Free MCAT Test Exam Braindumps (page: 7)

Page 7 of 203

Muzak, the intentionally unobtrusive music that most people associate with elevators and dentists' waiting rooms, represents the paradoxical success story of a product designed to be ignored. Although few people admit to enjoying its blandly melodic sounds, Muzak reaches over 100 million listeners in 14 countries and has played in the White House, the Apollo lunar spacecraft, and countless supermarkets, offices, and factories. This odd combination of criticism and widespread acceptance is not surprising, however, when one considers that Muzak is not created for the enjoyment of its listeners: rather, its purpose is to modify physiological and psychological aspects of an environment.
In the workplace, Muzak is credited with increasing both productivity and profitability. Research into the relationship between music and productivity can be traced to the earliest days of the Muzak Corporation. Developed by a military officer in 1922 as a way of transmitting music through electrical wires, Muzak blossomed in the 1930's following a study which reported that people work harder when they listen to certain kinds of music. Impressed by these findings, the BBC began to broadcast music in English munitions factories during World War II in an effort to combat fatigue. When workers assembling weapons increased their output

by 6 percent, the U.S. War Production Board contracted the Muzak Corporation to provide uplifting music to American factories. Today, the corporation broadcasts its "Environmental Music" to countless businesses and institutions throughout the world. And while most people claim to dislike Muzak's discreet cadences, it seems to positively influence both productivity and job satisfaction.
Researchers speculate that listening to Muzak and other soft music improves morale and reduces stress by modifying our physiology. Physiological changes such as lowered heart rate and decreased blood pressure have been documented in hospital studies testing the effect of calming music on cardiac patients. In addition, certain kinds of music seem to effect one's sense of emotional, as well as physical, well being. It is just this sort of satisfaction which is thought to result in increased performance in the workplace. In a study of people performing repetitive clerical tasks, those who listened to music performed more accurately and quickly than those who worked in silence; those who listened to Muzak did better still. Moreover, while Muzak was conceived as a tool for productivity, it also seems to influence a business' profitability. In an experiment in which supermarket shoppers shopped to the mellow sounds of Muzak, sales were increased by as much as 12 percent.
What makes Muzak unique is a formula by which familiar tunes are modified and programmed. Careful instrumentation adds to an overall sound that is neither monotonous nor rousing. But it is the precisely timed programming that separates Muzak from other "easy listening" formats. At the core of the programming is the concept of the "Stimulus Progression". Muzak programs are divided into quarter-hour groupings of songs, and are specifically planned for the time of day at which they will be heard. Each composition is assigned a mood rating between 1 and 6 called a stimulus value; a song with a rating of 2, for example, is slower and less invigorating than one with a value of 5. Approximately six compositions with ascending stimulus values play during any given quarter hour; each 15-minute segment ends in silence. Each segment of a 24-hour program is carefully planned. Segments that are considered more stimulating air at 11 a.m. and 3 p.m. (the times when workers typically tire), while more soothing segments play just after lunchtime and towards the end of the day, when workers are likely to be restless.
From the point of view of management, then, Muzak is a useful tool in the effort to maximize both productivity and profits. However, some people object to its presence, labeling it as a type of unregulated air pollution. Still others see it as an Orwellian nightmare, a manipulation of the subconscious. But Muzak's effectiveness seems to lie in the fact that most people never really listen to it. While it may be true that no one actually likes this carefully crafted aural atmosphere, many simply ignore it, allowing its forgettable sounds to soften the contours of the day.
According to the passage, Muzak differs from other "easy listening" formats in that Muzak:
I). produces measurable health benefits.
II). improves workers' job performances.
III). is programmed in order to effect behavioral changes.

  1. I only
  2. II only
  3. III only
  4. II and III only.

Answer(s): C

Explanation:

This asks how Muzak differs from other easy listening formats. The first sentence of the third paragraph states that listening to Muzak and other soft music may produce health benefits. Since the passage states that soft music in general, and not Muzak in particular, seems to positively influence health, option I is not a distinction between Muzak and other "easy listening" formats. In that same paragraph the author claims that people who listened to Muzak and those who listened to other forms of music performed better in their jobs than those who worked in silence. Therefore, option II is also not distinctive of Muzak. However, the fourth paragraph describes how Muzak, unlike other easy listening formats, is carefully programmed to effect behavioral changes. Since III is the only option which describes how Muzak is different from other easy listening formats, the answer is choice (C), III only.



