Reading comp PrepTest 101 · Section 1 · Question 3

Passage

Questions 1-6  .        To many developers of technologies that affect  . public health or the environment, "risk  . communication" Remaining source text redacted.
Passage walkthrough
Passage Summary

Topic: Social Sciences


Paragraph 1

  • Paragraph note
    • Two views of "risk communications" (tech devs: risk minimization; lay people: brainwashing)
  • Views, minor Meta-Structures, and the author's attitude
    • View of developers of tech that affects public health/environment:
      • "Risk communication" means convincing people that the risk of tech is low, so they cite studies that show that people overestimate "exotic hazards" while underestimating "mundane hazards" (first and second sentences)
    • Views of many lay people:
      • "Risk communication" refers to brainwashing done by experts (last sentence)

Paragraph 2

  • Paragraph note
    • Author's view (risk communicators should understand how people perceive risk)
  • Views, minor Meta-Structures, and the author's attitude
    • Author's view:
      • Risk communicators should help people make informed decisions about tech, so they need to understand how the public sees risk (first sentence)
      • Although lay people allow ethics to influence how they view risk, they often possess accurate knowledge about risk (fourth sentence)
    • Comparison, according to the author:
      • Lay people's understanding of risk involves ethics more than experts' understanding (second sentence)
    • Example of how lay people understand risk, according to the author:
      • More likely to be concerned about a small risk to children than a big risk to adults who benefit from the technology (third sentence)
      • A study showed that lay people, given time and facts, understood risks of electromagnetic fields (last sentence)
    • Example of questionable methods used by the studies referenced in the first paragraph, according to the author:
      • Asking lay people to rank risks that are difficult to compare (fifth sentence)
    • Author's attitude: "should be" (first sentence); "a clear understanding about how the public perceives risk is needed" (first sentence); "are more likely to" (second sentence); "quite reasonable estimates" (fourth sentence); "they have substantial knowledge" (fourth sentence); "questionable methods" (fifth sentence); "they understood" (last sentence); "well enough" (last sentence)

Paragraph 3

  • Paragraph note
    • Author's new approach (risk communicators should take into account people's knowledge/beliefs) and premise (study on radon)
  • Views, minor Meta-Structures, and the author's attitude
    • Author's view:
      • Risk communication should be based on the principle that people process new information based on their existing knowledge (first sentence)
      • If people know nothing or are uninformed, messages about risk will probably be lost or misconstrued, so risk communicators need to know what people believe and tailor their message accordingly (second through last sentences)
    • Example of risk communicators' need to know what people believe, according to the author:
      • In a study about the risk of radon, subjects who were given the researchers' brochure on risks — which was based on interviews with the subjects — did better than a group that was given a brochure not based on such interviews (fifth through seventh sentences)
    • Author’s attitude: “should” (first sentence); “will find” (second sentence); “likely to” (third sentence); “need to know” (fourth sentence); “need was demonstrated” (fifth sentence); “careful preparation can help” (last sentence); “balanced material that tells people what they need to know” (last sentence)

Main Point: Risk communication should take into account people's existing knowledge and beliefs to help these people make informed decisions about risk.

Key Lines?

Paragraph 2, Sentence 1 (P2, S1) - Author's response to risk communicators' old approach

P3, S8 - Author's new approach

Meta-Structure?

Old Approach/New Approach: The Old Approach/New Approach Meta-Structure best fits this passage.* The author takes issue with the old approach to risk communication: assume that people overestimate new or exotic technological risks and try to convince them to ignore that risk (P1, S2). The author responds that this approach doesn't help people make informed decisions about risk (P2, S1) and underestimates people's relatively accurate understanding of risk (P2, S4). In its place, the author recommends a new approach: figure out what people already know about the new technologies and incorporate that into how you communicate the associated risks (P3, S8).

In an Old Approach/New Approach passage, the author’s opinion on the new approach is generally the main point. We can look for whether the author provides a conclusion that summarizes their opinion on the new approach. Fortunately, the author's last sentence summarizes their favorable opinion of the new approach. We used that as the basis for our anticipated main point.

*Several other Critical Meta-Structures could describe this passage as well. One could reasonably conclude that this passage uses a Criticizing a Viewpoint or Correcting the Record Meta-Structure. We could even argue that there’s a whiff of Resolving a Debate in this passage if we say the author is resolving the debate between technology developers and lay people.

Example: The most prominent minor Meta-Structure is the example. The author uses several examples throughout the passage, but the two most important are the studies in the second and third paragraphs. Expect one or two Minor Point or Argument Structure questions about those.

Last Thoughts?

