Loading....
Coupon Accepted Successfully!

Practice Papers

Open Flashcards

Practice Test-3

Question
26 out of 60
 

In the following question, the first proposition is true. Mark which one of the propositions is true.

All students are not genius:



A Many students are not genius

B Every student is a genius

C Students are never genius

D Many students are genius

Ans. A

Practice Test-3 Flashcard List

60 flashcards
1)
2)
3)
4)
5)
6)
7)
8)
9)
10)
11)
Directions: Read the following passage and answer the questions. There is a great variety of ways in which one individual stands out from others in social situations and in which the one may be said, therefore, to be “leading” the others. So diverse are these ways that any one concept attempting to encompass them all, as “leadership” does, loses the specificity and precision that is necessary to scientific thinking. In general, it is an essential feature of the concept of leading that influence is exerted by one individual upon another, or more commonly that one or few individual influence a large number. Influence, however, is itself a non-specific term. One may be influenced by another’s disapproved-of behaviour to act antagonically toward him or in a direction quite contrary to that he represents or advocates. It is usual in such circumstances to say that one is driven to act thus, rather than led. “Leading” implies a shared direction and this, in turn, often implies that all parties to the leadership relation have a common goal or at least similar or compatible goals; and as Hollander and Julian say, “leaders’ influence suggests a positive contribution toward the attainment of these goals.” Thus, any act of leading implies an inter-individual relationship, and leading is one form of inter-individual influence. Definition of the simplest unit of analysis in leadership as “the act of leading” has led to the identification of four basic elements in the relationship (1) the leader, with the characteristics of ability and personality and his “resources relevant to goal attainment” (Hollander & Julian 1964); (2) the followers, who also have relevant abilities, personality, characteristic and resources; (3) the situationwithin which the relationship occurs : and  (4) the task with which the interacting individuals are confronted. The nature or the leader-influence relationship and the characterization of the act of leading are to be understood in terms of interaction between these four sets of variable. The concept of leadership is : A Vast B Specific & precise C Scientific D Methodical
12)
Directions: Read the following passage and answer the questions. There is a great variety of ways in which one individual stands out from others in social situations and in which the one may be said, therefore, to be “leading” the others. So diverse are these ways that any one concept attempting to encompass them all, as “leadership” does, loses the specificity and precision that is necessary to scientific thinking. In general, it is an essential feature of the concept of leading that influence is exerted by one individual upon another, or more commonly that one or few individual influence a large number. Influence, however, is itself a non-specific term. One may be influenced by another’s disapproved-of behaviour to act antagonically toward him or in a direction quite contrary to that he represents or advocates. It is usual in such circumstances to say that one is driven to act thus, rather than led. “Leading” implies a shared direction and this, in turn, often implies that all parties to the leadership relation have a common goal or at least similar or compatible goals; and as Hollander and Julian say, “leaders’ influence suggests a positive contribution toward the attainment of these goals.” Thus, any act of leading implies an inter-individual relationship, and leading is one form of inter-individual influence. Definition of the simplest unit of analysis in leadership as “the act of leading” has led to the identification of four basic elements in the relationship (1) the leader, with the characteristics of ability and personality and his “resources relevant to goal attainment” (Hollander & Julian 1964); (2) the followers, who also have relevant abilities, personality, characteristic and resources; (3) the situationwithin which the relationship occurs : and  (4) the task with which the interacting individuals are confronted. The nature or the leader-influence relationship and the characterization of the act of leading are to be understood in terms of interaction between these four sets of variable. Leading implies: A Exerting influence upon one or few individuals B Exerting pressure upon one or few individuals C Commanding others D Guiding to a common direction
13)
Directions: Read the following passage and answer the questions. There is a great variety of ways in which one individual stands out from others in social situations and in which the one may be said, therefore, to be “leading” the others. So diverse are these ways that any one concept attempting to encompass them all, as “leadership” does, loses the specificity and precision that is necessary to scientific thinking. In general, it is an essential feature of the concept of leading that influence is exerted by one individual upon another, or more commonly that one or few individual influence a large number. Influence, however, is itself a non-specific term. One may be influenced by another’s disapproved-of behaviour to act antagonically toward him or in a direction quite contrary to that he represents or advocates. It is usual in such circumstances to say that one is driven to act thus, rather than led. “Leading” implies a shared direction and this, in turn, often implies that all parties to the leadership relation have a common goal or at least similar or compatible goals; and as Hollander