Question 78·Hard·Cross-Text Connections
Text 1
Cognitive psychologist Maya Deshpande argues that repeated personal failure leads individuals to avoid subsequent high-stakes risks. Citing laboratory studies in which participants who lost money in simulated investments later chose safer portfolios, Deshpande maintains that "scar memory"—the lingering recollection of losses—exerts a powerful dampening effect on future risk-taking. She concludes that communities with a collective history of failure, such as firms that have launched several unsuccessful products, will predictably pursue conservative strategies thereafter.
Text 2
A team of management scholars examined 42 technology start-ups that experienced a major product flop during their first three years. Contrary to their expectations and to much of the psychological literature, the researchers found that a substantial majority of these companies responded by increasing their research-and-development budgets and adopting bolder product designs within two years of the flop. Interviews revealed that founders often viewed the failure as a license to experiment more radically, reasoning that they had "little left to lose" and hoping that dramatic innovation would differentiate them in crowded markets.
Based on the two texts, how would the scholars in Text 2 most likely respond to Deshpande’s claim in Text 1?
For cross-text connection questions, first summarize the main claim of each text in one short sentence, focusing on what each says causes what (here, what failure does to risk-taking). Next, decide the relationship between the claims: support, refine, complicate, or contradict; signal words like "however," "in contrast," or "contrary to" are crucial. Then scan the answer choices looking only for the one that matches that relationship without adding new ideas or distinctions that aren’t in either text. Eliminate any choice that weakens a clear contradiction into partial agreement or introduces concepts (like severity levels or exceptions) not supported by the passages.
Hints
Clarify each text’s main point
First, restate in your own words what Deshpande says in Text 1 happens after failure, and then what the scholars in Text 2 say usually happens to firms after a major flop.
Focus on the direction of the effect
Ask: according to each text, does failure make decision-makers more cautious or more willing to take risks? Are these effects the same or opposite?
Use key signal words
Pay attention to the phrase "Contrary to their expectations and to much of the psychological literature" in Text 2. Does that suggest agreement with Deshpande, a small adjustment to her view, or a strong challenge to it?
Eliminate answers that soften or limit the disagreement
Look for choices that make it sound like the scholars mostly agree with Deshpande or see their own firms as rare exceptions; check whether that matches the description of a "substantial majority" reacting in a way opposite to what Deshpande predicts.
Step-by-step Explanation
Identify Deshpande’s main claim in Text 1
Focus on Deshpande’s conclusion at the end of Text 1: she argues that repeated failure leads individuals to avoid high-stakes risks and that communities (like firms with several failed products) will "predictably pursue conservative strategies" after failure. In other words, failure → less risk-taking, more caution.
Identify the scholars’ main finding in Text 2
In Text 2, the management scholars study 42 start-ups that experienced a major product flop. They find that a substantial majority of these companies increased their research-and-development spending and adopted bolder product designs. Founders say the failure gave them a "license to experiment more radically" because they felt they had "little left to lose." So for these firms, failure → more risk-taking, not less.
Determine the relationship between the two texts
Compare the directions of the effects:
- Text 1: failure causes more caution and conservative strategies.
- Text 2: failure leads to greater risk-taking and bolder strategies for most firms studied. Text 2 is not just adding a detail or a small exception—it presents results that go the opposite way of Deshpande’s prediction. The phrase "Contrary to their expectations and to much of the psychological literature" signals direct contradiction.
Match that relationship to the correct answer choice
Now scan the choices and ask: which one says that the scholars’ findings undermine or oppose Deshpande’s claim by showing that failure can increase risk-taking?
- Only choice A clearly states that they would view her claim as fundamentally flawed because their findings show that past failure can encourage greater risk-taking, which is exactly what Text 2 describes.
Correct answer: A) They would contend that her claim is fundamentally flawed because their findings show that past failure can actually encourage greater risk-taking.