There are three viewpoints in this passage (risk communicators’, lay people’s, the author’s), so expect a few questions about these views. So, if you think you can remember each group’s views, you can really speed through these questions. To help us remember each view, let’s summarize each view into a bite-size chunk:

  • Risk communicators: Persuade people that technology isn’t dangerous by showing they overestimate unfamiliar risks
  • Lay people: Risk communicators try to brainwash people
  • The author: Risk communication can help people make informed decisions if it factors in people’s preexisting beliefs

Question prompt

According to the passage, Remaining source text redacted.
Why the credited answer is right

Credited answer: C

The notes below walk through why it fits the stem and how to eliminate the rest.

Question Type

Science

Strategy Overview

Refer to notes or what you highlighted/underline to locate where the passage discusses lay people with mistaken beliefs, and refer to the relevant part of the passage as needed to find that answer choice that must be true

Answer Anticipation

For questions that ask us to infer, from a few details in the passage, an answer choice that must be true, quickly finding and reviewing those details is critical. That is why we make brief notes describing the role of each paragraph and highlight or underline definitions and the minor Meta-Structures — doing so helps us find the salient information efficiently and reliably. Once we review that part of the passage, we can look through the answer choices to see which one is best supported by what we reviewed. Since the question stem asks us to make an inference, the correct answer probably won't restate something from the passage. Instead, the question will likely require us to draw a connection between a few different pieces of information.Here, the question asks what would happen when risk communicators attempt to communicate with lay people who have mistaken ideas about a particular technology. Where did the passage discuss such lay people? Our note for the third paragraph is, "Author's new approach (risk communicators should take into account people's knowledge/beliefs) and premise (study on radon)." The reference to "people's knowledge/beliefs" suggests the answer is in that paragraph. Upon reviewing the third paragraph, the author says that if lay people "have erroneous beliefs, they are likely to misconstrue the messages" from risk communicators (P3, S3). So, let's look for an answer choice that says lay people are likely to misinterpret risk communicators' messages.

Answer choices

  1. A
    The lay people, perceiving Remaining source text redacted.
    Why choice A is not credited

    (A) Does this say that lay people are likely to misinterpret risk communicators' messages?

    Nope. We can cross off (A) simply because it doesn't match our anticipation.

    Besides, if we reviewed the third paragraph further, we'd see that the author says that "people process new information in the context of their existing beliefs" (P3, S1). That suggests that people won't suddenly discard their beliefs when confronted with new information. So, (A) is probably false.

  2. B
    The lay people will Remaining source text redacted.
    Why choice B is not credited

    (B) Does this say that lay people are likely to misinterpret risk communicators' messages?

    No, so we can eliminate (B) without giving it a second thought.

    Besides, this is just a slightly less bold version of (A). If we reviewed the third paragraph further, we'd see that the author says that "people process new information in the context of their existing beliefs" (P3, S1). That suggests that people won't suddenly discard their beliefs — even if only partially — when confronted with new information. So, (B) is probably false.

  3. C
    The lay people, fitting Remaining source text redacted.
    Why choice C matches the stem

    (C) Does this say that lay people are likely to misinterpret risk communicators' messages?

    Yep. Saying that lay people will "interpret the communication differently than the risk communicators had intended" is just a wordier way of saying that lay people will misinterpret the risk communicators' message.

    This answer choice also says that lay people will fit "the new information into their existing framework." If you don't remember that this is supported, you may want to review the third paragraph further. At the beginning, the author says that "people process new information in the context of their existing beliefs" (P3, S1), which shows that (C) is fully supported by the passage. We can select it and advance straight to the following question.

  4. D
    The lay people, misunderstanding Remaining source text redacted.
    Why choice D is not credited

    (D) Does this say that lay people are likely to misinterpret risk communicators' messages?

    Yes, but it also says something the passage doesn't support. The passage never tells us what happens when lay people try to communicate risk to other lay people. We didn't read about that in our review of the third paragraph, and neither our notes nor our main point suggest that is a topic of this passage. So, we can eliminate (D).

  5. E
    The lay people will Remaining source text redacted.
    Why choice E is not credited

    (E) Does this say that lay people are likely to misinterpret risk communicators' messages?

    No. We can cross off (E) for this reason. Besides, the passage doesn't say lay people ignore communications about technological risks. If we reviewed the third paragraph further, we'd see that the author says that "people process new information in the context of their existing beliefs" (P3, S1). People can't process new information without first paying attention to that information, so (E) is almost certainly false.

What this tests

Question analytics

Based on historical answer selection rates for this question.

Answer choice distribution

  1. A 9%
  2. B 4%
  3. C Credited 76%
  4. D 8%
  5. E 3%

Deeper help

Ask follow-ups on any step

Optional AI tutor mode will let you interrogate assumptions, compare answers, and drill weak patterns without leaving the page.

Human-written explanations stay primary; AI is an add-on when you want it.

Discussion

View all discussions Start a discussion