- DI & DS
- English Language
- GK
-
Intelligence & CR
- Alphabet & Number Ranking
- Analytical Reasoning
- Blood Relations Test
- Coding - Decoding
- Comparision of Ranks
- Direction Sense Test
- Mathematical Operation / Number Puzzles
- Series
- Sitting Arrangement
- Statement and Arguement
- Statement and Conclusion
- Statement and Course of Action
- Statement-Assumption
- Syllogism
-
Mathematical Skills
- Average
- Calender
- Clocks
- Geometry
- Height and Distance
- Logarithms
- Mensuration
- Mixtures and Alligations
- Number System
- Percentage
- Permutation and Computation
- Probability
- Profit and Loss
- Ratio and Proportion
- Set Theory
- Simple calculations
- Simple Equations
- Simple Interest and Compound Interest
- Time and Work
- Time, Speed and Distance
-
61.
As a memory researcher, I have long been intrigued by the phenomenon of memory failures. What are the different ways that memory can get us into trouble? Bringing together everything I knew of memory’s imperfections, lapses, mistakes and distortions, I hit on a way of thinking that helped to make things fall in place. I propose that memory’s malfunctions can be divided into seven fundamental transgressions or “sins”, which I call transience, absent-mindedness, blocking, misattribution, suggestibility, bias, and persistence. Just like the ancient seven deadly sins, the memory sins occur frequently in everyday life and can have serious consequences for all of us.
Transience, absent-mindedness and blocking are sins of omission: we fail to bring to mind a desired fact, event or idea. Transience refers to a weakening or loss of memory over time. It is probably not difficult for you to remember now what you have been doing for the past several hours. But if I ask you about the same activities six weeks, six months, or six years from now, chances are you will remember less and less. Transience is a basic feature of memory, and the culprit in many memory problems.
Absent-mindedness involves a breakdown at the interface between attention and memory. Absent-minded memory errors — misplacing keys or eye-glasses, or forgetting a lunch appointment — typically occur because we are preoccupied with distracting issues or concerns, and do not focus attention on what we need to remember. The desired information is not lost over time; it is either never registered in memory to begin with, or not sought after at the moment it is needed, because attention is focused elsewhere.
The third sin, blocking, entails a thwarted search for information we may he desperately trying to retrieve. We have all failed to produce a name to accompany a familiar face. This frustrating experience happens even though we are attending carefully to the task at hand, and even though the desired name has not faded from our minds — as we become acutely aware when we unexpectedly retrieve the blocked name hours or days later.
In contrast to these three sins of omission, the next four sins of misattribution, suggestibility, bias, and persistence are all sins of commission: some form of memory is present, but it is either incorrect or unwanted. The sin of misattribution involves assigning a memory to the wrong source: mistaking fantasy for reality, or incorrectly remembering that a friend told you a bit of trivia that you actually read about in a newspaper. Misattribution is far more common than people realize, and has potentially profound implications in legal settings. The related sin of suggestibility refers to memories that are implanted as a result of leading questions, comments, or suggestions when a person is trying to call up a past experience. Like misattribution, suggestibility is especially relevant to – and can sometimes create havoc within – the legal system.
The sin of bias reflects the powerful influences of our current knowledge and beliefs on how we remember our pasts. We often unknowingly or unconsciously edit or rewrite our previous experiences in light of what we now know or believe. The result can be a skewed rendering of a specific incident, or even an extended period of our lives, which says more about how we feel now than about what happened then.
