Events & Promotions
| Last visit was: 23 Apr 2026, 01:45 |
It is currently 23 Apr 2026, 01:45 |
|
|
Customized
for You
Track
Your Progress
Practice
Pays
10:00 AM EDT
-11:00 AM EDT
11:00 AM EDT
-12:00 PM EDT
08:00 AM PDT
-11:00 AM PDT
Difficulty:
Question Stats:
46% (03:09) correct
54%
(03:10) wrong
based on 625
sessions
History
Difficulty:
Question Stats:
76% (01:52) correct
24%
(02:08) wrong
based on 591
sessions
History
Difficulty:
Question Stats:
68% (01:14) correct
32%
(01:24) wrong
based on 590
sessions
History
Difficulty:
Question Stats:
20% (01:20) correct
80%
(01:27) wrong
based on 580
sessions
History
Junk Mail.
Key Points of the Passage Purpose and Main Idea:
The author's purpose is to explain why direct mail marketing has been so successful despite Americans' seemingly negative attitudes towards direct mail techniques. The main idea is that even though Americans dislike receiving "junk mail," they value the advantages of shopping by mail and continue to respond positively to direct mail marketing, increasing the industry's success.Paragraph Structure:
Paragraph 1 introduces us to the notion that Americans' response to direct mail marketing has been "strangely mixed." We get the "negative side" of the American response in the first paragraph, as the author explains why Americans view direct mail marketing as annoying and invasive.ANSWERS AND EXPLANATIONS
1.C, 2.В, 3.A, 4.В
1.
(С)This "strengthen the argument" question requires that we first understand how the author explains the "seeming contradiction" in paragraph 3. He argues that Americans respond to direct marketing because of its conveniences, even though Americans don't like the annoyance or the invasion of privacy. This evidence assumes that Americans are willing to maintain certain shopping habits despite the drawbacks associated with them.2.
(B) Ouch. We're asked to identify the criticism that most closely approximates the logic of the author's concern over the use of computer matching programs. Well, why is the author concerned about these? The line reference brings us right to the crux of the matter: "Sophisticated computer matching programs can produce intrusive personal profiles from information which, standing alone, does not threaten individual privacy." Extracting the general logical structure of this, we have a situation in which harmless individual elements, when combined, become harmful in some way. That's the situation we need to find among the choices, and (B) best approximates this situation: the species alone aren't dangerous to the ecosystem, but put them together and look out! The mechanism at work in (B) mirrors the mechanism the author describes in paragraph 1— namely, the way that computer matching systems can combine non-intrusive independent bits of information into a profile that threatens individual privacy. It's helpful to restate exactly what we're looking for in order to eliminate the wrong choices: the logic of the original example in the passage states that things (bits of information) that individually don't have a certain effect (i.e., threaten privacy) DO have that effect when put together.3.
(A)The mention of expenditures from 1980-1990 brings us squarely to paragraph 2, where the author informs us that expenditures rose significantly during that stretch, and that "companies would not have made these efforts without prospects of success." Inference questions are not great candidates for prephrasing, so you probably moved directly to the choices. Hopefully you saw that (A) is a reasonable inference based on this information. It stands to reason that companies spent more money on advertising because they expected to benefit from it (in accordance with the "laws of the market"). Therefore, the rise in direct marketing expenditures can reasonably be said to reflect their expectations regarding success.4
. (B) This Inference question requires us to determine which statement could most likely be attributed to the author, based on the information presented in the passage. Again, our grasp of the author's purpose in writing the passage comes into play. This passage looks at the difference between Americans' attitudes about direct mail and their behaviors in response to it. Evidence for the public's attitudes is provided through opinion surveys, which suggests that the author believes that the attitudes revealed in surveys can help us understand public behavior—choice (B). Think of it this way: If the author didn't agree with (B), then there would be no contradiction to resolve, because the data from the opinion polls would be meaningless. The passage as is can exist only if the author believes that polls can provide insight as stated in choice (B).Success stories and strategies from high-scoring candidates.