Question 72·Hard·Rhetorical Synthesis
While researching a topic, a student has gathered the following notes:
- Atlantic cod stocks in U.S. waters plummeted during the mid-twentieth century because of sustained overfishing.
- In 1977, the United States expanded its Exclusive Economic Zone (EEZ) from 12 nautical miles to 200 nautical miles, limiting foreign fishing fleets.
- Economist Robert J. Johnston and several colleagues investigated whether this jurisdictional change helped cod populations recover.
- They compared federal catch records from 1960–1990 and found a brief uptick in cod numbers after the EEZ expansion, followed by a steep decline in the late 1980s that coincided with intensified domestic fishing.
- The researchers concluded that extending jurisdiction without introducing strict catch limits cannot by itself restore depleted fisheries.
The student wants to summarize the principal conclusion of Johnston and his colleagues’ study. Which choice most effectively uses relevant information from the notes to accomplish this goal?
For note-based Reading & Writing questions that ask for a “principal conclusion” or main takeaway, first underline exactly what the question wants (e.g., conclusion, method, main idea, specific detail). Then skim the notes to find the bullet that directly matches that request—often signaled by words like “concluded,” “determined,” or “found that overall.” Finally, choose the option that most closely restates that bullet without narrowing it to a single detail or shifting the focus to background or methods, and avoid any choice that adds information not supported by the notes.
Hints
Clarify the task
The question is not asking what the study measured or how it was done; it is asking for the principal conclusion the researchers reached.
Look for signal words in the notes
Scan the bullet points for words like "concluded" or "determined," which often introduce the main takeaway of a study.
Match, don’t invent
Once you find the note that states what the researchers concluded, pick the choice that most closely restates that idea without adding new information or focusing only on one small detail.
Step-by-step Explanation
Identify what the question is asking for
The question asks for the principal conclusion of Johnston and his colleagues’ study. That means you are not looking for background facts, dates, or specific pieces of data; you are looking for the main takeaway the researchers reached at the end of their analysis.
Find the conclusion in the notes
Scan the notes for where the researchers’ overall takeaway is stated. The last bullet begins, "The researchers concluded that..." This is almost always where the principal conclusion is expressed. Note the key idea(s) in that bullet before looking at the answer choices.
Eliminate choices that give only methods or specific results
Now compare the answer choices to the notes:
- Choice A talks about documenting a brief uptick after the EEZ expansion. That is one result (from the 4th bullet), not the researchers’ big-picture conclusion.
- Choice B talks about intensified domestic fishing and cod populations plummeting. That is another detail from the 4th bullet, again a specific outcome, not the main conclusion.
- Choice C describes who Johnston is and how he conducted the study (method and research question), not what he concluded. Only one choice matches the overall conclusion from the last bullet.
Match the remaining choice to the conclusion note
The last bullet says that changing jurisdiction alone was not enough to restore depleted fisheries and that another type of management action was needed. Choice D restates this idea by saying that simply enlarging U.S. jurisdiction did not revive cod stocks and that strict catch limits were also required. Therefore, D) Robert J. Johnston and his team concluded that simply enlarging the United States’ jurisdiction over coastal waters did not suffice to revive Atlantic cod stocks; stringent catch limits were also required. is the correct answer.