Question 141·Hard·Cross-Text Connections
Text 1
Why do some rural regions adopt new technologies faster than others? A prevalent account holds that rural adoption largely echoes adoption in nearby cities after a consistent delay. In this view, repeated exposure to urban devices and practices—through commuting, markets, and media—gradually normalizes the technology for rural communities; thus, differences in rural uptake across otherwise similar areas mainly reflect differences in exposure to urban networks.
Text 2
In a multi-country analysis of household broadband subscriptions between 2015 and 2021, economist Lena Osei linked adoption patterns to bus routes to metropolitan hubs (a proxy for urban exposure), subscription prices relative to median income, and the launch dates of local-language streaming services. Areas with abundant bus connections did not adopt significantly faster than poorly connected areas until subscription prices fell below roughly two percent of median monthly income and local-language platforms went live; after those changes, adoption surged even in sparsely connected districts. Conversely, highly connected districts with higher prices showed little growth. Osei concludes that while urban exposure may matter, affordability and locally relevant content are the binding constraints.
Based on the texts, how would Osei (Text 2) most likely respond to the account in Text 1?
For cross-text connection questions, first summarize each text’s main claim in your own words, focusing on what each author thinks causes the outcome. Then decide if the second author would agree, disagree, or partially agree with the first, and why. Finally, match that relationship to the choices, eliminating any option that (1) adds study results that aren’t in the passage, (2) contradicts what the second text clearly says, or (3) ignores key qualifiers like "may," "mainly," or stated "binding constraints."
Hints
Locate the main claim in Text 1
Reread the last sentence of Text 1. What does it say is the main reason some rural areas adopt faster than others?
Focus on Osei’s conclusion in Text 2
Look for the sentence starting with "Osei concludes" in Text 2. Which factors does she say are the real limits on adoption?
Decide if Osei mostly agrees, mostly disagrees, or partly both
Ask yourself: Does Osei completely reject the idea that urban exposure matters, fully support it, or accept it but say something else is more important?
Eliminate options that misdescribe the study
Check each answer against the details of the study: Does Text 2 actually say connectivity predicts earlier adoption on its own, or does it say adoption depends on price and local-language content?
Step-by-step Explanation
Clarify the claim in Text 1
Focus on what Text 1 says causes differences in rural adoption rates:
- It says rural adoption "echoes" urban adoption after a delay.
- The mechanism it emphasizes is repeated exposure to urban devices and practices through commuting, markets, and media.
- Therefore, it concludes that differences in rural uptake are mainly due to differences in exposure to urban networks.
So, Text 1’s core idea: urban exposure is the primary driver of rural adoption differences.
Summarize Osei’s findings in Text 2
Now look at what Osei actually measured and found:
- Variables: bus routes to metropolitan hubs (a proxy for urban exposure), subscription prices relative to income, and local-language streaming service launch dates.
- Key results:
- Areas with many bus connections did not adopt significantly faster than poorly connected areas until prices fell and local-language platforms launched.
- After prices dropped and local content appeared, adoption surged even in sparsely connected districts.
- Highly connected districts with high prices showed little growth.
- Her conclusion: urban exposure may matter, but affordability and locally relevant content are the “binding constraints” (the real limits on adoption).
So, Text 2 shows that exposure alone is not the main explanation; price and content are more decisive.
Compare Osei’s view to the account in Text 1
Put the two texts side by side:
- Text 1: differences in rural adoption across similar areas are mainly about differences in exposure to urban networks.
- Text 2 (Osei): exposure matters some, but adoption doesn’t increase much with exposure unless prices are low and content is locally relevant. When those are fixed, even low-exposure areas adopt quickly.
This means Osei would partly agree (urban exposure is a real factor) but would argue that Text 1 overstates exposure’s importance and misses the stronger drivers: affordability and content relevance.
Match this comparison to the best answer choice
Choose the option that says Text 1 identifies a real mechanism (exposure) but exaggerates its importance compared with other constraints that Osei found to be decisive.
The choice that matches that relationship is:
It identifies a real channel but overstates its role; the study suggests affordability and content relevance are more decisive than exposure.