The seventh sin – persistence – entails repeated recall of disturbing information or events that we would prefer to banish from our minds altogether: remembering what we cannot forget, even though we wish that we could. Everyone is familiar with persistence to some degree: recall the last time that you suddenly awoke at 3:00 AM, unable to keep out of your mind a painful blunder on the job or a disappointing result on an important exam. In more extreme eases of serious depression or traumatic experience, persistence can be disabling and even life-threatening.[1] The above passage DOES NOT mention
(A) impact of memory malfunctions on daily lives
(B) reasons for memory malfunctions
(C) relationship between seven memory sins and seven deadly sins
(D) lapses and distortions of memory[2] The above passage implies that
(A) sins of commission are more serious memory malfunctions than sins of omission
(B) the sin of bias arises as a result of misattribution
(C) the sin of persistence most frequently occurs when we are asleep
(D) sins of omission involve presence of memory in some form or other[3] In the passage, the term “transience” refers to
(A) transference
(B) truculence
(C) ephemeral
(D) epiphanicasked in JMET
View Comments [0 Reply]
-
62.
With each passing day, it is getting easier to believe that the acceleration in India’s economic growth from around 6% to 8% is here to stay. The hard part is trying to explain why this has happened. How this is explained is important since it has a bearing on our future policy.
As per conventional wisdom, India’s growth accelerated to around 6% in the nineties from the historical rate of 3.5% because ‘reforms’ had unleashed the pent-up energies of India entrepreneurs long shackled by the socialist raj. It slowed subsequently because ‘reforms’ had lost momentum. The last three years’ spurt in growth is the fortuitous result of a global economic boom. Once the world economy slows down, we will he back to 6% growth–unless we proceed with ‘second generation’ reforms.
However, each of these propositions bristles with problems. It is not true that economic growth rate accelerated to 6% in the nineties. In fact, research has shown that the ‘structural break’ in India’s economic growth occurred not in the early nineties but in the eighties, when economic growth accelerated to close to 6%. The growth in the first decade after reforms was not significantly different from the growth rate in the eighties. The ‘reforms’ in the sense of market-oriented or even pro-business policies did not commence overnight in 1991, but had commenced earlier. Economic policies in the nineties merely helped consolidate an underlying trend.
Subsequently, the world economy slowed down in 2001–03, which put the brakes on Indian economy. Then came the crucial change, an acceleration to 8% in 2010–06. This cannot be ascribed to any fresh bout of ‘reforms’ or even to the global boom. There have been important structural changes in the economy. One is the rise in the savings rate from 23.5% in 2000–01 to 29.1% in 2004–05. Most of this increase has come from the turnaround in public savings. Thanks to the rise in the savings rate, the economy has moved on to an altogether higher investment rate. The second structural change is enhanced export competitiveness, reflected in the rising share of exports. The Total exports (trade plus invisible receipts) / GDP ratio has risen sharply from 16.9% in 2000–01 to 24.6% in 2005–06. A third, less noticed change in recent years is financial deepening. The bank assets / GDP ratio rose from 48% in 2000–01 to 80% in 2005–06 on the back of a surge in bank credit.
One factor is common to these three structural changes: lower interest rates. The decline in interest rates has helped fiscal consolidation, it has boosted firms’ competitiveness and it has led to a huge increase in retail credit. Lower interest rates have been made possible by the rise in inflows on both current and capital accounts. The rise in inflows, in turn. reflects growing overseas confidence in India’s economic potential — confidence created by two decades of economic growth of 6%. The sharp depreciation in the rupee in the nineties undoubtedly helped but it is worth recalling that a trend towards rupee depreciation was underway in the eighties itself.[1] Which of the following statements is INCOREET according to the passage?
(A) Growth rate after reforms was similar to that in the eighties
(B) Reforms in economic policies had started prior to the nineties
(C) Structural changes in the Indian economy have helped lower interest rates
(D) Increase in public savings rate has contributed to higher investment rates[2] The passage DOES NOT discuss
(A) factors contributing to lower interest rates
(B) the importance of world economy on India’s reform rates
(C) dimensions of structural changes in India’s economic reforms
(D) the role of the public sector in India’s reformsasked in JMET
View Comments [0 Reply]
-
63.
