Question 92·Medium·Cross-Text Connections
Text 1
Some argue that the humbling sensation of awe arises only in direct encounters with nature. True awe, the kind that quiets self-absorption, cannot be produced by images on screens; it requires being physically present before vast natural phenomena. The rush of wind at a cliff’s edge and the glare off a glacier, critics insist, cannot be replicated by pixels, and without them the experience loses its power to alter perspective.
Text 2
In a series of controlled studies, psychologists Lina Kovács and Mateo Rangel exposed participants to 90-second clips of awe-evoking scenes—towering redwoods, deep canyons, and the view of Earth from orbit—or to neutral content. Participants who watched the awe clips reported lower self-focus and gave more in a subsequent anonymous-donation task than those who watched neutral clips. In a follow-up, students who spent two minutes in a campus redwood grove showed similar changes to those who watched the videos.
Based on the texts, what would the researchers in Text 2 most likely say about the claim underlined in Text 1?
For cross-text connection questions, first pinpoint the key claim or attitude in the specified part of Text 1 (often a sentence or phrase that is quoted or underlined). Then read Text 2 with a clear purpose: decide whether it supports, challenges, or qualifies that claim. Summarize in your own words how Text 2’s evidence or conclusions relate to Text 1’s statement, and only then look at the choices. Eliminate options that contradict specific details from Text 2 (for example, claiming “only X works” when Text 2 mentions Y also works, or saying something is unmeasurable when Text 2 gives measures), and choose the one that best matches your summary of the relationship between the two texts.
Hints
Restate the underlined claim in your own words
Look closely at the underlined sentence in Text 1. How does it describe the difference between in-person nature and screen images when it comes to producing awe?
Focus on what happens after the awe clips in Text 2
In Text 2, what changes were seen in people who watched awe-evoking videos compared to those who watched neutral clips? Pay attention to self-focus and donation behavior.
Ask how the researchers would judge the claim in Text 1
Given that the videos and the in-person grove produced similar changes, would the researchers think that only in-person nature can create perspective-shifting awe, or that other formats can as well?
Use eliminations based on details from Text 2
Check each choice against Text 2: Does Text 2 say awe is unmeasurable? That only in-person nature works? Or that awe doesn’t affect generosity or perspective? Cross out any choices that clearly disagree with the details provided.
Step-by-step Explanation
Clarify the claim in Text 1
Focus on the underlined sentence in Text 1: it says “True awe … cannot be produced by images on screens; it requires being physically present.”
In your own words, the claim is:
- Only direct, in-person contact with nature can create true awe that quiets self-absorption.
- Screen images (videos, pictures) cannot create this kind of awe.
Understand what the researchers did in Text 2
Now look at Text 2. The researchers:
- Showed participants 90-second clips of awe-evoking scenes (on screens) or neutral content.
- Measured what happened after the clips.
Results:
- Those who watched awe clips reported lower self-focus.
- They also gave more in an anonymous-donation task.
- In a follow-up, students who spent time in a real redwood grove showed similar changes to those who watched the videos.
So both screen-based awe and in-person awe led to reduced self-focus and increased generosity.
Compare Text 2’s findings to Text 1’s claim
Text 1 says screens cannot produce the kind of awe that “quiets self-absorption.”
Text 2 shows that awe-evoking videos (on screens):
- Lowered self-focus (the same as “quieting self-absorption”).
- Increased generosity.
- Produced effects similar to being in a real redwood grove.
So the researchers’ evidence contradicts the absolute claim that only in-person nature can have this effect. They would see the claim in Text 1 as too restrictive—it leaves out real effects from videos.
Match this comparison to the best answer choice
Now check each answer against what you just reasoned:
- The researchers would argue that screen-based awe can have the same self-diminishing effects as in-person awe, so the claim that screens cannot produce true awe is too narrow, not supported by their data.
The choice that captures this idea is:
It reflects an overly narrow view of awe, because screen-based experiences can also produce the same self-diminishing effects.