Stanley Milgram told volunteers they were testing whether punishment helps learning, then had them give ever stronger 'shocks' to an actor. Psychiatrists predicted almost nobody would go to the top level, but over 60 per cent did. The writer sets a genetic explanation against a social one, and says sociobiology's job is to decide between them.
The paragraph matching (14-19) jumps around: F, A, B, D, I, C. The multiple choice (20-22) goes back to A, B and D in order. The TRUE / FALSE / NOT GIVEN block (23-26) runs from A through F, H and I.
Answer key and self-check
Type what you wrote and hit mark. Hide the key first if you haven't done the passage yet. Every question number jumps to its explanation.
Q
Your answer
Answer
Questions 14-19 · Matching information (paragraphs A-I)
How to attack this block: Several paragraphs share a topic, so look for the specific angle: expected figures (D) against actual figures (E), the cover story (A) against persuasion when teachers objected (C). The biological explanation is F, not G, which gives the social one.
Question 14
Answer: FParagraph F
Which paragraph explains the teachers' behaviour in terms of biology?
there must be some sort of built-in animal aggression instinct that was activated by the experiment
Question says → Passage says
a biological explanationbuilt-in animal aggression instinct / a genetic need / our genetic make-up
Why: F is the 'nature' half of the title: a built-in instinct, a genetic need, a trait that evolved for survival. Instinct and genes are biology, so this is the biological explanation.
The trap: Paragraph I mentions 'the biological basis of all behaviour', but it's describing what sociobiology studies in general, not explaining these teachers' actions. G is the social (nurture) explanation.
Question 15
Answer: AParagraph A, second sentence
Where does Milgram tell the volunteers what the experiment is supposedly for?
Milgram told each volunteer 'teacher-subject' that the experiment was in the noble cause of education
Question says → Passage says
the explanation Milgram gaveMilgram told each volunteer
for the experimentdesigned to test whether or not punishing pupils for their mistakes would have a positive effect
Why: The cover story is all in A: the experiment was 'in the noble cause of education' and tested whether punishment helps learning. 'Told each volunteer' is the explanation he gave them.
The trap: Paragraph C also has Milgram speaking to the teachers, but there he's pushing them to continue, which is question 19.
Question 16
Answer: BParagraph B, third sentence
Which paragraph reveals who the pupils really were?
The supposed 'pupil' was in reality an actor hired by Milgram to simulate receiving the shocks
Question says → Passage says
the identity of the pupilsThe supposed 'pupil' was in reality an actor
Why: 'Supposed' and 'in reality' are the signal that a true identity is being revealed: the pupil was an actor. That's the only place the passage says who the pupils were.
The trap: Paragraph C describes the pupil deliberately giving wrong answers, which hints at the set-up, but it doesn't say who the pupil was.
Question 17
Answer: DParagraph D
Where is the predicted result, in figures, given?
they further anticipated that only four per cent would go up to 300 volts… only a lunatic fringe of about one in 1,000 would give the highest shock
Question says → Passage says
expectedpredict / anticipated
statistical outcomefour per cent / one in 1,000
Why: D is where the psychiatrists predict the outcome before the experiment, with percentages and ratios. 'Expected' matches 'anticipated', and the numbers make it statistical.
The trap: E has statistics too (over 60 per cent, 85 per cent), but those are the actual results, not the expected ones. The word 'expected' is what separates D from E.
Question 18
Answer: IParagraph I, last two sentences
Which paragraph states what sociobiology as a whole is trying to find out?
This, in essence, is the problem of modern sociobiology - to discover the degree to which hard-wired genetic programming dictates
Question says → Passage says
the general aim of sociobiological studythe problem of modern sociobiology - to discover / sociobiology is concerned with elucidating the biological basis of all behaviour
Why: I steps back from Milgram and says what the field is for: to discover how far genes shape behaviour, or put another way, to explain its biological basis. 'Is concerned with' signals a general aim.
The trap: F mentions 'a modern hard-core sociobiologist', so it's tempting, but that's one person's claim about these results, not the aim of the whole field.
Question 19
Answer: CParagraph C, middle
Which paragraph shows how Milgram got reluctant teachers to keep going?
Milgram said that it was important for the sake of the experiment that the procedure be followed through to the end. His final argument was, 'You have no other choice. You must go on.'
Question says → Passage says
persuaded the teacher-subjectsMilgram calmly explained / His final argument was
to continuecarry on with the experiment / You must go on
Why: C lists Milgram's steps when teachers balked: calm explanation, then 'it was important', then 'You must go on'. That sequence is the way he persuaded them.
The trap: B also has Milgram instructing the teachers ('to ignore the reactions of the pupil'), but that's the rule given at the start, not persuasion when they wanted to stop.
Multiple choice
Questions 20-22
How to attack this block: Each question points to one paragraph in order. Distractors reuse passage words in the wrong role, such as 'denounce' (which the pupil-actor does) and '150 volts' (a predicted stopping point). For 22, compare the psychiatrists' prediction with the actual results in E.
