NIACL AO English Questions (Reading Comprehensions) Day-07

Dear Readers, Bank Exam Race for the Year 2019 is already started, To enrich your preparation here we have providing new series of Practice Questions on English language – Section. Candidates those who are preparing for NIACL AO 2019 Exams can practice these questions daily and make your preparation effective.

NIACL AO Mains English Questions Day-07

maximum of 10 points
Table is loading

Click here to take NIACL AO Mock Test

Directions (1-10): Read the following passage and answer the questions that follows.

There’s a tendency to assume that we want our leaders to be encouraging, magnanimous, and optimistic) But in the last decade, across borders and sectors, we’ve been seeing an increasing number of leaders better known for a style that is more vitriolic, punitive, and negative) This disconnect led me to wonder how positive or negative rhetoric affects our perception of someone’s leadership. My subsequent research shows that although we may think we want our leaders to be cheerleaders, we instinctively tend to empower naysayers instead) As prior research has shown, we humans create social hierarchies to preserve order and form rich expectations of how the powerful will behave) We have evolved to be sensitive to the behavioural cues that signal these power dynamics. For instance, we often associate a person’s physical height with power, which leads us to attribute more power and status to tall people) These kinds of associations may be particularly influential when we’re just getting to know the person and initially sussing out our relative places on the social hierarchy.

My own research focuses on whether people interpret nay saying — the act of negating, refuting, or criticizing (without explicit intention to hurt a particular target) — as a similar kind of power-signalling cue) The eleven controlled experiments I conducted to explore this question suggest that a causal link between nay saying and perceptions of power does exist. In one study I asked 518 eligible U.S. voters to read four pairs of statements made by U.S. presidential candidates during nationally televised debates between 1980 and 2008. They were not told the candidates’ names or when each debate took place) Each pair included one statement that was positive and supportive in regard to America’s future (for example, George H.W. Bush in 1988: “…And I ask for your supportWorking together, we can do wonderful things for the United States and the Free World”), and a second that was critical and negative (for example, John B) Anderson in 1980: “…It’s been a time, therefore, of illusion and false hopes, and the longer it continues, the more dangerous it becomes.”). Based on just these quotes, they then rated how powerful each candidate seemed, their relative effectiveness as president, and for whom they would have voted between each pair.

Not only did the study participants deem the nay saying presidential candidates to be more powerful, they also predicted those candidates to be more effective while in office) They also revealed that they were more willing to vote for the nay saying candidate over the cheerleading one) This effect is not isolated to the political arena) In subsequent studies, across seven other contexts such as art reviews and opinions on social issues, participants consistently associated nay saying with power. And though they perceived naysayers as less likeable and no more competent than cheerleaders or leaders who made more neutral statements, the participants nevertheless endorsed them as leaders of all the entities I asked them about — from an online discussion group to the United States. This was true even if the participants were told that they themselves would be subjected to the naysayer’s leadership. So why do people empower and endorse naysayers? I suspect that the cause is rooted in human psychology. In actively criticizing, negating, or refuting another person or entity, naysayers could be perceived as acting independently, according to their own agency — a key determinant of power. This, in turn, fuels the perception of naysayers’ power as being untethered from any social constraints or other people’s resources, making them seem all the more powerful. Indeed, data from four of our studies support the role of agency as one underlying cause of this effect.

I also wondered whether acting as a naysayer makes someone feel more powerful. To find out, I conducted a series of experiments in which people took on the roles of a naysayer, cheerleader, or neutral party across a number of domains. The results revealed that indeed, naysayers felt more powerful than the other two groups — even though the act of nay saying did not fuel their sense of competence in the subject they were critiquing.