I feel that this award was not made to me as a man, but to my work — a life’s work in the agony and sweat of the human spirit, not for glory and least of all for profit, but to create out of the materials of the human spirit something which did not exist before. So this award is only mine in trust. It will not be difficult to find a dedication for the money part of it commensurate with the purpose and significance of its origin. But I would like to do the same with the acclaim too, by using this moment as a pinnacle from which I might be listened to by the young men and women already dedicated to the same anguish and travail, among whom is already that one who will some day stand here where I am standing.
Our tragedy today is a general and universal physical fear so long sustained by now that we can even bear it. There are no longer problems of the spirit. There is only the question: When will I be blown up! Because of this, the young man or woman writing today has forgotten the problems of the human heart in conflict with itself which alone can make good writing because only that is worth writing about, worth the agony and the sweat.
He must learn them again. He must teach himself that the basest of all things is to be afraid; and, teaching himself that, forget it forever, leaving no room in his workshop for anything but the old verities and truths of the heart, the old universal truths lacking which any story is ephemeral and doomed — love and honor and pity and pride and compassion and sacrifice. Until he does so, he labors under a curse. He writes not of love but of lust, of defeats in which nobody loses anything of value of victories without hope and, worst of all, without pity or compassion. His grief’s grieve on no universal bones, leaving no scars. He writes not of the hearts but of the glands.
Until he relearns these things, he will write as though he stood among and watched the end of man. I decline to accept the end of man. It is easy enough to say that man is immortal simply because he will endure: that when the last ding-dong of doom has clanged and faded from the last worthless rock hanging tideless in the last red and dying evening, that even then there will still be one more sound: that of his puny inexhaustible voice, still talking. I refuse to accept this. I believe that man will not merely endure: he will prevail. He is immortal, not because he alone among creatures has an inexhaustible voice, but because he has a soul, a spirit capable of compassion and sacrifice and endurance. The poet’s, the writer’s, duty is to write about these things. It is his privilege to help man endure by lifting his spirit, by reminding him of the courage and honor and hope and pride and compassion and pity and sacrifice which have been the glory of his past. The poet’s voice need not merely be the record of man, it can be one of the props, the pillars to help him endure and prevail.[1] The phrase “labors under a curse” in paragraph 3 means that the young writer
(A) is under a curse, so to speak
(B) continues to work though he is cursed
(C) is condemned to be abject
(D) is given to lusts[2] Which of the following inferences CANNOT be drawn from the passage?
(A) Good writing is always about the conflicted human heart
(B) A writer should overcome his fear and advocate the universal truths
(C) A writer should not seek money or fame
(D) A writer should espouse the immortality of the human soul[3] Which of the following is the MOST APT title for this passage?
(A) The Tragedy of Mankind
(B) Human Heart in Conflict
(C) The Writer’s Duty
(D) The Spirit of Manasked in JMET
View Comments [0 Reply]
-
64.
Pick up a glossy magazine or newspaper supplement and there will almost certainly be at least one double page spread that looks like a regular editorial page but is headed up either ‘promotion’ or ‘advertisement’. These hybrids — unattractively but aptly called advertorials -- are being used with increasing frequency by a growing number of companies. Traditionally the preserve of high-technology clients with a complicated message to get across to potential customers, the use of this technique has now spread to sectors like financial services, alcohol and automobiles.
One major reason why marketing departments are becoming more receptive to ideas for advertorials is that publishers are pursuing them more aggressively at a time of shrinking ad budgets, while they are being treated far more professionally in a bid to persuade clients that this is a creative opportunity to spread their message to their target audiences. Pouring more imagination into them allied with raising production standards has also been a means whereby the commercial executives of magazines and newspapers can try to convince skeptical editors who strongly disapprove of blurring the advertising / editorial line of their worth.
What advertorials are about is control — controlling the message in an editorial format. Positive editorial coverage of a company and / or its products in credible publications is the best publicity any company can hope for, but often proves elusive. A successful advertorial can pinpoint the way the company delivers its message to the heart of its target audience.