Question 20
Answer: BParagraph A, last sentence
What were the teachers told the experiment was testing?
designed to test whether or not punishing pupils for their mistakes would have a positive effect on the pupils' ability to learn
Question says → Passage says
punishment helps learningpunishing pupils… would have a positive effect on the pupils' ability to learn
Why: B is a compressed version of the cover story: punishment having 'a positive effect' on learning is punishment helping learning.
The trap: A picks up '450 volts (danger - severe shock)' from paragraph B, but that's the scale on the panel, not what they were testing. D is wrong because the teachers weren't being assessed as teachers in the cover story.
Question 21
Answer: DParagraph B, last sentence
What instruction were the teachers given about giving shocks?
to administer whatever level of shock was called for, as per the rule governing the experimental situation of the moment
Question says → Passage says
give punishment according to a ruleadminister whatever level of shock was called for, as per the rule
Why: D: 'as per the rule' is 'according to a rule', and 'administer whatever level of shock' is giving punishment.
The trap: B uses 'denounce', which is in the passage, but it's the pupil-actor who denounces the experiment, not the teachers who denounce pupils. A is the opposite of the truth: they were told to ignore the pupil's cries.
Question 22
Answer: CParagraph D
What was true of the psychiatrists' predictions before the experiment?
The overwhelming consensus was that virtually all the teacher-subjects would refuse to obey the experimenter.
Question says → Passage says
underestimated… willingness to complyvirtually all the teacher-subjects would refuse to obey
Why: C. They predicted almost everyone would refuse, yet over 60 per cent obeyed to the end (paragraph E). Predicting far less obedience than happened is underestimating it.
The trap: B is the opposite of 'overwhelming consensus': they did agree. D reverses their view, since they expected only about one in 1,000 to reach 450 volts. A twists '150 volts', which was a predicted stopping point, not a danger judgement.
TRUE / FALSE / NOT GIVEN
Questions 23-26
How to attack this block: Two of these are FALSE because the passage says the opposite: authority overrides personal values in H, and in I the question is still unsolved. The NOT GIVEN depends on noticing that only Milgram is linked to Yale.
Question 23
Answer: NOT GIVENParagraph A, first sentence
Were several of the subjects Yale psychology students?
Stanley Milgram of Yale University tested 40 subjects from all walks of life
Question says → Passage says
subjects40 subjects from all walks of life
Why: NOT GIVEN. The only link to Yale is that Milgram worked there. 'All walks of life' says the subjects were varied, but it doesn't say whether any were psychology students.
The trap: 'All walks of life' tempts people to write FALSE. But a varied group could still include a few students, so the passage neither confirms nor denies it.
Question 24
Answer: TRUEParagraph F, second sentence
Might some people see the teachers' behaviour as a useful survival trait?
A modern hard-core sociobiologist might even go so far as to claim that this aggressive instinct evolved as an advantageous trait, having been of survival value to our ancestors
Question says → Passage says
Some people may believeA modern hard-core sociobiologist might even go so far as to claim
a positive survival mechanisman advantageous trait, having been of survival value
Why: TRUE. 'Might… claim' matches 'may believe', and 'advantageous trait… of survival value' matches 'positive survival mechanism'.
Question 25
Answer: FALSEParagraph H
In the social explanation, do personal values beat authority?
the subject merges his unique personality and personal and moral code with that of larger institutional structures, surrendering individual properties
Question says → Passage says
personal valuespersonal and moral code / individual properties
authoritymalevolent systems of authority
Why: FALSE. In H, the person 'surrenders' their personal and moral code to institutional authority. Authority wins, which is the reverse of the statement.
The trap: Paragraph C says many teachers felt 'strong personal and moral revulsion', which makes personal values look strong. But they obeyed anyway, and the explanation in G-H is about authority overriding them.
Question 26
Answer: FALSEParagraph I
Does Milgram's experiment answer a key sociobiology question?
The problem for biologists, psychologists and anthropologists is to sort out which of these two polar explanations is more plausible.
Question says → Passage says
solves an important questionThe problem… is to sort out which of these two polar explanations is more plausible
Why: FALSE. The experiment leaves two competing explanations, and the passage says the problem is still to work out which is right. It raises the question; it doesn't solve it.
The trap: Students often choose NOT GIVEN because the passage never says 'unsolved'. But 'the problem… is to sort out' tells you it isn't settled, which contradicts 'solves'.
NOT GIVEN. 'From all walks of life' tells you the subjects were varied, but not whether any were Yale psychology students.
Words from this passage worth keeping
distaste(A)
a feeling of dislike for something
simulate(B)
pretend to have or experience something
balked at(C)
hesitated or refused to do something
revulsion(C)
a strong feeling of disgust
consensus(D)
general agreement among a group
discrepancy(E)
a difference between things that should match
pent-up(F)
held in and not released
malevolent(H)
wishing to do harm
Sit this test on Langujet, then come back
The full Cambridge 5 Test 1 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 5, Test 1, Reading Passage 2. 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.
