In a series of experiments, Julio Sevilla and Claudia Townsend showed that manipulating the space between products in store displays...
GMAT Information and Ideas : (Ideas) Questions
In a series of experiments, Julio Sevilla and Claudia Townsend showed that manipulating the space between products in store displays can influence consumers' views of those products. Participants in several of the experiments regarded the same products in the same (generic) retail settings as significantly more valuable when the product-to-space ratio was low than when it was high. But in one of the experiments, Sevilla and Townsend arranged the same jewelry with different levels of intervening space at an upscale retailer (Tiffany & Co.) and a relatively inexpensive retailer (Forever 21). The result of this experiment suggests that a store context associated with inexpensive products may moderate the effect Sevilla and Townsend observed in their other experiments.
Which finding from the experiment with Tiffany & Co. and Forever 21, if true, would most directly support the conclusion presented in the text?
Step 1: Decode and Map the Passage
Part A: Passage Analysis Table
| Text from Passage | Analysis |
|---|---|
| 'In a series of experiments, Julio Sevilla and Claudia Townsend showed that manipulating the space between products in store displays can influence consumers' views of those products.' |
|
| 'Participants in several of the experiments regarded the same products in the same (generic) retail settings as significantly more valuable when the product-to-space ratio was low than when it was high.' |
|
| 'But in one of the experiments, Sevilla and Townsend arranged the same jewelry with different levels of intervening space at an upscale retailer (Tiffany & Co.) and a relatively inexpensive retailer (Forever 21).' |
|
| 'The result of this experiment suggests that a store context associated with inexpensive products may moderate the effect Sevilla and Townsend observed in their other experiments.' |
|
Part B: Passage Architecture & Core Elements
Main Point: Research suggests that the effect of product spacing on perceived value may be weakened in stores associated with inexpensive products.
Argument Flow: The passage first establishes that spacing affects how valuable products seem, with more space leading to higher perceived value. It then introduces a specific experiment comparing an upscale store with an inexpensive store, concluding that the store's price context might moderate this spacing effect.
Step 2: Interpret the Question Precisely
What's being asked? Which experimental finding would most directly support the conclusion that inexpensive store context moderates the spacing effect.
What type of answer do we need? Evidence that shows the spacing effect works differently (presumably weaker) at Forever 21 compared to Tiffany & Co.
Any limiting keywords? 'Most directly support' - we need the finding that provides the strongest, clearest evidence for the moderation conclusion.
Step 3: Prethink the Answer
- The conclusion says that inexpensive store context 'may moderate the effect' - this means the spacing effect should be weaker or less pronounced at Forever 21 than at Tiffany & Co.
- The original effect was that more space makes products seem more valuable, so we need to see this effect working strongly at the upscale store but being reduced or weakened at the inexpensive store.
- So the right answer should show the spacing effect (more space = higher value) working clearly at Tiffany but being diminished at Forever 21.
- Shows spacing effect works substantially at Tiffany (far apart much more valuable than close together)
- Shows spacing effect works only slightly at Forever 21 (far apart barely more valuable than close together)
- Perfectly demonstrates moderation - same effect but much weaker at the inexpensive store
- Directly supports the conclusion that cheap store context reduces the spacing effect
- Says far apart jewelry is less valuable than close together at both stores
- This contradicts the basic research finding that more space increases perceived value
- While it shows different degrees at different stores, it gets the direction completely wrong
- Focuses on comparing jewelry values across stores rather than comparing the spacing effect within each store
- Doesn't show whether spacing affects perceived value differently at each store
- Students might focus on store-to-store value differences rather than how spacing effects differ by store context
- Again compares values across stores rather than examining how spacing affects perception within each store
- The pattern described doesn't align with testing the moderation of spacing effects
- Students might think any difference between stores supports the conclusion, missing that we need to see how the spacing effect itself varies