Dr. Sarah Kim and biochemist Dr. Anton Petrov developed their groundbreaking cancer treatment through an effective ______ that combined Kim's...
GMAT Craft and Structure : (Structure) Questions
Dr. Sarah Kim and biochemist Dr. Anton Petrov developed their groundbreaking cancer treatment through an effective ______ that combined Kim's pharmaceutical expertise with Petrov's innovative laboratory research methods.
Which choice completes the text with the most logical and precise word or phrase?
collaboration
disagreement
investigation
rivalry
Step 1: Decode and Map the Passage
Part A: Create Passage Analysis Table
| Text from Passage | Analysis |
|---|---|
| "Dr. Sarah Kim and biochemist Dr. Anton Petrov developed their groundbreaking cancer treatment through an effective" |
|
| [MISSING WORD] |
|
| "that combined Kim's pharmaceutical expertise with Petrov's innovative laboratory research methods." |
|
Part B: Provide Passage Architecture & Core Elements
Main Point: Two scientists with different expertise areas worked together effectively to develop an important cancer treatment.
Argument Flow: The passage establishes that two scientists achieved something significant, then explains that this achievement happened by bringing together their complementary skill sets.
Step 2: Interpret the Question Precisely
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
- The right answer should describe how two people with different expertise worked together
- It should indicate a positive, productive relationship since they achieved a groundbreaking result
- It must make sense with combining pharmaceutical expertise with laboratory research methods
- The word should capture the cooperative nature that allowed them to merge their different skills effectively
collaboration
- Collaboration means working together cooperatively toward a shared goal
- Perfectly matches our prethinking about a productive partnership
- Makes logical sense: an effective collaboration that combined their expertise
disagreement
- Disagreement suggests conflict or opposing views
- Contradicts the successful outcome described
investigation
- Investigation describes what they might have done during their research
- Does not capture the interpersonal working relationship between the two scientists
rivalry
- Rivalry suggests competition between the scientists
- Contradicts the idea of combining expertise harmoniously