The writers argue that discovery is more like evolution than genius: ideas mutate, and the useful ones survive. Nicholson's wrong theory inspired Bohr's atom, an injured jockey's uneven stirrups turned out to help on bends, and a weak glue met a bookmark problem to create the Post-It note. Thorndike's Law of Effect, like natural selection, needs no end goal.
The multiple choice (27-31) goes paragraph by paragraph from the first to the acey-deucy story. YES / NO / NOT GIVEN (32-36) covers the last four paragraphs. The summary (37-40) recaps the whole argument.
Multiple choice
Questions 27-31
How to attack this block: These ask about purpose. The first paragraph outlines the popular view, and the second criticises it. The third treats Darwin and Einstein as exceptions to the general rule. Nicholson's wrong idea laid the ground for Bohr. The stirrup story matters because it began with a simple injury, not research.
Question 27
Answer: DParagraph 1
What is the first paragraph doing?
Scientific discovery is popularly believed to result from the sheer genius of such intellectual stars as naturalist Charles Darwin and theoretical physicist Albert Einstein.
Question says → Passage says
a common assumptionpopularly believed / Conventional wisdom
outlineplaces great weight on insight… as if ideas spontaneously pop into someone's head
Why: 'Popularly believed' and 'conventional wisdom' signal what most people assume. The paragraph just sets out that view (genius, sudden insight) without arguing yet. So D.
The trap: C is the trap. The writers do go on to challenge this view, but that starts in paragraph 2 with 'However'. Paragraph 1 only describes it.
Question 28
Answer: AParagraph 2
What are the writers doing in the second paragraph?
However, we believe that it largely misrepresents the real nature of scientific discovery
Question says → Passage says
criticisinglargely misrepresents
an opinionthis view
Why: 'It' is the popular view from paragraph 1. Saying it 'largely misrepresents' discovery is criticism of that opinion. A.
The trap: B tempts because they say there may be 'some limited truth' in the view, which sounds like justifying it. That's a small concession before the 'However' that carries the real point.
Question 29
Answer: AParagraph 3, first sentence
What do the writers suggest about Darwin and Einstein in the third paragraph?
Setting aside such greats as Darwin and Einstein - whose monumental contributions are duly celebrated - we suggest that innovation is more a process of trial and error
Question says → Passage says
an exceptionSetting aside such greats as Darwin and Einstein
a general ruleinnovation is more a process of trial and error
Why: 'Setting aside' means 'leaving out of the argument'. The writers put these two to one side and say innovation in general is trial and error. They're the exceptions to that rule, so A.
The trap: D tempts, but their contributions are already 'duly celebrated', meaning they get the recognition they deserve. The writers don't ask for more.
Question 30
Answer: CParagraph 4, last two sentences
What is John Nicholson an example of?
Nicholson also proposed a novel theory about the structure of atoms. Niels Bohr… jumped off from this interesting idea to conceive his now-famous model of the atom.
Question says → Passage says
laid the foundationsjumped off from this interesting idea
someone else's breakthroughNiels Bohr… his now-famous model of the atom
Why: Bohr used Nicholson's idea as a starting point for his famous model of the atom. Nicholson's idea led to someone else's breakthrough, so C.
The trap: A tempts because Bohr was hugely influential, but Nicholson is called 'unheralded', the opposite of having a big reputation. Nobody is said to have doubted him at the time (D).
Question 31
Answer: AParagraph 6, second half
What's the main point of interest about the acey-deucy stirrups?
Had Westrope conducted methodical investigations…? No. He suffered a leg injury, which left him unable to fully bend his left knee.
Question says → Passage says
the simple reason why it was inventedHe suffered a leg injury
the research that went into its developmentmethodical investigations… No
Why: The writers ask whether Westrope planned it, answer 'No', and give the real cause: a leg injury. The story is there to show a big innovation can start from something simple and accidental. A.
The trap: B tempts because the passage mentions 'rapid and widespread adoption'. That's what happened afterwards, not the point the writers are making. C and D are exactly what they deny.
YES / NO / NOT GIVEN
Questions 32-36
How to attack this block: Calling people geniuses only labels innovation without explaining it, so the first statement is NO. The Law of Effect involves no end objective (YES), and the raw material it works on is 'not as clearly known' (NO). The passage gives no historical motive for the law's discovery and says nothing about what other scientists are doing now.
Question 32
Answer: NOParagraph 8
Does calling people like Plato or da Vinci geniuses help explain how they create ideas?
These notions merely label rather than explain the evolution of human innovations.
Question says → Passage says
Acknowledging… as geniusesThe notions of insight, creativity and genius
help us understand the processmerely label rather than explain
Why: The writers say 'genius' is a label, not an explanation, and call it 'vague and of doubtful scientific utility'. So it doesn't help us understand. That contradicts the statement: NO.
The trap: The writers praise these people's 'diverse and enduring contributions', which can make you think they back the genius idea. They admire the people, not the label.
Question 33
Answer: NOT GIVENParagraph 9, first sentence
Was the Law of Effect discovered when psychologists were looking for a scientific cause of creativity?
The Law of Effect was advanced by psychologist Edward Thorndike in 1898, some 40 years after Charles Darwin published
Question says → Passage says
was discovered at a timewas advanced by… in 1898
Why: You get the year and the link with Darwin, but nothing about what psychologists were looking for at the time. NOT GIVEN.
The trap: The writers use the law to explain creativity now, so it's tempting to assume that was Thorndike's reason too. The passage never says what prompted it.