High technology was one of the main sources of early advertorials — unsurprising]y, the products are complex and need to be explained with some technical detail to get the story across. That is not so easy with traditional advertising.
Advertorials can also to some degree circumvent journalistic indifference to what a company is doing because editorial coverage has already been so extensive. For example, in the case of a company like Compaq, whose swift growth in the computer market attracted many inches of editorial space, that very success can lead to journalists wondering how they can write something different about Compaq. There can be diminishing returns from an editorial point of view. So advertorials let the company present things editorially but with bought space. While they should be strongly labeled, information is being given to readers in a format that looks familiar.[1] In the light of your reading of the passage above, identify the option that contains the set of words CLOSEST in meaning to the set of words in CAPITALS
SCEPTICAL: CIRCUMVENT: ELUSIVE
(A) incredulous : surround: baffling
(B) doubtful : avoid: evasive
(C) thoughtful : deceit : illustrative
(D) philosophical : revolve : deceptive[2] In the above passage, the phrase “blurring the advertising / editorial line of their worth” implies
(A) diluting the perceived quality of their editorials
(B) hiding the actual value of the paper
(C) obscuring the actual facts in the paper
(D) devaluing the advertising potential of the editorials[3] The passage DOES NOT discuss
(A) attitude of journalists towards advertising
(B) advertorials and the publishing industry
(C) use of advertorials in industries
(D) impact of new technologies on advertorials[4] According to the passage,
(A) high technology does not support traditional advertising
(B) traditional journalists are indifferent to advertorials
(C) advertorials facilitate advertising of complex products in a professional manner
(D) advertorials occupy double-page spreads in magazinesasked in JMET
View Comments [0 Reply]
-
65.
Let us take a look at the pressures building up. To start off, there is the long term rise in the cost of energy. Every time the cost of transportation goes up, employers are compelled to increase wages accordingly. They may resist for a time, but if they want their workers to show up, they eventually have to provide a transportation subsidy. It is built right into the wage structure.
Next, the entire system of commuting implies hidden costs. Companies that bring employees to a central location wind up paying more for real estate; they pay higher taxes, maintenance costs and salaries. They often have to provide cafeterias, locker rooms, and in suburban locations, parking facilities - there is a whole infrastructure that supports the commuting process. All of these costs have been skyrocketing.
By contrast, as we all lalow, the cost of telecommunications and computing and video equipment, and other tools for "teleconunuting" are plummeting. So you have two powerful economic curves about to intersect. But even more importantly, we all worry about productivity. Without doubt, the single most anti productive thing that we do is to shift millions of people back and forth across the landscape everyday. A waste of time, of human creativity, of millions of barrels of non-renewable fuel, a cause of pollution, crowding and god knows what else.
We worry about the human effects of home-work. But how human is commuting itself? For most workers commuting is the unpaid part of the job, being isolated for hours at a time. Commuting was important when most workers had to handle physical goods in factories. Today, as the Third Wave industries expand, many workers travel to work to handle information, ideas, numbers, programs, formulas, designs and symbols and it is a lot cheaper to move the information to the workers than the workers to the information.
There are all kinds of parallel cultural and value shifts as well that support the idea. The new emphasis on revived family life. The decentralist push - nothing is more decentralized than working at home. The resistance to forced mobility - you do not have to move your family when you change your job. Environmental conceal- nothing pollutes more than centralized production.
Add all these pressures together, and you understand why this transfer of certain jobs into the home seems so likely. Moreover, you have to see this development not by itself, but as linked to the demassification of production and distribution; decentralization towards the regions: rising importance of information; the appearance of wholly new, unprecedented industries; the breakdown of national tools for economic regulation or management, and the rising importance of co-production and non-market production.
We are restructuring the economy on all these fronts at once. No wonder our economic vocabulary is outdated. No wonder our economic maps no longer reflect the terrain. A new Third Wave economy is taking shape.[1] The above passage DOES NOT talk about:
(1) The essential nature of commuting.