Muzak, the intentionally unobtrusive music that most people associate with elevators and dentists' waiting rooms, represents the paradoxical success story of a product designed to be ignored. Although few people admit to enjoying its blandly melodic sounds, Muzak reaches over 100 million listeners in 14 countries and has played in the White House, the Apollo lunar spacecraft, and countless supermarkets, offices, and factories. This odd combination of criticism and widespread acceptance is not surprising, however, when one considers that Muzak is not created for the enjoyment of its listeners: rather, its purpose is to modify physiological and psychological aspects of an environment.
In the workplace, Muzak is credited with increasing both productivity and profitability. Research into the relationship between music and productivity can be traced to the earliest days of the Muzak Corporation. Developed by a military officer in 1922 as a way of transmitting music through electrical wires, Muzak blossomed in the 1930's following a study which reported that people work harder when they listen to certain kinds of music. Impressed by these findings, the BBC began to broadcast music in English munitions factories during World War II in an effort to combat fatigue. When workers assembling weapons increased their output by 6 percent, the U.S. War Production Board contracted the Muzak Corporation to provide uplifting music to American factories. Today, the corporation broadcasts its "Environmental Music" to countless businesses and institutions throughout the world. And while most people claim to dislike Muzak's discreet cadences, it seems to positively influence both productivity and job satisfaction.
Researchers speculate that listening to Muzak and other soft music improves morale and reduces stress by modifying our physiology. Physiological changes such as lowered heart rate and decreased blood pressure have been documented in hospital studies testing the effect of calming music on cardiac patients. In addition, certain kinds of music seem to effect one's sense of emotional, as well as physical, well being. It is just this sort of satisfaction which is thought to result in increased performance in the workplace. In a study of people performing repetitive clerical tasks, those who listened to music performed more accurately and quickly than those who worked in silence; those who listened to Muzak did better still. Moreover, while Muzak was conceived as a tool for productivity, it also seems to influence a business' profitability. In an experiment in which supermarket shoppers shopped to the mellow sounds of Muzak, sales were increased by as much as 12 percent.
What makes Muzak unique is a formula by which familiar tunes are modified and programmed. Careful instrumentation adds to an overall sound that is neither monotonous nor rousing. But it is the precisely timed programming that separates Muzak from other "easy listening" formats. At the core of the programming is the concept of the "Stimulus Progression". Muzak programs are divided into quarter-hour groupings of songs, and are specifically planned for the time of day at which they will be heard. Each composition is assigned a mood rating between 1 and 6 called a stimulus value; a song with a rating of 2, for example, is slower and less invigorating than one with a value of 5. Approximately six compositions with ascending stimulus values play during any given quarter hour; each 15-minute segment ends in silence. Each segment of a 24-hour program is carefully planned. Segments that are considered more stimulating air at 11 a.m. and 3 p.m. (the times when workers typically tire), while more soothing segments play just after lunchtime and towards the end of the day, when workers are likely to be restless.
From the point of view of management, then, Muzak is a useful tool in the effort to maximize both productivity and profits. However, some people object to its presence, labeling it as a type of unregulated air pollution. Still others see it as an Orwellian nightmare, a manipulation of the subconscious. But Muzak's effectiveness seems to lie in the fact that most people never really listen to it. While it may be true that no one actually likes this carefully crafted aural atmosphere, many simply ignore it, allowing its forgettable sounds to soften the contours of the day.
It can be inferred from the statements in the passage that the author regards Muzak as:

  1. a paradoxical phenomenon.
  2. an unnecessary evil.
  3. a violation of privacy.
  4. a pleasurable diversion.