and Julian say, “leaders’ influence suggests a positive contribution toward the attainment of these goals.” Thus, any act of leading implies an inter-individual relationship, and leading is one form of inter-individual influence. Definition of the simplest unit of analysis in leadership as “the act of leading” has led to the identification of four basic elements in the relationship (1) the leader, with the characteristics of ability and personality and his “resources relevant to goal attainment” (Hollander & Julian 1964); (2) the followers, who also have relevant abilities, personality, characteristic and resources; (3) the situationwithin which the relationship occurs : and  (4) the task with which the interacting individuals are confronted. The nature or the leader-influence relationship and the characterization of the act of leading are to be understood in terms of interaction between these four sets of variable. Hollander & Julian are of the opinion that : A A leader unnecessarily interferes B A leader’s contribution is negligible for the attainment of goal. C A leader’s contribution is an impetus for the attainment of goal D A leader sometime tends to misguide
14)
Directions: Read the following passage and answer the questions. There is a great variety of ways in which one individual stands out from others in social situations and in which the one may be said, therefore, to be “leading” the others. So diverse are these ways that any one concept attempting to encompass them all, as “leadership” does, loses the specificity and precision that is necessary to scientific thinking. In general, it is an essential feature of the concept of leading that influence is exerted by one individual upon another, or more commonly that one or few individual influence a large number. Influence, however, is itself a non-specific term. One may be influenced by another’s disapproved-of behaviour to act antagonically toward him or in a direction quite contrary to that he represents or advocates. It is usual in such circumstances to say that one is driven to act thus, rather than led. “Leading” implies a shared direction and this, in turn, often implies that all parties to the leadership relation have a common goal or at least similar or compatible goals; and as Hollander and Julian say, “leaders’ influence suggests a positive contribution toward the attainment of these goals.” Thus, any act of leading implies an inter-individual relationship, and leading is one form of inter-individual influence. Definition of the simplest unit of analysis in leadership as “the act of leading” has led to the identification of four basic elements in the relationship (1) the leader, with the characteristics of ability and personality and his “resources relevant to goal attainment” (Hollander & Julian 1964); (2) the followers, who also have relevant abilities, personality, characteristic and resources; (3) the situationwithin which the relationship occurs : and  (4) the task with which the interacting individuals are confronted. The nature or the leader-influence relationship and the characterization of the act of leading are to be understood in terms of interaction between these four sets of variable. The act of leading : A Makes the leader isolated from the followers B Forges relationship between a leader and his follower C Consolidates a leader’s relationship with the followers D Gives birth to hero-worship
15)
Directions: Read the following passage and answer the questions. There is a great variety of ways in which one individual stands out from others in social situations and in which the one may be said, therefore, to be “leading” the others. So diverse are these ways that any one concept attempting to encompass them all, as “leadership” does, loses the specificity and precision that is necessary to scientific thinking. In general, it is an essential feature of the concept of leading that influence is exerted by one individual upon another, or more commonly that one or few individual influence a large number. Influence, however, is itself a non-specific term. One may be influenced by another’s disapproved-of behaviour to act antagonically toward him or in a direction quite contrary to that he represents or advocates. It is usual in such circumstances to say that one is driven to act thus, rather than led. “Leading” implies a shared direction and this, in turn, often implies that all parties to the leadership relation have a common goal or at least similar or compatible goals; and as Hollander and Julian say, “leaders’ influence suggests a positive contribution toward the attainment of these goals.” Thus, any act of leading implies an inter-individual relationship, and leading is one form of inter-individual influence. Definition of the simplest unit of analysis in leadership as “the act of leading” has led to the identification of four basic elements in the relationship (1) the leader, with the characteristics of ability and personality and his “resources relevant to goal attainment” (Hollander & Julian 1964); (2) the followers, who also have relevant abilities, personality, characteristic and resources; (3) the situationwithin which the relationship occurs : and  (4) the task with which the interacting individuals are confronted. The nature or the leader-influence relationship and the characterization of the act of leading are to be understood in terms of interaction between these four sets of variable. The ‘followers’: A Are puppets in the hands of a leader B Also contribute collectively to perform the task C With their meagre abilities remain passive in the action D With their collective strength sometime surpass the strength of the leader.
16)
17)
18)
19)
20)
21)
22)
23)
24)
25)
26)
27)
28)
29)
30)
31)
32)
33)
34)
35)
36)
37)
38)
39)
40)
41)
42)
43)
44)
45)
46)
47)
48)
49)
50)
51)
52)
53)
54)
55)
56)
57)
58)
59)
60)