Marine biologists Dr. Sarah Chen and her research team published their coral reef restoration study in 2023's Journal of Marine...
GMAT Information and Ideas : (Ideas) Questions
Marine biologists Dr. Sarah Chen and her research team published their coral reef restoration study in 2023's Journal of Marine Biology. The article follows standard academic formatting and explicitly states its purpose as sharing methodology with the marine biology community. Yet several features stand out: basic coral biology concepts receive extensive explanation despite the specialized readership, policy implications dominate the discussion section, and implementation guides target resource-limited communities rather than well-funded research institutions. Additionally, the economic analysis reads more like a policy brief than a research paper, while quotes from environmental activists appear alongside traditional scientific citations. These elements suggest that _____
Which choice most logically completes the text?
the research team intended to reach multiple types of readers.
many marine biologists disagreed with the team's conclusions.
aspects of the study were influenced by previous restoration research.
the journal's editorial standards may have been compromised.
Step 1: Decode and Map the Passage
Part A: Passage Analysis Table
| Text from Passage | Analysis |
|---|---|
| Marine biologists Dr. Sarah Chen and her research team published their coral reef restoration study in 2023's Journal of Marine Biology. |
|
| The article follows standard academic formatting and explicitly states its purpose as sharing methodology with the marine biology community. |
|
| Yet several features stand out: |
|
| basic coral biology concepts receive extensive explanation despite the specialized readership, |
|
| policy implications dominate the discussion section, |
|
| and implementation guides target resource-limited communities rather than well-funded research institutions. |
|
| Additionally, the economic analysis reads more like a policy brief than a research paper, |
|
| while quotes from environmental activists appear alongside traditional scientific citations. |
|
| These elements suggest that _____ |
|
Part B: Passage Architecture & Core Elements
Main Point: Despite appearing as a standard academic paper for marine biologists, Dr. Chen's coral reef study contains multiple unusual features that suggest a broader intended audience.
Argument Flow: The passage establishes that the study appears conventional on the surface with standard formatting and a stated purpose for marine biologists. However, it then contrasts this with five specific unusual features that do not align with writing for specialists alone. These features collectively point toward an unstated broader purpose or audience.
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 passage shows us that while the study looks like a standard academic paper for marine biologists, it has several features that do not make sense for that audience alone
- Basic concepts are over-explained to specialists, policy implications get heavy focus, implementation guides target poor communities instead of research institutions, the economic analysis resembles policy writing, and activist quotes appear with scientific sources
- All of these unusual features point in the same direction - they suggest the research team was trying to reach people beyond just marine biologists
- The over-explanations would help general readers, the policy focus would appeal to policymakers, the community-focused guides would help practitioners, and the activist quotes would resonate with environmental advocates
- So the right answer should indicate that the research team intended to reach multiple different types of readers or audiences, not just the stated marine biology community
the research team intended to reach multiple types of readers.
✓ Correct
- This directly matches our prethinking - the unusual features all point toward reaching different audiences
- The over-explanations help general readers, policy focus appeals to policymakers, community guides help practitioners, and activist quotes resonate with advocates
- Perfectly explains why a paper would have all these non-standard elements
many marine biologists disagreed with the team's conclusions.
✗ Incorrect
- Says marine biologists disagreed with conclusions, but passage gives no evidence of disagreement
- The unusual features are not about controversial conclusions - they are about writing style and content focus
- Nothing in our analysis suggests controversy among marine biologists
aspects of the study were influenced by previous restoration research.
✗ Incorrect
- Claims the study was influenced by previous restoration research, but this does not explain the unusual features
- All research builds on previous work - this would not explain why basic concepts are over-explained or why activist quotes appear
- What trap this represents: Students might think research influence sounds academic and scientific, but it does not address the specific evidence in the passage
the journal's editorial standards may have been compromised.
✗ Incorrect
- Suggests the journal's editorial standards were compromised, but this is unsupported and unnecessarily negative
- The passage describes the formatting as standard and does not criticize the journal
- What trap this represents: Students might think unusual features indicate poor editing, but the passage treats these features as deliberate choices, not editorial failures