The idea that equipping homes with electrical appliances and other "modern" household technologies would eliminate drudgery, save labor time, and...
GMAT Reading Comprehension : (RC) Questions
The idea that equipping homes with electrical appliances and other "modern" household technologies would eliminate drudgery, save labor time, and increase leisure for women who were full-time home workers remained largely unchallenged until the women's movement of the 1970's spawned the groundbreaking and influential works of sociologist Joann Vanek and historian Ruth Cowan. Vanek analyzed 40 years of time-use surveys conducted by home economists to argue that electrical appliances and other modern household technologies reduced the effort required to perform specific tasks, but ownership of these appliances did not correlate with less time spent on housework by full-time home workers. In fact, time spent by these workers remained remarkably constant—at about 52 to 54 hours per week—from the 1920's to the 1960's, a period of significant change in household technology. In surveying two centuries of household technology in the United States, Cowan argued that the "industrialization" of the home often resulted in more work for full-time home workers because the use of such devices as coal stoves, water pumps, and vacuum cleaners tended to reduce the workload of married-women's helpers (husbands, sons, daughters, and servants) while promoting a more rigorous standard of housework. The full-time home worker's duties also shifted to include more household management, child care, and the post-Second World War phenomenon of being "Mom's taxi."
According to the passage, which of the following is true about the idea mentioned in the highlighted text?
1. Passage Analysis:
Progressive Passage Analysis
| Text from Passage | Analysis |
|---|---|
| The idea that equipping homes with electrical appliances and other "modern" household technologies would eliminate drudgery, save labor time, and increase leisure for women who were full-time home workers remained largely unchallenged until the women's movement of the 1970's spawned the groundbreaking and influential works of sociologist Joann Vanek and historian Ruth Cowan. | What it says: For decades, people believed that household technology would make housework easier and give women more free time. This belief wasn't questioned until the 1970s when two researchers (Vanek and Cowan) did important studies. What it does: Sets up the traditional belief and introduces the researchers who challenged it. Source/Type: Author's summary of historical context and fact about when research began. Connection to Previous Sentences: This is the opening sentence - establishes the foundation for the entire passage. Visualization: Timeline: 1920s-1960s (widespread belief: technology = less housework) → 1970s (Vanek & Cowan challenge this belief) What We Know So Far: - Traditional belief: household technology reduces women's work time - This belief went unchallenged for decades - Two 1970s researchers questioned this assumption What We Don't Know Yet: What exactly did these researchers find? How did they challenge the belief? |
| Vanek analyzed 40 years of time-use surveys conducted by home economists to argue that electrical appliances and other modern household technologies reduced the effort required to perform specific tasks, but ownership of these appliances did not correlate with less time spent on housework by full-time home workers. | What it says: Vanek studied 40 years of data and found that while appliances made individual tasks easier, women with these appliances didn't actually spend less total time on housework. What it does: Provides the first researcher's specific finding and methodology. Source/Type: Researcher's claim based on data analysis. Connection to Previous Sentences: This directly answers our question from sentence 1 - here's HOW Vanek challenged the traditional belief. It builds on the setup by giving us concrete evidence. Visualization: Traditional belief: More appliances = Less time on housework Vanek's finding: More appliances ≠ Less time on housework Individual tasks easier? YES Total time reduced? NO Reading Strategy Insight: Notice this sentence has two parts - it acknowledges appliances DO help with individual tasks (agrees partially with traditional view) BUT challenges the main assumption about total time. |
| In fact, time spent by these workers remained remarkably constant—at about 52 to 54 hours per week—from the 1920's to the 1960's, a period of significant change in household technology. | What it says: Women spent the same amount of time (52-54 hours per week) on housework from the 1920s to 1960s, even though household technology changed dramatically during this period. What it does: Provides specific data that supports and reinforces Vanek's finding. Source/Type: Statistical evidence from Vanek's research. Connection to Previous Sentences: This REINFORCES and provides concrete proof for the previous sentence. The previous sentence said appliances didn't reduce time - this gives us the actual numbers that prove it. Visualization: 1920s household technology: Basic → Time spent: 52-54 hours/week 1930s-1950s: Major tech improvements → Time spent: Still 52-54 hours/week 1960s household technology: Modern → Time spent: Still 52-54 hours/week Reading Strategy Insight: Feel confident here! This isn't new complexity - it's the author helping us by giving concrete numbers to support the claim we just learned. The "In fact" signals this is reinforcement, not contradiction. |
| In surveying two centuries of household technology in the United States, Cowan argued that the "industrialization" of the home often resulted in more work for full-time home workers because the use of such devices as coal stoves, water pumps, and vacuum cleaners tended to reduce the workload of married-women's helpers (husbands, sons, daughters, and servants) while promoting a more rigorous standard of housework. | What it says: The second researcher, Cowan, studied 200 years of household technology and found it often created MORE work for women because: (1) it reduced help from family members and servants, and (2) it raised cleanliness standards. What it does: Introduces the second researcher's findings and explains WHY the phenomenon Vanek discovered actually happened. Source/Type: Researcher's argument based on historical analysis. Connection to Previous Sentences: This builds on Vanek's findings by providing the explanation. Vanek showed us WHAT happened (time didn't decrease), now Cowan explains WHY it happened. Visualization: Before household technology: Woman + helpers (husband, kids, servants) = shared workload After household technology: Woman alone + higher standards = same or more total work Example: Washing clothes by hand = family affair vs. Electric washer = woman's job but expected to wash more frequently Reading Strategy Insight: This isn't contradicting Vanek - it's explaining her findings! Both researchers agree that household technology didn't reduce women's work time. |
| The full-time home worker's duties also shifted to include more household management, child care, and the post-Second World War phenomenon of being "Mom's taxi." | What it says: Women's household responsibilities expanded to include managing the household, more childcare duties, and after WWII, driving children around. What it does: Provides additional examples of how women's work increased rather than decreased, supporting Cowan's argument. Source/Type: Continuation of Cowan's historical analysis with specific examples. Connection to Previous Sentences: This adds MORE evidence to support Cowan's explanation. The previous sentence explained WHY work didn't decrease (lost help + higher standards), now we see ADDITIONAL types of work that were added. Visualization: Traditional housework: Cleaning, cooking, laundry + New responsibilities: Managing household, extended childcare, transportation = More total work, not less Reading Strategy Insight: This is pure reinforcement - more examples supporting the same argument. The passage is becoming CLEARER, not more complex. What We Know So Far: - Traditional belief that technology reduces housework was wrong - Vanek proved time spent stayed constant (52-54 hours/week) despite tech advances - Cowan explained why: lost help from others + higher standards + new types of responsibilities - Both researchers agree: household technology didn't liberate women from housework |
2. Passage Summary:
Author's Purpose:
To explain how two 1970s researchers challenged and disproved the long-held belief that household technology reduces women's housework time.