Answer(s): A

Explanation:

This is a question regarding the author's view of Muzak. In the first sentence of the passage the author writes that Muzak represents the "paradoxical success story of a product designed to be ignored". Later, in the last sentence of the passage, the author notes that although no one really seems to like Muzak, they do not seem to object to it either. Rather, people appear to ignore it and allow it to fade into the background of the day. From this, we can infer that the author finds Muzak to be a paradoxical phenomenon, choice (A). In the last paragraph, the author describes a few objections raised against Muzak. But these are the objections of other critics, not those of the author. The author's tone is not condemnatory enough to suggest she herself regards Muzak as an unnecessary evil, choice (B), or a violation of privacy, choice (C). Neither is the author's tone particularly laudatory, as choice (D), "a pleasurable diversion", would suggest. In fact, in the last sentence the author states that no one likes Muzak, and in no way suggests that anyone would regard it as a pleasurable diversion.



The Russian wheat aphid, Diuraphis noxia, is a small green insect discovered in southern Russia around the turn of the century. Agricultural researchers are not quite sure, but they believe the Russian aphid adapted itself to wheat about ten thousand years ago, when the crop was first domesticated by man. What is not in doubt is the insect's destructiveness. Spread by both wind and human transport, the Russian aphid has destroyed wheat fields throughout Asia, Africa, and Latin America. Until a few years ago, the United States had been free of this pest. But in the spring of 1986, a swarm of Russian aphids crossed the Mexican border and settled a few hundred miles north, in central Texas. From there, it quickly spread to other Western states, destroying wheat fields all along its path. In fact, the level of destruction has been so great over the past five years that entomologists are calling the Russian aphid the greatest threat to American agriculture since the Hessian fly, Phytophaga destructor, was inadvertently brought to the colonies on ships by German mercenary troops during the Revolutionary War. A combination of several factors have made it particularly difficult to deal with the threat posed by this aphid. First, Russian aphids reproduce asexually at a phenomenal rate. This process, known as parthenogenesis, often results in as many as twenty generations of insects in a single year. Although most generations remain in a limited geographic area because they have no wings, a few generations are born with wings, allowing the insect to spread to new areas. Second, because wheat is a crop with a very low profit margin, most American farmers do not spray it with pesticides; it simply is not economical to do so. And since the Russian aphid has only recently entered the United States, it has no natural enemies among North American insects or animals. As a result, there have been no man-made or natural obstacles to the spread of the Russian aphid in the United States.
Agricultural researchers seeking to control the Russian aphid have looked to its place of origin for answers. In the Soviet Union, the Russian aphid has been kept in check by predators which have evolved alongside it over many thousands of years. One species of wasp seems to be particularly efficient at destroying the aphid. The pregnant females of the species search the Russian aphid's home, the interior of a wheat stalk, sting the aphid into paralysis, and then inject an egg into its body. When the egg hatches the wasp larva feeds off of the aphid, killing it in the process.
The introduction of predators like the wasp, coupled with the breeding of new strains of insect-resistant wheat, may substantially curb the destructiveness of the Russian aphid in the future. For the time being, however, American farmers are left to their own devices when it comes to protecting their wheat crops.
Which of the following statements would be most in agreement with the statements in the passage?

  1. It is no longer economical to grow crops with low profit margins.
  2. Humans are powerless against the forces of nature.
  3. Regional ecosystems are often severely damaged when new organisms are introduced.
  4. It is more difficult to stop the spread of an insect that reproduces asexually than one that reproduces sexually.

Answer(s): C

Explanation:

This is an application question asking you to determine which of four general statements most closely reflects ideas contained in the passage.
One way to successfully approach this kind of question is to go through the options, considering the appropriateness of each and keeping an eye out for the one that really sounds consistent with the focus of the passage. Choice (A) indicates that it is no longer economical to grow crops with low profit margins. But the passage neither states nor suggests this. The only point in the passage regarding the economics of farming, made in the fifth sentence of the third paragraph, states that American farmers do not spray their wheat crops with pesticides because it is not economically logical to spray such low-profit mar- gin crops with expensive pesticides. In other words, it is not economical to spray these crops, but that doesn't mean it is not economical to grow them at all. Furthermore, this passage concerns just one type of crop ­ wheat crops. One cannot generalize this passage to make a statement regarding all low profit-margin crops, so there's no basis for supporting choice (A). The sentiment expressed in choice (B), that of human powerlessness in the face of nature, seems to be contradicted by the passage. The fourth and fifth paragraphs state that agricultural researchers are examining methods for controlling the Russian aphid in the United States, particularly by importing its natural enemies to the United States and breeding insect-resistant strains of wheat, and that these methods may curb the aphid's future destructiveness. In other words, the passage suggests that it probably is possible for humans to exercise some control over nature, so choice (B) is wrong. Choice (C) appears to accurately reflect one of the passage's principal ideas. The passage, particularly the first three paragraphs, strongly suggests that the Russian aphid has caused a great deal of destruction in areas outside of the Soviet Union because these areas had no natural defenses against this insect. Thus, a general statement to the effect that regional ecosystems are often severely damaged when new organisms are introduced into them, choice (C), accurately reflects a major idea conveyed in this passage and is the correct answer. Finally, the passage does indeed suggest, in the first two sentences of the third paragraph, that the aphid's rapid asexual reproduction is one reason for the difficulty in controlling this pest, but it would be wrong to read into this one detail of the passage that it is always more difficult to control asexual insects, so choice (D) is wrong. Notice that all of the incorrect choices in this question are strongly-worded generalizations ­ sweeping conclusions which go way beyond the scope of this passage. Only choice (C) is strongly supported by the passage and is correct.



The Russian wheat aphid, Diuraphis noxia, is a small green insect discovered in southern Russia around the turn of the century. Agricultural researchers are not quite sure, but they believe the Russian aphid adapted itself to wheat about ten thousand years ago, when the crop was first domesticated by man. What is not in doubt is the insect's destructiveness. Spread by both wind and human transport, the Russian aphid has destroyed wheat fields throughout Asia, Africa, and Latin America. Until a few years ago, the United States had been free of this pest. But in the spring of 1986, a swarm of Russian aphids crossed the Mexican border and settled a few hundred miles north, in central Texas. From there, it quickly spread to other Western states, destroying wheat fields all along its path. In fact, the level of destruction has been so great over the past five years that entomologists are calling the Russian aphid the greatest threat to American agriculture since the Hessian fly, Phytophaga destructor, was inadvertently brought to the colonies on ships by German mercenary troops during the Revolutionary War. A combination of several factors has made it particularly difficult to deal with the threat posed by this aphid. First, Russian aphids reproduce asexually at a phenomenal rate. This process, known as parthenogenesis, often results in as many as twenty generations of insects in a single year. Although most generations remain in a limited geographic area because they have no wings, a few generations are born with wings, allowing the insect to spread to new areas. Second, because wheat is a crop with a very low profit margin, most American farmers do not spray it with pesticides; it simply is not economical to do so. And since the Russian aphid has only recently entered the United States, it has no natural enemies among North American insects or animals. As a result, there have been no man-made or natural obstacles to the spread of the Russian aphid in the United States.
Agricultural researchers seeking to control the Russian aphid have looked to its place of origin for answers. In

the Soviet Union, the Russian aphid has been kept in check by predators which have evolved alongside it over many thousands of years. One species of wasp seems to be particularly efficient at destroying the aphid. The pregnant females of the species search the Russian aphid's home, the interior of a wheat stalk, sting the aphid into paralysis, and then inject an egg into its body. When the egg hatches the wasp larva feeds off of the aphid, killing it in the process.
The introduction of predators like the wasp, coupled with the breeding of new strains of insect-resistant wheat, may substantially curb the destructiveness of the Russian aphid in the future. For the time being, however, American farmers are left to their own devices when it comes to protecting their wheat crops.
According to the passage, which of the following statements is/are true of Russian wheat aphids?
I). Most are capable of flight.
II). They are resistant to pesticides.
III). They are capable of spreading rapidly.

  1. II only
  2. III only
  3. I and II only
  4. II and III only

Answer(s): B

Explanation:

This is a scattered detail question in Roman numeral format. It's scattered in the sense that the reader must scan various parts of the passage in order to pinpoint the details the question requires. The fourth sentence of the third paragraph tells us that most Russian aphids are born without wings only a few generations have them), so most can't fly, making option I a false statement. Option II suggests that aphids are resistant to pesticides. We have no basis for concluding that this is true because the passage doesn't provide any information about whether or not Russian aphids are resistant to pesticides. In fact, the only piece of information the passage provides about pesticides is the fact, stated in the middle of the third paragraph, that American farmers haven't used pesticides against the Russian aphid for economic reasons. So far, then, neither options I nor II are true statements. The third sentence of the second paragraph asserts that once Russian aphids invaded the United States, they spread rapidly to different areas. Option III, therefore, is a true statement. They are capable of spreading rapidly.



