Examkin

Question

Difficulty: HardSingle-Sentence Inferences

Read the following sentence from an academic passage on industrial history: 'While late-twentieth-century antitrust regulators frequently parsed corporate vertical integration as a predatory mechanism designed primarily to foreclose entry to nascent market rivals, mid-century manufacturing firms engaged in the practice chiefly to mitigate transaction friction and stabilize raw-material supply chains amid severe commodity price volatility.'

True or False: Based on the passage sentence, it can be inferred that the primary impetus driving mid-century manufacturing firms to adopt vertical integration was distinct from the primary rationale attributed to such integration by late-twentieth-century antitrust regulators.

Answer: Answer

Answer

True
The inference is valid and True because the sentence contrasts the primary purpose ascribed by regulators (foreclosing rival market entry) with the chief objective of mid-century firms (mitigating transaction friction and stabilizing supply chains). Because these two stated goals differ in focus and intent, the primary impetus of the firms was demonstrably distinct from the rationale attributed to the practice by regulators.

Step-by-Step Solution

1
Deconstruct the syntactic contrast in the target sentence
Identified the pivot word 'While', which establishes a direct contrast between late-twentieth-century regulators' interpretation and mid-century manufacturing firms' actual goals.
Single-sentence inferences require tracking contrastive structural pivots to delineate distinct claims.
2
Extract the primary motivation attributed by late-twentieth-century regulators
Regulators parsed integration as 'designed primarily to foreclose entry to nascent market rivals'.
This establishes the first entity's rationale mentioned in the contrast.
3
Extract the primary motivation of mid-century manufacturing firms
Firms engaged in integration 'chiefly to mitigate transaction friction and stabilize raw-material supply chains'.
This establishes the second entity's rationale mentioned in the contrast.
4
Compare the two motivations to verify the inference statement
The two primary motives ('foreclosing entry' vs. 'mitigating friction and stabilizing supply') are distinct.
Validates that the primary impetus of the firms was indeed distinct from the rationale attributed by regulators.

Key Concept

Single-Sentence Contrastive Deduction
Rate this question

Topics

Single-Sentence Inferences

More questions from this topic