Summary of Passage Structure:
The author builds their explanation by walking us through the research that overturned a popular assumption:
- First, the author sets up the traditional belief that household technology would reduce women's work time, noting this idea went unchallenged for decades until two researchers studied it in the 1970s.
- Next, the author presents the first researcher's findings, showing that Vanek used data to prove women's housework time stayed constant despite technological advances.
- Then, the author introduces the second researcher's explanation for why this happened, showing how Cowan argued that technology actually shifted and increased women's workload.
- Finally, the author provides additional examples of how women's responsibilities expanded rather than decreased over time.
Main Point:
Household technology did not reduce the time women spent on housework as people expected, but instead maintained or even increased their workload by eliminating help from others, raising standards, and adding new types of responsibilities.
3. Question Analysis:
The question asks us to identify what is true about "the idea mentioned in the highlighted text." The highlighted text refers to the opening sentence's description of the traditional belief that household technology would "eliminate drudgery, save labor time, and increase leisure for women who were full-time home workers."
Connecting to Our Passage Analysis:
Our passage analysis reveals a clear structure where:
- The traditional belief is introduced as going "largely unchallenged until the 1970s"
- Vanek's research using "40 years of time-use surveys conducted by home economists" directly contradicted this belief
- The data showed that "ownership of these appliances did not correlate with less time spent on housework"
- Specific evidence showed time remained "remarkably constant—at about 52 to 54 hours per week—from the 1920's to the 1960's"
Prethinking:
Based on our passage analysis, the traditional idea was fundamentally undermined by empirical data. Vanek's analysis of time-use surveys conducted by home economists provided concrete evidence that contradicted the belief. The passage structure moves from presenting the unchallenged belief to showing how research data disproved it. We should look for an answer that captures how the traditional belief was challenged by research findings, particularly the time-use survey data.
Why It's Right:
• The passage explicitly states that Vanek "analyzed 40 years of time-use surveys conducted by home economists" to challenge the traditional belief
• These surveys provided concrete data showing that "ownership of these appliances did not correlate with less time spent on housework by full-time home workers"
• The research demonstrated that time spent remained "remarkably constant—at about 52 to 54 hours per week—from the 1920's to the 1960's"
• This directly undermines the idea that household technology would "save labor time"
Key Evidence: "Vanek analyzed 40 years of time-use surveys conducted by home economists to argue that electrical appliances and other modern household technologies reduced the effort required to perform specific tasks, but ownership of these appliances did not correlate with less time spent on housework by full-time home workers."
Why It's Wrong:
• The passage never mentions that Vanek and Cowan rejected any specific definition of housework
• Both researchers studied the same general concept of housework time without challenging definitional issues
• Their challenge was based on empirical findings, not definitional disagreements
Common Student Mistakes:
- Did the researchers disagree about what counts as housework?
→ No, they used standard time-use survey data and didn't challenge definitions - Does challenging a belief mean they rejected the definition behind it?
→ No, they challenged the prediction using the same understanding of housework
Why It's Wrong:
• Both researchers' findings align with each other rather than applying to different time periods
• Vanek studied 1920s-1960s, Cowan studied "two centuries"—overlapping periods where both found similar conclusions
• The passage presents their work as complementary, not contradictory across different eras
Common Student Mistakes:
- Do different time periods studied mean different conclusions?
→ No, both researchers reached similar conclusions that challenged the traditional belief - Does a broader time scope (Cowan's two centuries) contradict a narrower one (Vanek's 40 years)?
→ No, Cowan's broader analysis explains and supports Vanek's more focused findings
Why It's Wrong:
• The passage doesn't suggest the traditional belief was based on underestimating pre-industrialization housework time
• The research focused on showing that technology didn't reduce time as expected, not on correcting historical time estimates
• The issue was with predictions about technology's impact, not with baseline measurements
Common Student Mistakes:
- Was the problem that people didn't know how much time housework took before technology?
→ No, the problem was that people incorrectly predicted technology would reduce that time - Does proving technology didn't help mean people underestimated past work time?
→ No, it means they overestimated technology's labor-saving potential
Why It's Wrong:
• The passage actually confirms that new technologies DID reduce effort for specific tasks
• Vanek found that "electrical appliances and other modern household technologies reduced the effort required to perform specific tasks"
• The issue wasn't that technology didn't help with effort, but that it didn't reduce total time spent
Common Student Mistakes:
- If housework time didn't decrease, does that mean individual tasks didn't get easier?
→ No, individual tasks became easier but total time remained constant due to other factors - Does the traditional belief being wrong mean it was wrong about everything?
→ No, it was partially right about effort reduction but wrong about total time savings