Reading Comprehension: Main Idea Questions

The author of the passage is mainly concerned with:

Incorrect. [[snippet]] This answer choice is **too narrow**. It does not include the information in the **third paragraph**, which shows that the behavior of Russian peasants can be explained by economic considerations.

Very good! The author begins with a description of neoclassical economics, moving to different explanations of a phenomenon that defy this theory: Chayanov's explanation, which claims that the peasants' behavior goes beyond the scope of what can be explained by neoclassical economics, and the agrarian historians' view, according to which the Russian peasants _did_ use economical decision making, albeit peculiar to their own unique position. The author indicates his agreement with the latter view (that the peasants did include economical needs in their considerations) by saying that the agrarian historians _convincingly_ argued their case.

Incorrect. [[snippet]] While both Chayanov's and 1970s agrarian historians' explanations refute the assumptions of neoclassical economic theory, the passage does not tell us whether this theory is part of the mainstream of economic science. Furthermore, the agrarian historians’ explanation does adhere to the rules of general economics.

Incorrect. [[snippet]] This answer choice is too narrow, as it only addresses the information given in the **third** paragraph.

Incorrect. [[snippet]] This answer choice, while broadly correct, is not the best answer choice available because the explanation given by the agrarian historians partially coincides with neoclassical theory and doesn’t necessarily contradict it.

explaining the conceptual framework behind neoclassical economics and using Russian peasants' behavior in the 19th century to prove that economic considerations are not the only motivating power behind human behavior.

exploring explanations for the divergence of Russian peasants' behavior in the 19th century from neoclassical economic theory and indicating agreement with one of the explanations.

comparing the explanations of Chayanov and 1970s agrarian historians for Russian peasants' behavior in the 19th century and showing how both these explanations challenge the assumptions of mainstream economic science.

questioning the legitimacy of neoclassical economic theory while upholding the assumptions of general economics by arguing for the theories set by agrarian historians in the 1970s of Russian peasant behavior in the 19th century.

detailing neoclassical economic theory and presenting possible explanations for Russian peasant behavior in the 19th century that contradicts its assumptions.