Quiz Hacker Daily Drill #24
Dive into This Bonus FREE Drill and Up Your Game on SAT and ACT Reading Non-Citation Questions!
The below drill is designed to help you increase your skill with Non-Citation Questions, which appear frequently on ACT Reading and paper SAT Reading. Before doing the exercise, take a few minutes to review the strategies for this question type.
I publish a new Daily Drill every morning at 6:30am ET, seven days a week. On Wednesdays, the complete drill and its answer explanations are accessible to everyone. On other days, a comprehensive set of resources — including answer explanations, key vocabulary, grammar notes, and links to relevant tactics — is reserved for supporting subscribers.
As a special treat, even though today's drill falls on a Sunday, I'm offering it as a bonus FREE drill for this week!
To have all Daily Drills sent directly to your inbox and gain access to my full archive of strategies, drills, and answer explanations, join the community by becoming a paid subscriber now!
Drill
This passage is adapted from R. L. Turner, The Green Space Enigma: How City Parks Can Actually Lower Quality of Life ©2023 by R. L. Turner.
The creation of urban parks isn't a flawed concept, but it can inadvertently worsen city environments if these green spaces simply become spots for vendors to set up shop—a trend that is popular among those who prefer convenience over natural tranquility. To truly have societal value, new parks must elevate urban quality of life by providing a idyllic alternative to the hustle and bustle of metro areas. That implies that the introduction of a park must be accompanied by regulations that discourage commercialization—perhaps by banning food trucks or setting up dedicated non-commercial zones, ideally alongside entry fees or stringent licensing procedures. Understandably, such measures aren't universally embraced. However, they're essential, as you can't provide city residents with the serenity of a natural environment by introducing elements that make parks busier and noisier.
One of the few instances where city greenery has effectively improved the quality of life has been when local authorities limit commercial activities. This restraint has increased over the years, not only in America but globally. Even cities that initially welcome commercial activities in parks often draw a line when the peace and quiet of green spaces significantly deteriorate. Crowding parks with vendors can have societal drawbacks, since it diminishes the relaxation opportunities for city residents—unless we strictly manage commercial activity.
If, in an effort to promote convenience and city revenue, municipalities allow an uncontrolled influx of vendors—by providing more spots, reducing licensing restrictions, or even promoting large commercial events that draw more crowds—we inadvertently foster a shift in urban demographics by giving those with the financial means an incentive to leave city centers. Over-commercialization encourages upwardly mobile locals to look elsewhere for relaxation, and urban areas begin to lose their tax base and thus the budgetary ability to provide remaining city residents with peaceful havens such as public parks. If you increase “convenience” (i.e., vendor spots) by 10 percent, people looking for calm spots will be further pushed out, compelled to explore areas farther from their homes in city centers. This is how thriving urban areas enter stages of stagnation and decline.
Urban planners have long recognized that introducing more vendor spots only offers short-lived increases in convenience and revenue because these spots eventually reach saturation—a situation termed induced commercialization. More spots might seem profitable initially, but the increased activity eventually deters visitors, which then triggers discussions about limiting vendor spots and reducing expenditures on park upkeep. One of the claims cities often assert when proposing park designs is that new green spaces, by offering both a place for relaxation and convenient commercial services, will provide the best of both worlds. Rarely does anyone advocate for a park with the intent of making convenient amenities harder to find—even though, from a quality of life standpoint, lack of convenience is a worthwhile objective.
According to the passage, increasing convenient amenities for urban park-goers can result in which of the following?
A) Residents of city centers become more engaged citizens than was formerly the case.
B) More public parks get built in outlying suburban areas than was previously the case.
C) Vendor licensing departments receive fewer applications and less city funding than they formerly did.
D) Urban residents become more willing to live farther from city centers than they previously were.
Answer Explanations
This is a Non-Citation Question. Let's approach this question by using the "locator" method. We need to identify a key word/phrase/idea from the question and use it to locate the portion(s) of the passage relevant to the question.