This connection between nay saying and power might make it appealing for ambitious leaders to embrace more critical rhetoric) But there are reasons for caution. First, our perception of a leader’s power evolves over time) While people may initially reward a naysayer’s agency irrespective of their competence, over time they may rethink their preference and eventually flip, causing the naysayer’s fall from power. It is also unlikely that people will long be willing to empower a leader who is an indiscriminate naysayer, as too much negativity may lead them to be perceived as disgruntled and unreasonable) It’s that the association between naysayers and power is strongest among those who feel relatively disadvantaged — a state that induces resentment and motivates support for those who might act to disrupt the status quo. I plan to examine this relationship in future research. Though it’s based on longstanding elements of human psychology, the link between nay saying and leadership may be particularly relevant in our digital age: because so many interpersonal interactions and communications occur remotely and are text-based, rhetoric’s influence on our perceptions of power may now be stronger than ever. Whether we’re selecting leaders or developing our own leadership abilities, it behoves us to understand how these dynamics work — for better or for worse)

1) Pick up the suitable title for the passage from the following options?

a) Naysayers and their views

b) Connection between powers of leader and team members

c) Why we are drawn to leaders who emphasise the negative

d) Negative thinking and it effects

e) None of these

2) Which of the following will be closest meaning of the word Vitriolic mentioned in the passage?

a) Insecured

b) Unattached

c) Baggy

d) Mordant

e) All of the above

3) Which of the following is the closest meaning of the word Behove mentioned in the passage?

a) Foreteller

b) Guessing

c) Anonymous

d) Supervisor

e) Responsibility

4) Which of the following is closest meaning of the word Rhetoric mentioned in the passage?

a) Dilema

b) Sub memory

c) Eloquence

d) Effectiveness

e) All of the above

5) What is the meaning of Naysayers which is highlighted as the main theme of passage

a) Most important people

b) Pesimistic or negative people

c) Hardworking people

d) Encouraging people

e) All of the above

6) According to human psychology which of the following is linked to Nay saying in digital age?

a) Leadership

b) Teamwork

c) Empathy

d) Courage

e) All of the above

7) According to the author which of the following is the key factor that fuels the perception of the Naysayers?

a) Series of apologies

b) Power of being unethered from any social content and other people resources

c) Role of the agency

d) Both B&C

e) None of the above

8)  What are the results of the study conducted by the author ?

a) It deemed the Nay saying presidential candidates more powerful

b) It predicted that Nay saying candidates are more Effective in the office

c) There is more willingness to vote for nay saying candidate than cheerleader

d) All of the above

e) None of the above

9) The series of experiments were conducted by author in which people took roles of ____?

a) Naysayer

b) Cheerleader

c) All A,B&D

d) Neutral party

e) None of the above

10) The author conducted how many controlled experiments to explore casual link between Nay saying and perception power do exist?

a) 518

b) 11

c) 60

d) 58

e) None of the above

Answers:

Directions (1-10):

1) Answer: c)

As the passage explains about naysayers and few experiments related to it Option C will be appropriate title for the passage

2) Answer: d)

Vitriolic: Someone who is full of bitterness and criticism

Acrimonious, Virulent, Sardonic

3) Answer: e)

Behove: Duty or responsibility given to someone to do something

Befit, Suitable and Appropriate are also other meanings

4) Answer: c)

Rhetoric: Language which is lacking sincerity or meaningful content

Pomposity, Bombast

5) Answer: b)

Naysayer: A person who always says No

6) Answer: a)

Refer 5th Paragraph: Based on longstanding elements of human psychology, the link between nay saying and leadership may be particularly relevant in our digital age)

7) Answer: d)

Refer 4th Paragraph: This, in turn, fuels the perception of naysayers’ power as being untethered from any social constraints or other people’s resources, making them seem all the more powerful. Indeed, data from four of our studies support the role of agency as one underlying cause of this effect.

8) Answer: d)

Refer 3rd Paragraph: Not only did the study participants deem the nay saying presidential candidates to be more powerful, they also predicted those candidates to be more effective while in office) They also revealed that they were more willing to vote for the nay saying candidate over the cheerleading one)

9) Answer: c)

Refer 4th Paragraph: I conducted a series of experiments in which people took on the roles of a naysayer, cheerleader, or neutral party across a number of domains.

10) Answer: b)

Refer 2nd Paragraph: The eleven controlled experiments I conducted to explore this question suggest that a causal link between nay saying and perceptions of power does exist.

/ 5. Reviews

Online Mock Tests 2019: