Reading Comprehension

The passage is chiefly concerned with

Directions: This question is based on the following reading passage. Choose the best answer to the question on the basis of what is stated or implied in the passage.

Intuitively, intellectual skills and perceptual-motor skills seem very different because perceptual-motor skills appear more primitive. Ontogenetically, perceptual-motor skills develop before intellectual skills, or at least before most intellectual skills are manifested. Phylogenetically, creatures "high on the evolutionary ladder" are more obviously capable of intellectual skills than are creatures "lower down".
Perceptual-motor skills also seem more closely tied to specific forms of expression. Being a chess player does not mean one can only play with pieces of a certain size, that one can only move pieces with one's right hand, and so on. By contrast, being a violinist means one can play an instrument whose size occupies a fairly narrow range and that one must play with a rather rigid assignment of functions to effectors (bowing with the right hand, and fingering with the left). The seeming narrowness of this perceptual-motor skill expression, contrasted with the seeming openness of intellectual skill expression, seems to follow from intellectual skills having symbolic outcomes and perceptual-motor skills having non-symbolic outcomes. Symbolic outcomes need not be realized in specific ways and can rely on abstract rules. Non-symbolic outcomes, by contrast, need more specific forms of realization and seem to depend on restricted associations between stimuli and responses.
Another difference between intellectual and perceptual-motor skills is that the two kinds of skill seem to be represented in different parts of the brain. For example, structures homologous to the optic tectum, a nucleus located on the dorsal surface of the midbrain, have a common function in all vertebrates--coordinating visual, auditory, and somatosensory information relevant to the control of orienting movements of the eyes, ears, and head. Similarities in structure and function between these and other brain areas associated with perceptual-motor behavior suggest that mechanisms for control of perceptual-motor skills are both highly specialized and conserved across species. In contrast, what distinguishes the human brain from the brains of other species -- even closely related ones -- is the differential growth of brain regions most strongly associated with intellectual skills, such as the association areas of the cerebral cortex.
The contention that these areas serve intellectual functions is supported by a large body of clinical and experimental literature. Together, these diverse sources of information suggest that perceptual-motor and intellectual skills depend on distinct brain circuits

The passage discusses the likelihood of violence stemming from which of the following types of individuals?

Directions: This question is based on the following reading passage. Choose the best answer to the question on the basis of what is stated or implied in the passage.

Considerable debate exists in the self-perception literature over the impact of positively biased self-perceptions on social and psychological functioning. Positively based self-perceptions are those in which an individual has a more positive opinion of himself than objective indicators warrant. One view suggests that positive perceptual biases are characteristic of normal human thought across a variety of domains and correlate positively with good mental and psychological health. Certain researchers and clinicians have even proposed that by boosting self-concepts, symptoms of depression and levels of aggression may be reduced.
Investigators on the other side of the debate maintain that when most positive self-perceptions are compared to an objective criterion, they appear neither positively biased nor adaptive. In fact, Baumeister, Smart, and Boden suggest that positively biased self-concepts may have a ‘dark side’. They proposed that it is persons with very positive self-views who are prone to be aggressive. As a result, building up individuals' self-perceptions may serve only to increase levels of aggression rather than curb them.
According to Baumeister et al., not all individuals with positive self-perceptions are going to be interpersonally aggressive. Rather, individuals who are extremely positive in their perceptions of themselves and their functioning are proposed to be the most likely to become angry and potentially violent. The mechanism that triggers aggressive behavior by these individuals has been suggested to be negative social feedback that challenges their positive self-views. Such threats to positive self-esteem give rise to anger and hostility.
If negative social information is encountered that challenges established positive self-perceptions, Baumeister et al. propose that individuals must choose to either accept the feedback and lower their self-perceptions or reject the feedback to maintain their positive self-views. The chosen reaction then influences their subsequent affective states and behavioral expressions. By accepting the external appraisals and adjusting self-perceptions downward, dysphoric feelings and social withdrawal may result. Conversely, the rejection of the validity of the unfavorable feedback results in feelings of anger and resentment toward the source of the threat. Dodge and colleagues demonstrated that children who interpret social cues as threatening direct their anger and aggression at the peers who gave the negative evaluations. Anger stemming from the receipt of social criticism is a way to deny the legitimacy of the negative information. By directing hostile reactions toward the source of the negative feedback, the influx of disconfirming information may end. Unless individuals react against the self-esteem threat, they may be compelled to revise their self-concepts negatively, in line with the information provided. By discounting the negative social feedback, individuals can protect themselves from dysphoric feelings and maintain their positively biased self-perceptions, but they may be setting themselves up to become interpersonally aggressive.
Although positively biased self-perceptions may place individuals at risk for negative social feedback and subsequent increases in aggressive behavior, not all positive self-concepts are suggested to be harmful. The relationship between positive self-perceptions and aggression may depend on the degree of perceptual distortion (i.e., moderate vs. extreme distortion). Baumeister (1989) and Baumeister et al. (1996) proposed that an optimal range of moderate bias might exist within which mental health is encouraged. Maladjustment in psychological and social functioning is suggested to occur when the degree of bias of self-perceptions shifts from moderate to extreme levels. Extremely negative and positive perceptual bias would be related to different but equally harmful difficulties.