The question asks about the effects of "increasing convenient amenities for urban park-goers."
The "locator" here would be the effects of "increasing convenient amenities" in urban parks.
Scanning the passage, the relevant information is found in this part:
"If, in an effort to promote convenience and city revenue, municipalities allow an uncontrolled influx of vendors... we inadvertently foster a shift in urban demographics by giving those with the financial means an incentive to leave city centers … If you increase ‘convenience’ (i.e., vendor spots) by 10 percent, people looking for calm spots will be further pushed out, compelled to explore areas farther from their homes in city centers.”
This suggests that increasing convenience can lead to a shift in where people want to live, with those who have the means potentially moving away from city centers.
Thus, the correct answer is:
D) Urban residents become more willing to live farther from city centers than they previously were.
Let’s evaluate each answer choice in more detail:
A) Residents of city centers become more engaged citizens than was formerly the case.
The passage does not state or provide an Allowable Inference that residents become more engaged citizens due to the increase in convenient amenities in urban parks. The passage focuses on how commercialization and convenience in public parks affect urban quality of life. It does not address the issue of civic engagement.
B) More public parks get built in outlying suburban areas than was previously the case.
This choice might seem tempting to test takers who notice the passage mentions residents moving farther away from city centers. However, on closer reading, the passage only indicates that urban residents might be compelled to "explore areas farther from their homes in city centers" due to over-commercialization; it doesn't suggest that more public parks are being built in these outlying areas as a result. This choice capitalizes on a superficial similarity with the text but doesn't accurately reflect the passage's main point about the effect of park commercialization.
C) Vendor licensing departments receive fewer applications and less municipal funding than they formerly did.
Although the passage discusses the potential of limiting vendor spots and the implications of over-commercialization on a city's tax base, it does not specifically mention changes in the number of applications vendor licensing departments receive or alterations in their funding. Neither is this answer choice an Allowable Inference. The passage's statements on this topic are not directly related to the specific consequences outlined in this answer choice.
D) Urban residents become more willing to live farther from city centers than they previously were.
This answer choice is supported by the passage, particularly in the lines that say, "If, in an effort to promote convenience and city revenue, municipalities allow an uncontrolled influx of vendors... we inadvertently foster a shift in urban demographics by giving those with the financial means an incentive to leave city centers … If you increase ‘convenience’ (i.e., vendor spots) by 10 percent, people looking for calm spots will be further pushed out, compelled to explore areas farther from their homes in city centers.”
This segment indicates that when cities increase the number of vendors for the sake of convenience, it has the unintended consequence of encouraging people, especially those with financial means, to move away from city centers. Hence, the passage supports the idea that urban residents become more inclined to live farther away from these areas than they had been before.
Key Takeaways
1. Surface Similarities Can Mislead: It's important not to be swayed solely by superficial similarities between the passage and an answer choice, as evidenced by choice B. Just because a phrase or idea appears in both the passage and an answer doesn't make the answer correct. Close, contextual reading is vital. HLTA FTW!
2. Avoid Overthinking and Over-Interpreting: As seen in choice A, if an answer choice presents an idea clearly lacking in direct textual support, it's likely incorrect. Don't let such wildly off-target answer choices lure you into over-interpretation or unsupported reasoning.
3. Direct Textual Support: Successful test-takers ensure their answer choices are either explicitly stated in the passage or are Allowable Inferences based on the given text. Answer choice D exemplifies this by directly tying back to specific lines in the passage that support the answer.
Need more practice on Non-Citation Questions? To see all Non-Citation Question drills, click here.
For the full archive of all Quiz Hacker Daily Drills and drill sets, visit the Drills page.
For help with ACT and SAT grammar essentials, check out Quiz Hacker’s ACT & SAT Grammar Crash Course.
To explore Non-Citation Questions on official exams, visit the Self Prep section of Quiz Hacker Test Prep. You'll find a Question Type Inventory (QTI) for the tests in the Official ACT Prep Guide and the Official SAT Study Guide.