📐 SAT
📝 ACT
🎓 AP Exams
About Contact Blog Privacy Policy

SAT Reading & Writing: Cross-Text Connections (Drill 1)

Drill 1 · Reading & Writing · Cross-Text Connections

0 / 5
Next drill
Drill 2
→
More Sat Reading Writing Cross Text Connections drills
Drill 1 — current you are here
Drill 2 5 questions → Drill 3 5 questions →

About This Drill

SAT Reading & Writing: Cross-Text Connections (Drill 1) is a Reading & Writing practice drill covering Cross-Text Connections. It contains 5 original questions created by Brian Stewart, a Barron's test prep author with over 20 years of tutoring experience.

SAT Cross-Text Connections questions present two related passages and ask you to analyze how the authors' claims, evidence, or perspectives agree, disagree, or relate. These questions require synthesizing information from both texts rather than reading each in isolation.

Questions & Explanations

Text 1
A research team led by Yuki Tanaka observed that certain species of ants consistently rescue nestmates trapped under debris by digging around them until they are freed. The researchers noted that rescuing ants did not appear to receive any direct benefit from these efforts and concluded that the behavior likely reflects a form of altruism, selfless concern for the welfare of fellow colony members.
Text 2
Observations of ants freeing trapped nestmates are compelling, but interpreting the behavior as altruistic may be premature. Trapped ants release distress pheromones that trigger nearby ants to dig at the source of the chemical signal. Because the digging response is automatic and chemically driven, the rescuing ants may not be responding to the trapped ant's predicament at all but simply reacting to a chemical stimulus in their environment.

Question 1. Based on the texts, how would the author of Text 2 most likely respond to the conclusion presented in Text 1?

  • A) By arguing that the rescue behavior might be sufficiently explained by a chemical mechanism rather than by altruistic motivation ✓
  • B) By suggesting that the trapped ants were not actually in distress and therefore did not require assistance from nestmates, according to Text 2's reasoning
  • C) By pointing out that the researchers failed to observe enough instances of the behavior to draw reliable conclusions
  • D) By asserting that altruistic behavior has never been documented in insect species

Explanation: Text 2 proposes that the rescue behavior can be explained by ants' automatic response to distress pheromones, a chemical mechanism, rather than by genuine concern for the trapped ant. This directly challenges the altruism conclusion in Text 1 by offering an alternative, simpler explanation. Choice B is incorrect because Text 2 doesn't dispute that the ants were trapped. Choice C is incorrect because Text 2 doesn't question the sample size. Choice D is incorrect because Text 2 doesn't make such a sweeping claim.

Text 1
Urban green spaces, parks, community gardens, and tree-lined streets, have been shown to improve residents' mental health and reduce stress levels. A 2022 study of 30 major cities found that neighborhoods with more green space had measurably lower rates of anxiety and depression. The researchers argued that expanding urban green spaces should be a top public health priority for city planners.
Text 2
The mental health benefits of urban green spaces are well documented, but expanding these spaces can also raise property values in surrounding areas, potentially displacing lower-income residents who would benefit most from them. Any public health strategy centered on green space expansion must therefore also include affordable housing protections, or the communities with the greatest need may be pushed out of the very neighborhoods the green spaces are meant to serve.

Question 2. Which choice best describes a difference in how the authors of Text 1 and Text 2 view the expansion of urban green spaces?

  • A) The author of Text 1 presents green space expansion as a clear public health benefit, whereas the author of Text 2 highlights a potential unintended consequence of that expansion. ✓
  • B) The author of Text 1 believes green spaces reduce stress, whereas the author of Text 2 disputes that claim based on more recent evidence.
  • C) The author of Text 1 focuses on the environmental effects of green spaces, whereas the author of Text 2 focuses on the economic effects.
  • D) The author of Text 1 argues that green spaces benefit all residents equally, whereas the author of Text 2 argues that only wealthy residents benefit.

Explanation: Text 1 is enthusiastic about green space expansion as a public health priority, while Text 2 agrees that green spaces have health benefits but warns that expansion can displace lower-income residents through rising property values. Text 2 adds nuance rather than outright disagreement. Choice B is incorrect because Text 2 doesn't dispute the health benefits. Choice C is incorrect because Text 1 focuses on health, not the environment. Choice D is incorrect because Text 2 doesn't say only wealthy residents benefit; it warns that lower-income residents may be displaced.

Text 1
The rise of streaming platforms has been a boon for independent filmmakers. Directors who once struggled to find theatrical distribution can now reach global audiences through services like Netflix and Amazon. Independent films that would have been seen by only a few thousand viewers in limited release are now available to millions, dramatically expanding the audience for diverse and unconventional storytelling.
Text 2
While streaming platforms have undeniably made independent films more accessible, the economics of these platforms may actually undermine the filmmakers they appear to support. Streaming services typically pay a flat licensing fee rather than box-office royalties, meaning a film watched by ten million viewers generates the same income for its creators as one watched by ten thousand. The sheer volume of content on these platforms means that most independent films are buried in algorithms and never discovered by the broad audiences they theoretically have access to.