The author mentions the game of chess in paragraph two primarily in order to

Directions: This question is based on the following reading passage. Choose the best answer to the question on the basis of what is stated or implied in the passage.

Intuitively, intellectual skills and perceptual-motor skills seem very different because perceptual-motor skills appear more primitive. Ontogenetically, perceptual-motor skills develop before intellectual skills, or at least before most intellectual skills are manifested. Phylogenetically, creatures "high on the evolutionary ladder" are more obviously capable of intellectual skills than are creatures "lower down".
Perceptual-motor skills also seem more closely tied to specific forms of expression. Being a chess player does not mean one can only play with pieces of a certain size, that one can only move pieces with one's right hand, and so on. By contrast, being a violinist means one can play an instrument whose size occupies a fairly narrow range and that one must play with a rather rigid assignment of functions to effectors (bowing with the right hand, and fingering with the left). The seeming narrowness of this perceptual-motor skill expression, contrasted with the seeming openness of intellectual skill expression, seems to follow from intellectual skills having symbolic outcomes and perceptual-motor skills having non-symbolic outcomes. Symbolic outcomes need not be realized in specific ways and can rely on abstract rules. Non-symbolic outcomes, by contrast, need more specific forms of realization and seem to depend on restricted associations between stimuli and responses.
Another difference between intellectual and perceptual-motor skills is that the two kinds of skill seem to be represented in different parts of the brain. For example, structures homologous to the optic tectum, a nucleus located on the dorsal surface of the midbrain, have a common function in all vertebrates--coordinating visual, auditory, and somatosensory information relevant to the control of orienting movements of the eyes, ears, and head. Similarities in structure and function between these and other brain areas associated with perceptual-motor behavior suggest that mechanisms for control of perceptual-motor skills are both highly specialized and conserved across species. In contrast, what distinguishes the human brain from the brains of other species -- even closely related ones -- is the differential growth of brain regions most strongly associated with intellectual skills, such as the association areas of the cerebral cortex.
The contention that these areas serve intellectual functions is supported by a large body of clinical and experimental literature. Together, these diverse sources of information suggest that perceptual-motor and intellectual skills depend on distinct brain circuits

It can be inferred from the passage that

Directions: This question is based on the following reading passage. Choose the best answer to the question on the basis of what is stated or implied in the passage.