Page 7 of 203



Post your Comments and Discuss Test Prep MCAT Test exam with other Community members:

ileana commented on October 12, 2024
I can not access in this moc, is it available in other url?
Anonymous
upvote

edward commented on October 12, 2024
Passed with flying colors. Amazing material... came word by word.
Anonymous
upvote

Calisto MF Moniz commented on October 12, 2024
No comment for this form for the time being.
Anonymous
upvote

Calisto MF Moniz commented on October 12, 2024
Good mechanism for Security expertise practices!
Anonymous
upvote

Meraj commented on October 12, 2024
The exam is super duper hard. You use these exam dumps to only pass. If you don't have the questions it is not easy to pass.
INDIA
upvote

Lucas commented on October 12, 2024
Its so good.
Anonymous
upvote

Iwada commented on October 12, 2024
The answers and questions are valid. I believe this site trusted and anyone preparing for this exam needs to go the this materials.
Anonymous
upvote

Ramesh commented on October 12, 2024
All are very Good Questios
Anonymous
upvote

Sandy commented on October 12, 2024
I found this exam dumps questions and answers very helpful despite some questions do not have the complete answers. Overall it helped me pass.
Anonymous
upvote

P commented on October 11, 2024
So glad to have found this site
CANADA
upvote

Michal commented on October 11, 2024
I hope it will worth it
POLAND
upvote

Bannor commented on October 11, 2024
This exam is valid and legit. I purchased the full version last week and managed to pass. There are 2 or 3 wrong answers which I reported to the admin and they fixed it right away.
CANADA
upvote

Marko commented on October 11, 2024
Been using this website for a while now. I am a big fun as it has helped me pass 3 exams so far. I hope they can keep the site live.
EUROPEAN UNION
upvote

Ngoni commented on October 11, 2024
Great resource
ZIMBABWE
upvote

jeffrey commented on October 11, 2024
this is great
Anonymous
upvote

Soniksha commented on October 10, 2024
I purchased the full version of this exam and it turned out quire accurate. I passed with the help of this exam.
UNITED STATES
upvote

Sadiq commented on October 10, 2024
Test questions
Anonymous
upvote

Viktor commented on October 10, 2024
Respect to the owners and operators of this site for providing this free exam site.
CANADA
upvote

Deep commented on October 10, 2024
Good questions
INDIA
upvote

Goben commented on October 10, 2024
Passed in one shot.
GERMANY
upvote

Neo commented on October 10, 2024
Gets easier as you go along
SOUTH AFRICA
upvote

Neo commented on October 10, 2024
Need more practice
SOUTH AFRICA
upvote

Violet commented on October 10, 2024
Need more practice
SOUTH AFRICA
upvote

Neo commented on October 10, 2024
Challenging
SOUTH AFRICA
upvote

Kopano commented on October 10, 2024
Prep going well
SOUTH AFRICA
upvote

Harika Mudumby commented on October 10, 2024
great content
Anonymous
upvote

Neo commented on October 10, 2024
Happy with the material
SOUTH AFRICA
upvote

Emily commented on October 09, 2024
A bit challe
SOUTH AFRICA
upvote

a commented on October 09, 2024
SIMPLE QUESTIONS
Anonymous
upvote

Emily commented on October 09, 2024
grt resource
SOUTH AFRICA
upvote

robin commented on October 09, 2024
Im' done with clear in my mind
Anonymous
upvote

EDC commented on October 09, 2024
Passed this exam with a freaking 95% today.
Anonymous
upvote

Divyesh Arya commented on October 09, 2024
Nice questions
UNITED STATES
upvote

Harry commented on October 09, 2024
This platform is the best out of the exam dumps sites. I love it.
UNITED STATES
upvote