:
- Hard to  explain or express in words 
- Complex to describe
- Challenging to communicate

The passage clearly indicates the glass-ceiling theory lacks  empirical support  (evidence), NOT that it's hard to explain. The theory is easy to articulate (discriminatory barriers limit women) but hard to prove with data.

Why "plausible" in option C? 
"Plausible" means  seemingly reasonable or possible  - not that the author agrees! The theory sounds reasonable on its surface (hence plausible) but lacks evidence (poorly substantiated). This perfectly matches:  "harder to account for in empirically proven terms"

Recognition Framework: 
In RC, when the passage says something is "hard to account for empirically," immediately think →  lacks evidence/proof  → look for answers about  substantiation , not  articulation .

If you want, you can practice similar questions  here  - select  Reading Comprehension  under  Verbal  and choose  Medium  level questions focusing on inference and vocabulary-in-context types.

The term "glass ceiling" as a discriminatory barrier limiting females

Prep Toolkit

Top 5 GMAT Debrief Videos

615 to 715 in 15 Days (Ria's Strategies)

More than Quant/Verbal Abilities: Speed vs. Accuracy

745 with Only Self-Prep and GMAT Club

From 555 to 765: 210-point Improvement

Perfect 805 Score Debrief by Julia

My Rewards

GMAT Reading Comprehension (RC) Questions

The term "glass ceiling" as a discriminatory barrier limiting females

Prep Toolkit

615 to 715 in 15 Days (Ria's Strategies)

More than Quant/Verbal Abilities: Speed vs. Accuracy

745 with Only Self-Prep and GMAT Club

From 555 to 765: 210-point Improvement

Perfect 805 Score Debrief by Julia

My Rewards