Take a very commonplace, often discussed and critical topic: Are we detecting a greenhouse effect, and related to this, is it exacerbated by "homogenic factors," i.e., human actions? Most would be inclined to give a positive answer to both of these questions. But, if pushed, what would be the evidence, and how well grounded would it be for such affirmations?
Within scientific communities and associated scientifically informed circles, the answers have to be somewhat more ambiguous, particularly when rigorous questions concerning evidence are raised. Were scientific truth to be a matter of consensus, and some argue that scientific truth often turns out to be just that, then it is clear that there is beginning to be a kind of majority consensus among many earth science practitioners that the temperature of the Earth, particularly of the oceans, is indeed rising and that this is a crucial indicator for a possible greenhouse effect.
Most of these scientists admit that the mean oceanic temperature has risen globally in the last several decades. But this generalization depends upon how accurate measurements may be, not just for samples, but also for the whole Earth. Hot spots, for example the now four year old hot spot near New Guinea which is part of the El Niño cycle, does not count by itself because it might be balanced by cold spots elsewhere. And the fact of the matter is that "whole earth measurements" are still rare and primitive in the simple sense that we simply do not have enough thermometers out. Secondly, even if we had enough thermometers, a simply synchronic whole earth measurement over three decades is but a blip in the diachronic history of ice age cycles over the last tens of thousands of years. Thirdly, even if we know that the earth is now heating up, has an ever increasing ozone hole, and from this strange weather effects can be predicted, how much of this is due to homogenic factors, such as CFCs, CO2 increases, hydrocarbon burning, and the like? Is it really the case, as Science magazine claimed in l990, "24% of greenhouse encouraging gases are of homogenic origin"?

The author cites the example of psychological laws of sight, for instance, the effects of colors or optical illusions in order to illustrate

Directions: This question is based on the following reading passage. Choose the best answer to the question on the basis of what is stated or implied in the passage.

Art is visible. However, everything one sees is filtered through certain conditions, some of them historical, and others, natural. The historical conditions include the material, which is used — oil, colors, and the canvas; second, a certain style, i.e., a system of rules by which things visible are submitted a priori. There can be a general style, for example, the style of Impressionism, or a particular style, for example, the individual ways in which two painters, both impressionists, paint. The natural conditions include certain unchanging psychological laws of sight, for instance, the effects of colors or optical illusions.
The conditions of art are nothing but a particular way of interpreting reality. To understand this, one can examine the difference between the classical Greek and the classical Egyptian styles. For the Greeks, the reality of the visible was given by the perspective and the situation in which the object appears; for that reason they presented a person in his individual movements. For the Egyptians, however, this was only the appearance of a transitory moment, which, according to their beliefs, was not real. Therefore, the Egyptians searched for the permanent essence and the typical character in their depiction of an object. For the Egyptians, Greek art was an illusion; for the Greeks, on the other hand, Egyptian art was unrealistic constructivism.
The way in which reality appears in art must not be regarded on its own. It is affected by many other systems of recognizing reality, including the political, religious, economic, intellectual, and social — in short, all the phenomena of human life. Moreover, art is always of a certain epoch, with its particular conception of reality. Thus, when discussing, for example, the art of ancient myth, of medieval Christianity, or that of the technological age, one must be aware that myth, Christianity, or technology was the most salient feature of the epoch.
It is paradoxical to understand art as some kind of copy of the fields of experience connected with it. So, for example, it is meaningless for the work of art as such if one compares the landscape of a painting with the landscape, which served the artist as his model. Even if the artist had tried to make what he painted as similar as possible to the model he used, the landscape which he saw is only the matter from which something completely different emerges since he has submitted its view to the a priori conditions of art: namely to the material used (colors, canvas, etc.), to his style, and even to the fact that he paints on a flat surface. Thus one must contemplate a work of art by itself. Even if it is connected to other fields of experience it nevertheless displays something unique which appears in that piece of art and there alone.

The author mentions which of the following as one of the conditions through which art is seen?

Directions: This question is based on the following reading passage. Choose the best answer to the question on the basis of what is stated or implied in the passage.