Question 34
Answer: YESParagraph 9, last sentence
Does the Law of Effect say organisms' behaviour involves no planning?
the Law of Effect involves an entirely mechanical process of variation and selection, without any end objective in sight
Question says → Passage says
no planning is involvedentirely mechanical process / without any end objective in sight
Why: A purely mechanical process with no end objective means nothing is aimed at or planned. Organisms just repeat what worked. YES.
Question 35
Answer: NOParagraph 10, second sentence
Does the Law of Effect clearly explain where new ideas and behaviours come from?
the provenance of the raw material on which the Law of Effect operates is not as clearly known as that of the genetic mutations
Question says → Passage says
the sources of new ideas and behavioursthe provenance of the raw material
clear explanationsnot as clearly known
Why: 'Provenance' means origin, and the raw material is the new ideas and behaviours. The writers say that origin is 'not as clearly known', which contradicts 'clear explanations'. NO.
The trap: 'Provenance' is a hard word, and if you skip it you might call this NOT GIVEN. The sentence is a direct denial.
Question 36
Answer: NOT GIVENLast paragraph
Are many scientists now turning away from the idea of intelligent design and genius?
The time seems right for abandoning the naive notions of intelligent design and genius
Question says → Passage says
turning away fromabandoning
the notion of intelligent design and geniusthe naive notions of intelligent design and genius
Why: The writers say it's time to abandon these ideas, which is their recommendation. They never say what other scientists are actually doing now. NOT GIVEN.
The trap: The words match almost perfectly, which pushes people to YES. But 'the time seems right' is an opinion about what should happen, not a report that many scientists are already doing it.
Summary completion (word list A-G)
Questions 37-40
How to attack this block: Each gap names one theme of the argument: the sudden flash the traditional view relies on, what Nicholson's proto-elements were, what brought the Post-It together, and what natural selection and the Law of Effect lack. 'Invention' and 'experiments' are the leftover traps.
Question 37
Answer: FParagraph 1, last sentence
What does the traditional view say a great mind suddenly has?
Conventional wisdom also places great weight on insight in promoting breakthrough scientific achievements, as if ideas spontaneously pop into someone's head
Question says → Passage says
The traditional viewConventional wisdom
suddenspontaneously pop into someone's head
Why: Ideas popping into your head fully formed is a flash of inspiration. 'Insight' isn't in the box, and F, inspiration, is its closest match.
The trap: A, invention, is what the breakthrough produces, not what the mind suddenly has. You don't 'have sudden invention'.
Question 38
Answer: DParagraph 4, third sentence
What does the longer process sometimes involve, as with Nicholson's proto-elements?
Nicholson was wrong about the presence of proto-elements: they do not actually exist
Question says → Passage says
Nicholson's theory about proto-elementspostulated the existence of 'proto-elements'
mistakeswas wrong / fanciful theories and wild speculations
Why: Nicholson's proto-elements don't exist, so his theory was a mistake, yet it still led to Bohr's model. D, mistakes.
The trap: G, experiments, sounds scientific, but the passage never describes Nicholson experimenting. It describes him being wrong.
Question 39
Answer: EParagraph 7
What element was behind the coincidence that produced the Post-It note?
fresh advances can arise from error, misadventure, and also pure serendipity - a happy accident
Question says → Passage says
an element ofpure serendipity
the coincidence of ideasa happy accident / each had a problem
Why: Serendipity is luck, and the passage defines it for you as 'a happy accident'. Silver's weak glue happened to meet Fry's bookmark problem, which is E, luck.
The trap: A, invention, is tempting because the sentence says 'the invention of… the Post-It note'. But the invention was the result. The gap wants what made it happen.
Question 40
Answer: BParagraph 9, last sentence
What is missing from both natural selection and the Law of Effect?
an entirely mechanical process of variation and selection, without any end objective in sight
Question says → Passage says
no clear ___ involvedwithout any end objective in sight
merely a process of variation and selectionan entirely mechanical process of variation and selection
Why: An 'end objective' is a goal, and both laws have none. B, goals, also fits 'no clear ___' as a plural noun.
The trap: C, compromise, and G, experiments, have nothing to do with this sentence. The sentence is about aim, and only 'goals' means that.
A. Setting aside such greats' contributions, the writers argue innovation is usually trial and error, so Darwin and Einstein are exceptions to that rule, not models.
D (mistakes). Nicholson was wrong: proto-elements don't exist. His error still led somewhere useful.
Words from this passage worth keeping
predecessors(Paragraph 1)
people who did the same work earlier
cumulative(Paragraph 3)
growing by adding one thing to another over time
unheralded(Paragraph 4)
not praised or well known
postulated(Paragraph 4)
suggested something as a basis for a theory
confer(Paragraph 6)
give an advantage or benefit
serendipity(Paragraph 7)
luck in finding something good by chance
banal(Paragraph 7)
ordinary and unremarkable
provenance(Paragraph 10)
where something comes from
Sit this test on Langujet, then come back
The full Cambridge 17 Test 2 reading paper: all three passages, 60 minutes, marked the second you finish with a review of every answer. Already done it? Take it again and see if the same traps still get you.
Cambridge IELTS 17, Test 2, Reading Passage 3. The passage and questions belong to Cambridge University Press and are not reproduced here. We quote short extracts only as evidence for our own commentary, and the answers are published for self-marking. Get the book for the full text, or sit the test on Langujet.
