What does the evidence about free entry show, according to the author?
When the state funds a museum, should entry be free? Supporters say that free entry opens culture to everyone and encourages casual visits that build curiosity. Opponents answer that charges raise money, and that the public pays for museums through taxes whether or not it visits, so those who do visit should contribute. There is evidence that free entry increases attendance, but it is mixed on whether the new visitors are drawn from groups previously excluded. This should temper claims on both sides. Free entry is a good policy if one wants more visits and can afford the cost; it is not a guarantee of wider access. If breadth matters, free entry needs to be accompanied by outreach to the people who do not currently come.
Answer and explanation
Correct answer: C. It increases attendance, but the effect on previously excluded groups is mixed
- Step 1: The passage says free entry increases attendance but evidence is mixed on whether the new visitors come from excluded groups.
- Step 2: The only choice consistent with this is "It increases attendance, but the effect on previously excluded groups is mixed".
Answer
It increases attendance, but the effect on previously excluded groups is mixed.
Why not the others: The evidence does not show that attendance falls, that it is unchanged, that only excluded groups come or that museums close; it shows rising attendance with mixed effects on excluded groups.
Practise more Museums and money.
Free questions with an explanation for every one, and full timed LNAT mock tests.