Art is visible. However, everything one sees is filtered through certain conditions, some of them historical, and others, natural. The historical conditions include the material, which is used — oil, colors, and the canvas; second, a certain style, i.e., a system of rules by which things visible are submitted a priori. There can be a general style, for example, the style of Impressionism, or a particular style, for example, the individual ways in which two painters, both impressionists, paint. The natural conditions include certain unchanging psychological laws of sight, for instance, the effects of colors or optical illusions.
The conditions of art are nothing but a particular way of interpreting reality. To understand this, one can examine the difference between the classical Greek and the classical Egyptian styles. For the Greeks, the reality of the visible was given by the perspective and the situation in which the object appears; for that reason they presented a person in his individual movements. For the Egyptians, however, this was only the appearance of a transitory moment, which, according to their beliefs, was not real. Therefore, the Egyptians searched for the permanent essence and the typical character in their depiction of an object. For the Egyptians, Greek art was an illusion; for the Greeks, on the other hand, Egyptian art was unrealistic constructivism.
The way in which reality appears in art must not be regarded on its own. It is affected by many other systems of recognizing reality, including the political, religious, economic, intellectual, and social — in short, all the phenomena of human life. Moreover, art is always of a certain epoch, with its particular conception of reality. Thus, when discussing, for example, the art of ancient myth, of medieval Christianity, or that of the technological age, one must be aware that myth, Christianity, or technology was the most salient feature of the epoch.
It is paradoxical to understand art as some kind of copy of the fields of experience connected with it. So, for example, it is meaningless for the work of art as such if one compares the landscape of a painting with the landscape, which served the artist as his model. Even if the artist had tried to make what he painted as similar as possible to the model he used, the landscape which he saw is only the matter from which something completely different emerges since he has submitted its view to the a priori conditions of art: namely to the material used (colors, canvas, etc.), to his style, and even to the fact that he paints on a flat surface. Thus one must contemplate a work of art by itself. Even if it is connected to other fields of experience it nevertheless displays something unique which appears in that piece of art and there alone.

According to the passage, classical Egyptians did not present a person in his individual movements

Directions: This question is based on the following reading passage. Choose the best answer to the question on the basis of what is stated or implied in the passage.

Art is visible. However, everything one sees is filtered through certain conditions, some of them historical, and others, natural. The historical conditions include the material, which is used — oil, colors, and the canvas; second, a certain style, i.e., a system of rules by which things visible are submitted a priori. There can be a general style, for example, the style of Impressionism, or a particular style, for example, the individual ways in which two painters, both impressionists, paint. The natural conditions include certain unchanging psychological laws of sight, for instance, the effects of colors or optical illusions.
The conditions of art are nothing but a particular way of interpreting reality. To understand this, one can examine the difference between the classical Greek and the classical Egyptian styles. For the Greeks, the reality of the visible was given by the perspective and the situation in which the object appears; for that reason they presented a person in his individual movements. For the Egyptians, however, this was only the appearance of a transitory moment, which, according to their beliefs, was not real. Therefore, the Egyptians searched for the permanent essence and the typical character in their depiction of an object. For the Egyptians, Greek art was an illusion; for the Greeks, on the other hand, Egyptian art was unrealistic constructivism.
The way in which reality appears in art must not be regarded on its own. It is affected by many other systems of recognizing reality, including the political, religious, economic, intellectual, and social — in short, all the phenomena of human life. Moreover, art is always of a certain epoch, with its particular conception of reality. Thus, when discussing, for example, the art of ancient myth, of medieval Christianity, or that of the technological age, one must be aware that myth, Christianity, or technology was the most salient feature of the epoch.
It is paradoxical to understand art as some kind of copy of the fields of experience connected with it. So, for example, it is meaningless for the work of art as such if one compares the landscape of a painting with the landscape, which served the artist as his model. Even if the artist had tried to make what he painted as similar as possible to the model he used, the landscape which he saw is only the matter from which something completely different emerges since he has submitted its view to the a priori conditions of art: namely to the material used (colors, canvas, etc.), to his style, and even to the fact that he paints on a flat surface. Thus one must contemplate a work of art by itself. Even if it is connected to other fields of experience it nevertheless displays something unique which appears in that piece of art and there alone.

