Cause–Effect Pairing: I) Attendance at the All-India examination held in July 2006 was poor across centers. II) Western states of the country experienced heavy floods during July 2006.
-
AIf statement I is the cause and statement II is its effect.
-
BIf statement II is the cause and statement I is its effect.
-
CIf both the statements I and II are independent causes.
-
DIf both the statements I and II are effects of independent causes.
-
ENone of these
Answer
Correct Answer: If statement II is the cause and statement I is its effect.
Explanation
Introduction / Context:This item checks whether an external disruptive event plausibly explains depressed exam turnout. Natural disasters commonly impede mobility and access to exam centers.
Given Data / Assumptions:
- I) National exam: poor attendance in July 2006.
- II) Heavy floods in western states during the same period.
- Flooding disrupts transport, electricity, safety, and scheduling.
Concept / Approach:Align time and geography. If floods coincide with exam dates and affect many centers/regions, attendance suffers. Statement II is a strong environmental cause; Statement I is a plausible effect.
Step-by-Step Solution:1) Map the coincidence: July 2006 floods → travel disruption.2) Identify immediate exam-related impacts: delayed trains/buses, blocked roads, center closures.3) Conclude II → I.
Verification / Alternative check:Historical patterns show extreme weather reduces participation in time-bound events.
Why Other Options Are Wrong:(a) reverses direction; (c)/(d) downplay clear linkage; “None” is inapplicable.
Common Pitfalls:Overlooking logistical dependencies (transport access) in exam attendance.
Final Answer:Statement II is the cause; Statement I is its effect.