Q16

[a3friedm]

For some reason I had a really hard time with this passage in general. It was surprising because I actually found it particularly interesting which is normally half the battle. I found Q16 particularly difficult. I wound up with the correct answer, but I spent way too much time trying to get there and in the end I think I just got lucky, which for the purpose of preparation I like to consider wrong anyway.

So here goes my two cents at this question

I was able to eliminate (D) and (E) quickly.
(D) Obviously this is pretty far out of scope, we have no idea the motivations behind the specialists, definitely not to the level of passionate craving

(E)Again, significantly out of scope.

It was really hard to get rid of both (A) & (C) here is my best guess

(A)I originally thought this was tempting, the author did mention the communication specialists assertion was too abstract (line 10) and lacked conclusiveness. However, the author was looking for a research model that is not in fact abstract. Rather, includes variability for individuals and cultures. Thus, I feel like this would be a bad logical continuation of the last paragraph.
Also something about "the degree to which cultural relationships" kind of set off an alarm for me. It didn't seem the author was trying to prove the assertion to a specific degree.

(C) I feel like this would be the overwhelming sucker choice and I think requires a good understanding of the whole passage, especially the purpose of the second paragraph (even more so if you missed Q17). In a more abstract sense, I think we can get rid of C because the problem with the communication specialists assertion was not so much the model, but lack there of. Line 15, "the assertion lacks empirical foundation and in some cases goes against fact.", Line 10, "based on little or no research into the place held by imported programs...". So from the information in the passage, there assertion has not described accurately the impact of external cultural influences. This is also reciprocated by the anthropologists findings in the second paragraph.

(B) on the other hand, gives us what we want to see. It is saying, that until communications specialists can approve otherwise, their assertions (which seemed to go against the evidence mentioned above) will not survive the criticisms.

Apologies for the lengthy descriptions, hope this helps and please correct me if I went wrong anywhere.

[bbirdwell]

The primary thing I see wrong with that explanation is that (B) is not the correct answer to this question Oops. Maybe that's where some of the difficulty lies?

(C) is actually the correct answer! And why? In part because of all the lines you referenced. There's no data! And the last paragraph is a call for data! If we don't get some data up in here, we'll never really know what's going on!

(A) not quite -- this author doesn't want data in order to evaluate "an abstract model." The author is critical of the existing "model" and wants data in order to discover what's actually happening.

(B) Tempting, perhaps. But we have no evidence to suggest that the current model will survive all its criticisms without this data. Too strong!

(D) "will never gain"..."passionately crave" This is an easy elimination. Far too "extreme" and emotional.

(E) Its description of the economy will not determine its usefulness! The author believes the data will be useful on numerous fronts, including the ability to empirically evaluate the current "imperialism" assertions.

Hope that helps.

[StratosM31]

(A) was tempting to me as well, but is ultimately wrong for another reason in my opinion:

this answer would make sense to me if it was talking about our specific case (cultural relationships between imported and domestic productions described by the model supposed to be developed). This choice, though, is generally talking about cultural relationships (could be literally ANYTHING) and abstract models in general.

If we leave this emphasis out, it might indeed be the case that we won't be certain to what degree this specific model could describe the relationships between imported and domestic productions, but it is way too far-fetched to assume that it will be the case for any cultural relationships and any other abstract model in the world...

In short, this answer is too generic, therefore too strong.