The author's claim that, a simply synchronic whole earth measurement over three decades is but a blip in the diachronic history of ice age cycles over the last tens of thousands of years would be strengthened if the author

Directions: This question is based on the following reading passage. Choose the best answer to the question on the basis of what is stated or implied in the passage.

Take a very commonplace, often discussed and critical topic: Are we detecting a greenhouse effect, and related to this, is it exacerbated by "homogenic factors," i.e., human actions? Most would be inclined to give a positive answer to both of these questions. But, if pushed, what would be the evidence, and how well grounded would it be for such affirmations?
Within scientific communities and associated scientifically informed circles, the answers have to be somewhat more ambiguous, particularly when rigorous questions concerning evidence are raised. Were scientific truth to be a matter of consensus, and some argue that scientific truth often turns out to be just that, then it is clear that there is beginning to be a kind of majority consensus among many earth science practitioners that the temperature of the Earth, particularly of the oceans, is indeed rising and that this is a crucial indicator for a possible greenhouse effect.
Most of these scientists admit that the mean oceanic temperature has risen globally in the last several decades. But this generalization depends upon how accurate measurements may be, not just for samples, but also for the whole Earth. Hot spots, for example the now four year old hot spot near New Guinea which is part of the El Niño cycle, does not count by itself because it might be balanced by cold spots elsewhere. And the fact of the matter is that "whole earth measurements" are still rare and primitive in the simple sense that we simply do not have enough thermometers out. Secondly, even if we had enough thermometers, a simply synchronic whole earth measurement over three decades is but a blip in the diachronic history of ice age cycles over the last tens of thousands of years. Thirdly, even if we know that the earth is now heating up, has an ever increasing ozone hole, and from this strange weather effects can be predicted, how much of this is due to homogenic factors, such as CFCs, CO2 increases, hydrocarbon burning, and the like? Is it really the case, as Science magazine claimed in l990, "24% of greenhouse encouraging gases are of homogenic origin"?

The author of the passage would be most likely to agree with which of the following statements about the greenhouse effect?

Directions: This question is based on the following reading passage. Choose the best answer to the question on the basis of what is stated or implied in the passage.

Take a very commonplace, often discussed and critical topic: Are we detecting a greenhouse effect, and related to this, is it exacerbated by "homogenic factors," i.e., human actions? Most would be inclined to give a positive answer to both of these questions. But, if pushed, what would be the evidence, and how well grounded would it be for such affirmations?
Within scientific communities and associated scientifically informed circles, the answers have to be somewhat more ambiguous, particularly when rigorous questions concerning evidence are raised. Were scientific truth to be a matter of consensus, and some argue that scientific truth often turns out to be just that, then it is clear that there is beginning to be a kind of majority consensus among many earth science practitioners that the temperature of the Earth, particularly of the oceans, is indeed rising and that this is a crucial indicator for a possible greenhouse effect.
Most of these scientists admit that the mean oceanic temperature has risen globally in the last several decades. But this generalization depends upon how accurate measurements may be, not just for samples, but also for the whole Earth. Hot spots, for example the now four year old hot spot near New Guinea which is part of the El Niño cycle, does not count by itself because it might be balanced by cold spots elsewhere. And the fact of the matter is that "whole earth measurements" are still rare and primitive in the simple sense that we simply do not have enough thermometers out. Secondly, even if we had enough thermometers, a simply synchronic whole earth measurement over three decades is but a blip in the diachronic history of ice age cycles over the last tens of thousands of years. Thirdly, even if we know that the earth is now heating up, has an ever increasing ozone hole, and from this strange weather effects can be predicted, how much of this is due to homogenic factors, such as CFCs, CO2 increases, hydrocarbon burning, and the like? Is it really the case, as Science magazine claimed in l990, "24% of greenhouse encouraging gases are of homogenic origin"?

