How to Analyze a GRE Reading Comprehension Specific Detail Question
In recent articles, we’ve talked about how to read RC passages and we’ve also discussed how to analyze an RC practice problem when we’re studying. (I recommend reading those articles before you read this, if you haven’t already.)
Today, we’re going to do another question from the Language Power passage (follow the link for the passage!), and we’re going to analyze that question using the how to analyze a problem process. If you haven’t already read this passage (or if it has been a while since you read it), go take a look at the Language Power article first. Give yourself roughly 3 minutes to read through the passage and take notes (not much time!), then read the rest of that article.
Okay, finally, you can get started on this article! Below is the full text of the passage followed by the question (© ManhattanPrep).
Sarah Meyers McGinty, in her new book Power Talk: Using Language to Build Authority and Influence, argues that while the simple lingual act of declaring power does not help a powerless person gain influence, well-considered linguistic techniques and maneuvers do. McGinty does not dispute the importance of factors such as expertise and ability in determining stature, but argues persuasively that these power determinants amount to little in a person unable to communicate effectively. Many surveys have shown that the ability to communicate effectively is the characteristic judged by managers to be most critical in determining promotability in the workplace or an academic environment.
McGinty divides speech into two categories: “language from the center” and “language from the edge”. In McGinty’s words, “Language from the center makes a speaker sound like a leader. McGinty suggests that language from the center is not only for those in high positions of power, but also for those of lower ranks who wish to gain more power and credibility. A speaker using language from the center exhibits the following characteristics: he directs rather than responds; he makes statements rather than asks questions; he contradicts, argues, and disagrees; he uses his experience persuasively; and he maintains an air of impersonality in the workplace. McGinty suggests that the use of language from the center can alter or create a new balance of power. These assertions are supported by studies that show that people accept leadership from those they perceive to be experts.
Language from the edge stands in stark contrast to language from the center. Language from the edge is careful, exploratory, and inquiring. It is inclusive, deferential, and collaborative. A speaker using language from the edge responds rather than directs; asks questions; strives to make others feel heard and protected; and avoids argument. The main purpose of language from the center is to claim authority for a speaker, while language from the edge strives to build consensus and trust. McGinty argues that true power comes from a deep understanding of when to use which style and the ability to use both as necessary.
What distinguishes McGinty’s discussion of effective communication is her focus on communication skills as a way of gaining power; this contrasts with most workplace communication theory, which focuses on communication skills as a way of preventing misunderstandings, avoiding conflict, and fostering interpersonal relationships. McGinty, however, holds that language not only helps maintain relationships but also lends authority. According to Power Talk, effective communication skill is an understanding of how situation shapes speech and how speech shapes situation and an understanding of how speech styles and the forces that affect those styles . . . can build your authority, and enhance your credibility and impact.
According to the passage, McGinty believes that ineffective communication can undermine which of the following power determinants?
(A) experience
(B) stature
(C) expertise
(D) an air of impersonality
(E) confidence
The first thing everybody does is check the answer “ but I’m not going to tell you what it is till later. : )
Now we’re going to analyze our work. I’ve reproduced the questions from the How To Analyze article below, but in a shorter form. I’ve followed the questions with italicized notes. These italics represent what I would think to myself when analyzing this problem.
Note: I’m going to pretend that I chose answer choice D (so I got it wrong!).
1. Did I know WHAT they were trying to test?
Questions: Was I able to categorize this question? Did I comprehend all the words, vocab, concepts, and answer choices? Do I know what I’m supposed to do for questions of this type?
I knew that this was a look up or specific detail question because the question stem says According to the passage. For these, I know I’m supposed to go back into the passage to find a certain sentence (or sentences) in order to answer the question. That’s why they’re called look up questions!
2. How well did I HANDLE what they were trying to test?
Questions: How was my approach? Did I have the skills to follow through? Did I make any careless mistakes? If so, WHY did I make each mistake? How could I have made an educated guess? Do I understand the traps built into the question, including wrong answers?
I messed up on this one. I picked D; the correct answer is C. I had no idea why until I read the explanation: I was looking at the wrong place in the passage.
When I read the question, I really didn’t know where to look. I remembered reading power determinants in the passage but didn’t know where. I felt that language from the center was the more powerful type, and the question stem said something about power, so I started skimming paragraph 2, which talks about language from the center. I noticed that the paragraph lists a bunch of characteristics of someone using language from the center, including an air of impersonality, so I picked that one.
I didn’t notice, though, that at that point the passage says nothing about ineffective communication and how that can undermine something. I wasn’t looking in the right place at all.
The correct answer was actually in the first paragraph, and the key words were power determinants. I even remember, now, that paragraph 1 did talk about the importance of communicating effectively (that’s even in my notes!) and also mentioned something about ineffective communication (which I didn’t write down).
I knew that I had seen the phrase power determinants somewhere in the passage, and I should’ve scanned until I found it. If it’s actually quoted in the question stem, it must be important. Sure enough, that’s the sentence that contains the answer to the question. Here’s the relevant sentence:
McGinty does not dispute the importance of factors such as expertise and ability in determining stature, but argues persuasively that these power determinants amount to little in a person unable to communicate effectively.
The factors are the power determinants and she’s basically saying that, if you can’t communicate effectively in the first place, then it doesn’t even matter if you have expertise or ability. That’s why the correct answer is C.
3. How well did I or could I RECOGNIZE what was going on?
Questions: Did I make a connection to previous experience? Can I make any connections now, while I’m analyzing the problem? HOW will I recognize similar problems in the future?
I did recognize that this was a specific detail question. My real problem was not finding the right place in the passage. And I’ve actually made this kind of mistake before “ I sort of get impatient and just go for the first thing that sort of seems like what the question says. I need to make myself focus on the precise wording of the question.
In particular, I knew I had seen power determinants somewhere in the passage but I didn’t actually try to go find it again! Next time, when there’s a keyword like that, I have to make myself find it again. I’m always so anxious about the time that I just jump to the first thing I think of, but that’s not a good strategy because it’s likely to lead me to the wrong answer!
Also, I’m just noticing that answer B is tempting. If I had gone to the right location in the first place, I would’ve narrowed it down to B and C; both words are in the sentence. Why is it C and not B? Oh, I see. The two factors in question are expertise and ability; stature is mentioned only as what you can gain if you do have those factors. But the two factors themselves are the actual power determinants.
And there you have it “ that’s how to analyze an RC look-up or specific detail problem. Note that I didn’t answer every single question on the lists of questions. You don’t need to do that (if you tried, you’d be studying each problem for half an hour!). Rather, pick and choose the particular questions that you need based on how things went for each problem.
You can also go through some aspects of the question more quickly. I knew that I correctly recognized the problem type, so I didn’t spend much time thinking about it. I messed up on process, however, and fell into a trap, so I spent a lot more time examining how I should have known where to go “ looking for the keyword that I already knew I had seen somewhere in the passage.