Reading comp PrepTest 126 · Section 2 · Question 24
Passage
Passage walkthrough
Topic: Social Science
Paragraph 1
- Paragraph note
- "Speculative bubble" defined (price increase caused by confidence, not potential earnings); Mackay and Garber's debate on whether it applies to the 1600s Dutch tulip market
- Views, minor Meta-Structures, and the author's attitude
- Definition of a "speculative bubble": A sharp price increase that's caused by people's untested confidence in others' willingness to pay a high price, not by the potential earnings the item could derive (first sentence)
- Cause-and-effect relationship, according to the author:
- In a speculative bubble, people's confidence that others will be willing to pay a higher price for an item causes the item's price to go up; the loss of that confidence causes the price to decrease dramatically (first and second sentences)
- Example of a speculative bubble, according to Mackay:
- The 1600s Dutch tulip market (third sentence)
- Garber's view:
- There is no evidence that tulips were a speculative bubble (last sentence)
- author's attitude: "mere speculation" (first sentence); "dramatic decline" (second sentence)
Paragraph 2
- Paragraph note
- Background/Mackay's view on Dutch tulip market (rare varieties sold for a lot until 1637, when prices suddenly collapsed)
- Views, minor Meta-Structures, and the author's attitude
- Example of a rare Dutch tulip variety that commanded a high price, according to the author:
- Semper Augustus bulb that sold for today's equivalent of $11,000 in 1999 (second sentence)
- Comparison, according to the author:
- While rare varieties of bulbs sold for a lot of money, common bulb varieties sold for very little (second and third sentences)
- Mackay's view:
- The rapid rise in the price of rare bulbs attracted speculators to the Dutch tulip market, and prices increased even more until 1637, when the bubble burst (fourth and fifth sentences)
- Example of a rare Dutch tulip variety that commanded a high price, according to the author:
Paragraph 3
- Paragraph note
- Garber's argument (original bulb's price is justified due to earnings from all the bulbs created by the original)
- Views, minor Meta-Structures, and the author's attitude
- Garber's view:
- The details from Mackay's argument are true (first sentence)
- But the price commanded by the original bulb can be explained by standard pricing patterns (second and third sentence)
- The newly developed and fashionable original bulbs sell for a lot of money because you can sell a lot of their descendants to earn a return on your initial investment, even the bulbs' price drops as more of those descendants become available (fourth through seventh sentences)
- Therefore, the Dutch tulip market is not an example of a speculative bubble (last sentence)
- Garber's view:
Main Point: While Mackay argues that the seventeenth-century Dutch tulip market is an example of a speculative bubble, Garber believes that it isn't a bubble and can be explained by standard pricing patterns.
Meta-Structure?Describing a Debate: This passage uses a Describing a Debate Meta-Structure.* In such a passage, the author describes two sides of a debate without taking a side or attempting to reconcile the two sides. (If the author takes a side or attempts to resolve the debate, the passage is better understood as a "Resolving a Debate" passage.) That describes this passage. The author presents two opinions on the Dutch tulip market in the seventeenth century: Mackay's classic view and Garber's challenge to Mackay's view.
In a Describing a Debate passage, the main point is a description of both sides of the debate (or simply an assertion that there is a debate). To express the main point, we can look for whether the author provides a conclusion that summarizes both sides of the debate. The author provides such a summary in the last two sentences of the first paragraph, so we can use those sentences for any question on which we need to consider the main point. Alternatively, we can summarize both sides ourselves. We condensed that summary into one sentence and filled in some details about Garber's view in our anticipated main point.
*You could also call this a Phenomenon/Explanation passage (or, relatedly, a Question/Answer passage) because the author lists two explanations (or answers) to a phenomenon that occurred in the Dutch tulip market in the seventeenth century. Or, since the author simply describes two viewpoints without offering their own opinions, we could call this a Reporting a Viewpoint passage.
Last Thoughts?Since the author didn't advance an argument in the passage, we'll get fewer Major Point and Tone questions than usual. Expect several Minor Point and Application questions about the Dutch tulip market and Mackay and Garber's view, as well as the typical Argument Structure question.
Question prompt
Why the credited answer is right
Credited answer: B
The notes below walk through why it fits the stem and how to eliminate the rest.