In this passage the author is primarily interested in

Directions: This question is based on the following reading passage. Choose the best answer to the question on the basis of what is stated or implied in the passage.

Take a very commonplace, often discussed and critical topic: Are we detecting a greenhouse effect, and related to this, is it exacerbated by "homogenic factors," i.e., human actions? Most would be inclined to give a positive answer to both of these questions. But, if pushed, what would be the evidence, and how well grounded would it be for such affirmations?
Within scientific communities and associated scientifically informed circles, the answers have to be somewhat more ambiguous, particularly when rigorous questions concerning evidence are raised. Were scientific truth to be a matter of consensus, and some argue that scientific truth often turns out to be just that, then it is clear that there is beginning to be a kind of majority consensus among many earth science practitioners that the temperature of the Earth, particularly of the oceans, is indeed rising and that this is a crucial indicator for a possible greenhouse effect.
Most of these scientists admit that the mean oceanic temperature has risen globally in the last several decades. But this generalization depends upon how accurate measurements may be, not just for samples, but also for the whole Earth. Hot spots, for example the now four year old hot spot near New Guinea which is part of the El Niño cycle, does not count by itself because it might be balanced by cold spots elsewhere. And the fact of the matter is that "whole earth measurements" are still rare and primitive in the simple sense that we simply do not have enough thermometers out. Secondly, even if we had enough thermometers, a simply synchronic whole earth measurement over three decades is but a blip in the diachronic history of ice age cycles over the last tens of thousands of years. Thirdly, even if we know that the earth is now heating up, has an ever increasing ozone hole, and from this strange weather effects can be predicted, how much of this is due to homogenic factors, such as CFCs, CO2 increases, hydrocarbon burning, and the like? Is it really the case, as Science magazine claimed in l990, "24% of greenhouse encouraging gases are of homogenic origin"?

The author cites studies conducted at McKean University to account for why

Directions: This question is based on the following reading passage. Choose the best answer to the question on the basis of what is stated or implied in the passage.

An Australian group named Action Council on Smoking and Health (ACSH) has recently lobbied to make warnings on cigarette packets more graphic. The council proposed that striking visual photos of diseased organs should be put on at least 50% of outside packaging, in conjunction with health warnings outlining smoking hazards enumerated in a separate leaflet placed inside the cigarette packet. The ACSH claim that bland and ineffectual warnings like "Smoking is a health hazard" currently found on cigarette packets are not nearly sufficient.
Substituting those inadequate admonitions with explicit photos will provide a powerful visual stimulus to help smokers relinquish their habit. The current cautions on cigarette packets have little or no impact on smokers who have grown immune to the warnings that focus on abstract tobacco related risks and illnesses from which smokers can easily disassociate themselves. The proposed new tactics would concentrate on the perspective of the individual smoker through a demonstration of what is occurring in his body each time he reaches for a cigarette, rather than a generic cautionary word of advise.
The ACSH cited the results of recent studies conducted by psychologists at McKean University confirming that evidence related to one's own experience is more effective at influencing future behavior than a presentation of facts and figures. An further rationale for the addition of pictures to cigarette packages is the finding that smokers handle their packets 20-30 times a day, on average, thus, if graphic pictures on cigarette packets were introduced, smoker would have 20-30 chances to face the harsh reality of what damage they are doing to themselves each time they light up.
Even more essential than the pictures on the outside label, ACSH strongly advocate including warnings and helpful information in a leaflet inserted into the packet of cigarettes. Even an analgesic, ACSH adds, found in every bathroom cabinet has all possible side effects enumerated in the insert. How much more imperative is it then when the substance in question is tobacco, a dried weed that contains highly noxious nicotine that society still accepts even though it kills one of every two of its users.
Fundamentally, what is at stake here is consumer rights. Smokers should know what substances they are inhaling, and what damage they are inflicting to their bodies, though surprisingly, even today, many do not. For this reason alone, the recommendation for more graphic pictures and warnings on cigarette packets, which many seem excessive, is being seriously considered.

