Text 1Dr. Sarah Chen advocates for open-access research publishing, arguing that scientific knowledge should be freely available to all researchers...
GMAT Craft and Structure : (Structure) Questions
Dr. Sarah Chen advocates for open-access research publishing, arguing that scientific knowledge should be freely available to all researchers worldwide. She believes that traditional subscription-based journals create barriers that slow scientific progress and limit collaboration between institutions with different funding levels. Chen has published extensively in open-access journals and frequently speaks at conferences about democratizing scientific information.
Text 2
Dr. Marcus Webb defends the peer-review standards of established subscription journals, arguing that their rigorous editorial processes ensure higher quality research publication. While he acknowledges that open-access publishing has merit, Webb contends that the traditional publishing model provides necessary quality controls that prevent the spread of flawed research. He worries that rapid open-access publishing may compromise scientific integrity.
Based on the texts, both authors would most likely agree with which statement?
Research quality standards are important considerations in scientific publishing.
Open-access journals provide inadequate peer review processes.
Traditional subscription journals should be completely eliminated.
Scientific collaboration between institutions needs improvement.
Step 1: Decode and Map the Passage
Part A: Passage Analysis Table
| Text from Passage | Analysis |
|---|---|
| "Dr. Sarah Chen advocates for open-access research publishing, arguing that scientific knowledge should be freely available to all researchers worldwide." |
|
| "She believes that traditional subscription-based journals create barriers that slow scientific progress and limit collaboration between institutions with different funding levels." |
|
| "Chen has published extensively in open-access journals and frequently speaks at conferences about democratizing scientific information." |
|
| "Dr. Marcus Webb defends the peer-review standards of established subscription journals, arguing that their rigorous editorial processes ensure higher quality research publication." |
|
| "While he acknowledges that open-access publishing has merit, Webb contends that the traditional publishing model provides necessary quality controls that prevent the spread of flawed research." |
|
| "He worries that rapid open-access publishing may compromise scientific integrity." |
|
Part B: Core Elements
Main Point: Two experts disagree on scientific publishing models - Chen favors open-access for accessibility, Webb favors traditional journals for quality control.
Argument Flow: Clear contrast between accessibility-focused and quality-focused approaches to scientific publishing.
Step 2: Interpret the Question
This is a fill-in-the-blank question asking us to choose the best logical connector. The answer must create the right relationship between what comes before and after the blank.
Step 3: Prethink the Answer
- Both authors care about scientific research quality and integrity - they just disagree on how best to achieve it
- Chen wants quality research to be accessible, Webb wants to maintain research standards
- Their common ground should be a shared concern for research quality
Research quality standards are important considerations in scientific publishing.
- Both demonstrate concern for research quality
Open-access journals provide inadequate peer review processes.
- Chen wouldn't agree open-access journals have inadequate peer review
Traditional subscription journals should be completely eliminated.
- Webb wouldn't agree traditional journals should be eliminated
Scientific collaboration between institutions needs improvement.
- Webb doesn't emphasize institutional collaboration as a priority