Question 3. Based on the texts, how would the author of Text 2 most likely respond to the claim in Text 1 that streaming platforms have been beneficial for independent filmmakers?

  • A) By arguing that independent filmmakers would reach larger audiences through traditional theatrical distribution than through streaming platforms, according to Text 2's account
  • B) By acknowledging the increased accessibility but questioning whether it translates into meaningful financial or practical benefits for filmmakers ✓
  • C) By disputing the idea that independent films are available on major streaming platforms at all
  • D) By suggesting that only filmmakers who produce conventional stories benefit from streaming distribution

Explanation: Text 2 concedes that streaming has made films more accessible (agreeing with part of Text 1) but argues that the financial model and content volume undermine the supposed benefits. The response is a qualification, not a complete rejection. Choice A is incorrect because Text 2 doesn't claim theatrical distribution is superior. Choice C is incorrect because Text 2 acknowledges that independent films are on these platforms. Choice D is incorrect because Text 2 doesn't distinguish between conventional and unconventional films.

Text 1
Analysis of sediment cores from Lake Chala on the Kenya-Tanzania border has revealed high concentrations of charcoal particles dating to approximately 40,000 years ago. Because the surrounding savanna would not have produced enough natural wildfires to account for this quantity of charcoal, a team led by geologist Christine Mwangi concluded that early humans were conducting large-scale, deliberate burns of the landscape, evidence that advanced land management practices existed far earlier than previously believed.
Text 2
While the charcoal concentrations in the Lake Chala sediment cores are striking, the conclusion that they resulted from deliberate human burning may be premature. Volcanic activity was widespread in the East African Rift Valley during that period and could have ignited extensive grassland fires. Shifts in regional climate around 40,000 years ago may have produced drier conditions that increased the frequency and scale of natural wildfires, even on savanna landscapes.

Question 4. Based on the texts, how would the author of Text 2 most likely respond to the underlined conclusion in Text 1?

  • A) By asserting that the conclusion rests on an incomplete consideration of natural processes that could account for the charcoal evidence ✓
  • B) By arguing that the sediment core analysis was conducted using flawed methodology and should be disregarded
  • C) By suggesting that early humans were present in the region but were not yet capable of managing fire
  • D) By pointing out that the charcoal particles were likely deposited much more recently than 40,000 years ago

Explanation: Text 2 doesn't dispute the charcoal evidence itself but argues that natural processes, volcanic activity and climate-driven wildfires, could explain the charcoal without requiring deliberate human burning. This challenges the assumption in Text 1 that natural fires couldn't account for the evidence. Choice B is incorrect because Text 2 doesn't question the methodology. Choice C is incorrect because Text 2 doesn't discuss human capabilities. Choice D is incorrect because Text 2 doesn't question the dating.

Text 1
Research on decision-making has consistently shown that people presented with more options tend to report greater difficulty choosing and lower satisfaction with their eventual selection. This phenomenon, known as the paradox of choice, suggests that while some variety is desirable, excessive options overwhelm consumers and ultimately reduce well-being. Many psychologists argue that limiting the number of available choices leads to better outcomes.
Text 2
While acknowledging that the paradox of choice has been demonstrated in laboratory settings, Sheena Iyengar and colleagues have found that the effect depends heavily on context. In their studies, participants with expertise in a given domain, such as experienced wine drinkers selecting a bottle, reported greater satisfaction when presented with many options rather than few. This suggests that the negative effects of extensive choice may be largely confined to situations in which the decision-maker lacks relevant knowledge.

Question 5. Based on the texts, how would Iyengar and colleagues (Text 2) most likely respond to the view presented in Text 1?

  • A) By suggesting that the paradox of choice may be less universal than Text 1 implies, since expertise can change how people respond to many options ✓
  • B) By conceding that reducing available choices is the most reliable way to improve consumer satisfaction across all contexts
  • C) By arguing that the paradox of choice has not been demonstrated in any well-designed studies
  • D) By recommending that consumers develop expertise before making any significant purchasing decisions

Explanation: Text 2 doesn't reject the paradox of choice entirely but presents evidence that expertise moderates the effect, suggesting it is less universal than Text 1 implies. This is a qualification: the paradox holds in some contexts but not others. Choice B contradicts Text 2's findings. Choice C is incorrect because Text 2 acknowledges the paradox has been demonstrated in lab settings. Choice D overstates Text 2's findings, the researchers describe what happens, not what consumers should do.