It can be inferred from the passage

Directions: This question is based on the following reading passage. Choose the best answer to the question on the basis of what is stated or implied in the passage.

An Australian group named Action Council on Smoking and Health (ACSH) has recently lobbied to make warnings on cigarette packets more graphic. The council proposed that striking visual photos of diseased organs should be put on at least 50% of outside packaging, in conjunction with health warnings outlining smoking hazards enumerated in a separate leaflet placed inside the cigarette packet. The ACSH claim that bland and ineffectual warnings like "Smoking is a health hazard" currently found on cigarette packets are not nearly sufficient.
Substituting those inadequate admonitions with explicit photos will provide a powerful visual stimulus to help smokers relinquish their habit. The current cautions on cigarette packets have little or no impact on smokers who have grown immune to the warnings that focus on abstract tobacco related risks and illnesses from which smokers can easily disassociate themselves. The proposed new tactics would concentrate on the perspective of the individual smoker through a demonstration of what is occurring in his body each time he reaches for a cigarette, rather than a generic cautionary word of advise.
The ACSH cited the results of recent studies conducted by psychologists at McKean University confirming that evidence related to one's own experience is more effective at influencing future behavior than a presentation of facts and figures. An further rationale for the addition of pictures to cigarette packages is the finding that smokers handle their packets 20-30 times a day, on average, thus, if graphic pictures on cigarette packets were introduced, smoker would have 20-30 chances to face the harsh reality of what damage they are doing to themselves each time they light up.
Even more essential than the pictures on the outside label, ACSH strongly advocate including warnings and helpful information in a leaflet inserted into the packet of cigarettes. Even an analgesic, ACSH adds, found in every bathroom cabinet has all possible side effects enumerated in the insert. How much more imperative is it then when the substance in question is tobacco, a dried weed that contains highly noxious nicotine that society still accepts even though it kills one of every two of its users.
Fundamentally, what is at stake here is consumer rights. Smokers should know what substances they are inhaling, and what damage they are inflicting to their bodies, though surprisingly, even today, many do not. For this reason alone, the recommendation for more graphic pictures and warnings on cigarette packets, which many seem excessive, is being seriously considered.

The passage does NOT state which of the following about smoking warnings.

Directions: This question is based on the following reading passage. Choose the best answer to the question on the basis of what is stated or implied in the passage.

An Australian group named Action Council on Smoking and Health (ACSH) has recently lobbied to make warnings on cigarette packets more graphic. The council proposed that striking visual photos of diseased organs should be put on at least 50% of outside packaging, in conjunction with health warnings outlining smoking hazards enumerated in a separate leaflet placed inside the cigarette packet. The ACSH claim that bland and ineffectual warnings like "Smoking is a health hazard" currently found on cigarette packets are not nearly sufficient.
Substituting those inadequate admonitions with explicit photos will provide a powerful visual stimulus to help smokers relinquish their habit. The current cautions on cigarette packets have little or no impact on smokers who have grown immune to the warnings that focus on abstract tobacco related risks and illnesses from which smokers can easily disassociate themselves. The proposed new tactics would concentrate on the perspective of the individual smoker through a demonstration of what is occurring in his body each time he reaches for a cigarette, rather than a generic cautionary word of advise.
The ACSH cited the results of recent studies conducted by psychologists at McKean University confirming that evidence related to one's own experience is more effective at influencing future behavior than a presentation of facts and figures. An further rationale for the addition of pictures to cigarette packages is the finding that smokers handle their packets 20-30 times a day, on average, thus, if graphic pictures on cigarette packets were introduced, smoker would have 20-30 chances to face the harsh reality of what damage they are doing to themselves each time they light up.
Even more essential than the pictures on the outside label, ACSH strongly advocate including warnings and helpful information in a leaflet inserted into the packet of cigarettes. Even an analgesic, ACSH adds, found in every bathroom cabinet has all possible side effects enumerated in the insert. How much more imperative is it then when the substance in question is tobacco, a dried weed that contains highly noxious nicotine that society still accepts even though it kills one of every two of its users.
Fundamentally, what is at stake here is consumer rights. Smokers should know what substances they are inhaling, and what damage they are inflicting to their bodies, though surprisingly, even today, many do not. For this reason alone, the recommendation for more graphic pictures and warnings on cigarette packets, which many seem excessive, is being seriously considered.