(2) Additive costs of commuting.
(3) Changing nature of social values.
(4) Rise of the knowledge economy.[2] Which of the following can be the MOST APPROPRIATE title for the passage?
(1) To Commute or to Produce?
(2) The future of work
(3) The “Third Wave Economy”
(4) In support of “home-work”[3] Which of the following statements can be deduced from the given passage'?
(1) Rise in transportation costs leads to loss in productivity.
(2) Commuting is the least productive aspect of today's economy.
(3) Renewed emphasis on family life is pushing down telecommuting costs.
(4) Physical production in factories has been replaced by information, design and symbols.[4] As per the passage, which of the following is NOT a reason for working from home?
(1) increasing energy costs
(2) decreasing telecommuting costs
(3) increasing levels of social diversity
(4) regional decentralizationasked in JMET
View Comments [0 Reply]
-
66.
Evolutionary relationships are also genealogical, not primarily functional. We all understand that whales are mammals by history of common descent, not fishes because they swim in the ocean. In genealogical terms, closeness is defined by position in a sequence of branchings - what Darwin called "propinquity", or relative nearness. I may look and act more like my cousin Bob than my brother Bill, but Bill is still closer to me by genealogy. Function and appearance need not correlate strongly with genealogical propinquity. Evolutionists have described the genealogical relationships among trout, lungfishes and cows in the following manner. Terrestrial vertebrates branched off the line of early fishes at a point near the ancestry - of modern lungfishes; trout evolved much later from a persisting earlier lines of fishes. Therefore, if we chose to classify purely by genealogy, lung fishes and cows must be placed together in a group separate from trout. Many of us rebel against such an idea because our conventional classifications mix functional and strictly genealogical relationship. We may say, "A lungfish looks like a fish, swims like a fish, acts like a fish, and tastes like a fish. Therefore it is a fish." Perhaps so; but by propinquity, lungfishes are closer to cows.
This issue now pervades the science of systematics as the great debate about "cladism". Cladists advocate classification by pure genealogy (branching order), with no attention what so ever to traditional concepts of similarity in function or biological role. However, we need only carry away the lesson that genealogical and functional similarity are different concepts, and that we can be terribly fooled when we make a mistaken equation - particularly when we assume a closeness in branching (propinquity) from evidence of common appearance or behavior.
If we call a whale a fish, we make a simple error by misunderstanding the evolutionary phenomenon of "convergence". The fish like characters of whales evolved separately and independently in a line derived from fully terrestrial vertebrates. But the fishy similarities of trout and lungfishes are genuine evolutionary marks of common ancestry. These similarities do not forge a closer genealogical bond between lungfish and trout than between lungfish and cow because such shared features are common characters of all early vertebrates; propinquity is marked by shared characters of later derivation. For example, the character "five fingers" cannot be used to unite humans and dogs while placing seals in another group for dogs and seals are genealogically close as members of the order Carnivore. The position of five fingers is a shared character of all ancestral mammals; such traits cannot help us make divisions within later mammalian evolution.[1] Which of the following option is NOT TRUE as per the above passage?
(1) Evolutionary relationships have their basis in functional similarities.
(2) Lungfishes and trouts belong to the same common ancestry
(3) Genealogical branching gives rise to propinquity.
(4) Dogs and seals are genealogically closer compared to lungfish and trout.[2] As per the given passage, a “Cladist” is one who:
(1) Acknowledges the distinction between genealogical and functional similarties.
(2) Debates at length on the science of systematics
(3) Groups animals by propinquity.
(4) Describes genealogical relationships between mammals and fish.[3] Which of the following options can be BEST deduced from the passage?
(1) There is no such thing as functional similarity.
(2) Behavioral similarities in the animal kingdom point to a common ancestry.
(3) The phenomenon of “convergence” can best explain the basis of all evolutionary
(4) Genealogical propinquity need not follow from functional similarity.asked in JMET
View Comments [0 Reply]