Question Type
Strategy Overview
Answer Anticipation
Answer choices
-
AIf speculative bubbles occur Remaining source text redacted.
Why choice A is not credited
(A) Does this align with Garber's belief that the Dutch tulip market in the seventeenth century is not an example of a speculative bubble because the original bulbs' prices were justified due to the earnings collected from all the bulbs created from the originals?
No. We only know Garber's beliefs about whether the Dutch tulip market was a speculative bubble. Our notes don't mention his beliefs about speculative bubbles generally, so we can safely table or eliminate (A) without reviewing the passage.
Besides, we wouldn't find any support for (A) even if we re-read the entire passage. The passage never discusses Garber's opinion on other markets or the frequency of speculative bubbles, so this answer is unsupported.
-
BMany of the owners Remaining source text redacted.
Why choice B matches the stem
(B) Does this align with Garber's belief that the Dutch tulip market in the seventeenth century is not an example of a speculative bubble because the original bulbs' prices were justified due to the earnings collected from all the bulbs created from the originals?
Yep! As our note summarizes, Garber says that someone who spent a lot of money on a highly prized tulip bulb could make money by selling many of the descendant bulbs, even if each one is sold at a much lower price. This answer choice reflects that argument, so it's correct. We can justifiably select it and advance straight to the next question.
-
CIf there is not Remaining source text redacted.
Why choice C is not credited
(C) Does this align with Garber's belief that the Dutch tulip market in the seventeenth century is not an example of a speculative bubble because the original bulbs' prices were justified due to the earnings collected from all the bulbs created from the originals?
No, although this gets pretty close to a belief we can infer from Garber's argument. Garber argues that since the prices paid for the original, expensive bulbs were not irrational, the market for bulbs was not a speculative bubble (P3, S7-S8). From that argument, we can infer that Garber assumes that an "if-then" statement is true — if the prices in a market are not irrational, then the market is not a speculative bubble. This answer choice, however, erroneously flips the "if" and "then" conditions. So, we can't infer that Garber would agree with this answer choice. Perhaps Garber think sirrational prices can exist outside of a speculative bubble!
-
DMost people who invested Remaining source text redacted.
Why choice D is not credited
(D) Does this align with Garber's belief that the Dutch tulip market in the seventeenth century is not an example of a speculative bubble because the original bulbs' prices were justified due to the earnings collected from all the bulbs created from the originals?
Nope. This is way too broad in scope. We have no idea whether Garber thinks "generally" rational in "all" their investments. So, we can safely table or eliminate (D) without reviewing the passage.
Besides, we wouldn't find any support for (D) even if we re-read the entire passage. Garber argues that spending a ton of money on a tulip bulb wasn't an inherently irrational decision (P3, S7), but that leaves open the possibility that it actually was an irrational decision in certain cases. Moreover, it doesn't address the other investments that the bulb buyers may have made!
-
EMackay mistakenly infers from Remaining source text redacted.
Why choice E is not credited
(E) Does this align with Garber's belief that the Dutch tulip market in the seventeenth century is not an example of a speculative bubble because the original bulbs' prices were justified due to the earnings collected from all the bulbs created from the originals?
No. We only know that Garber disagrees with Mackay's belief that the Dutch tulip market was a speculative bubble. Our notes don't mention his beliefs about whether the low prices of the bulbs were irrational. So, we can safely table or eliminate (E) without reviewing the passage.
Besides, we wouldn't find any support for (E) even if we re-read the entire passage. Garber argues that the high prices the original bulbs commanded weren't necessarily irrational (P3, S7), so he'd probably agree that the low prices weren't irrational either. However, at no point does the passage say that Mackay viewed the low prices that these bulbs sold for as irrational. In fact, since he was arguing that the bulb market was a speculative bubble, he would believe that the bulbs didn't have high value. Therefore, he must also believe that paying little money for them was perfectly rational.
What this tests
Question analytics
Based on historical answer selection rates for this question.
Answer choice distribution
Accounts
Save your place across PrepTests
Bookmark questions, build weak-spot lists, and pick up exactly where you left off—built for serious repeat practice.
No payment yet. We will only email when accounts open.
Already have an account? Log in
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
-
How is B correct ? 1 reply
Started by Nativeguy
-
Why not E 1 reply
Started by alliehall21
-
Choice C 1 reply
Started by Meredith