Which of the following, if true, would be most useful in supporting the claims made by the ACSH?

Directions: This question is based on the following reading passage. Choose the best answer to the question on the basis of what is stated or implied in the passage.

An Australian group named Action Council on Smoking and Health (ACSH) has recently lobbied to make warnings on cigarette packets more graphic. The council proposed that striking visual photos of diseased organs should be put on at least 50% of outside packaging, in conjunction with health warnings outlining smoking hazards enumerated in a separate leaflet placed inside the cigarette packet. The ACSH claim that bland and ineffectual warnings like "Smoking is a health hazard" currently found on cigarette packets are not nearly sufficient.
Substituting those inadequate admonitions with explicit photos will provide a powerful visual stimulus to help smokers relinquish their habit. The current cautions on cigarette packets have little or no impact on smokers who have grown immune to the warnings that focus on abstract tobacco related risks and illnesses from which smokers can easily disassociate themselves. The proposed new tactics would concentrate on the perspective of the individual smoker through a demonstration of what is occurring in his body each time he reaches for a cigarette, rather than a generic cautionary word of advise.
The ACSH cited the results of recent studies conducted by psychologists at McKean University confirming that evidence related to one's own experience is more effective at influencing future behavior than a presentation of facts and figures. An further rationale for the addition of pictures to cigarette packages is the finding that smokers handle their packets 20-30 times a day, on average, thus, if graphic pictures on cigarette packets were introduced, smoker would have 20-30 chances to face the harsh reality of what damage they are doing to themselves each time they light up.
Even more essential than the pictures on the outside label, ACSH strongly advocate including warnings and helpful information in a leaflet inserted into the packet of cigarettes. Even an analgesic, ACSH adds, found in every bathroom cabinet has all possible side effects enumerated in the insert. How much more imperative is it then when the substance in question is tobacco, a dried weed that contains highly noxious nicotine that society still accepts even though it kills one of every two of its users.
Fundamentally, what is at stake here is consumer rights. Smokers should know what substances they are inhaling, and what damage they are inflicting to their bodies, though surprisingly, even today, many do not. For this reason alone, the recommendation for more graphic pictures and warnings on cigarette packets, which many seem excessive, is being seriously considered.

Which of the following is the most suitable heading for the passage?

Directions: Read the following passage carefully and answer the question.

To listen properly is a hard job, and probably one of the toughest skills in the art of communication. Good listening has nothing to do with proper functioning of one’s auditory organs, which is assumed to be inevitable. Good listening in the sense we are interested in, is not a biological factor, but a psychological one. Your auditory organs may be in perfect order when actually you cannot use them creatively. Creative listening implies your being efficient in the art of concentration. In other words, you concentrate on what one is saying so as to make sure that you hear all that is said. At the same time, you are concentrating on hearing all that is being said you are also thinking fast, digesting what is being said allowing your mental faculties and your memory to accept what you understand and to reject what is not. Sorting out what you do not understand and storing them somewhere in your brain for future discussion. At the same time rationalising what you hear; accepting that which you find rational and rejecting that which you do not find rational.
After you have listened creatively to what you have been told, you can respond if the need arises. It is quite obvious that you respond, because the process of response enhances the art of communication. But your response ought to be only a necessary response, a response that will improve your understanding. This response should involve your mentioning some of those things you have been told but which you do not understand, or politely questioning the rationality of some of the speaker’s must enhance the communicative worth. It should not be an unnecessary argument, or an opportunity for you to express dissatisfaction or disaffection. The ability to listen properly aids communication and understanding.