Questions & explanations
1. Which of the following identifies a potential weakness in the proponents' argument for the ban?
- The ban might lead to an increase in the use of paper bags, which have a higher environmental impact.
- The success of bans in other cities may not be replicable due to differences in waste management infrastructure.
- The proponents fail to consider that plastic bags are a small fraction of total litter.
- The ban could disproportionately affect low-income residents who rely on plastic bags for waste disposal.
- The recycling program's limitation regarding soiled bags undermines the opponents' counterargument.
Answer: The proponents fail to consider that plastic bags are a small fraction of total litter.
The proponents argue that banning plastic bags will reduce litter, but the passage states that plastic bags constitute only 5% of total litter. This suggests that even a complete elimination of plastic bag litter would have a minimal impact on overall litter, which is a weakness in the proponents' argument.
2. Which of the following pieces of information is most relevant to evaluating the researchers' conclusion?
- The average age of the participants in the study.
- The brand of coffee most commonly consumed by participants.
- Whether the study controlled for age and physical activity levels.
- The number of participants who drank decaffeinated coffee.
- The participants' income levels.
Answer: Whether the study controlled for age and physical activity levels.
The conclusion that coffee reduces heart disease risk is weakened by the fact that coffee drinkers were younger and more active. To evaluate the conclusion, we need to know if the study accounted for these differences. Option c directly addresses whether the study controlled for these confounding factors.
3. Which of the following, if true, would most strengthen the researchers' conclusion that Kepler-186f is unlikely to support liquid water?
- Geothermal heating on Kepler-186f is negligible due to its small size and lack of radioactive elements.
- Tidal heating from gravitational interactions with a nearby planet could increase surface temperatures by up to 20 degrees Celsius.
- Cloud formation on Kepler-186f would increase the planet's albedo, reflecting more sunlight and cooling the surface.
- The planet's atmosphere contains trace amounts of methane, a potent greenhouse gas.
- Kepler-186f's star emits less ultraviolet radiation than previously thought.
Answer: Geothermal heating on Kepler-186f is negligible due to its small size and lack of radioactive elements.
The researchers' conclusion that liquid water is unlikely relies on their model showing surface temperature below freezing. The passage notes that geothermal heating could raise temperatures, so if geothermal heating is negligible, that potential counterargument is removed, strengthening the conclusion.
4. Which of the following, if true, would most weaken the authors' dismissal of City X as a counterexample?
- City X's subway line was built in a densely populated area with high potential ridership.
- City X's subway line was completed on time and within budget.
- City X's subway line was designed to connect major employment centers with residential areas.
- City X's subway line had lower ridership than projected due to a competing bus service that was later discontinued.
- City X's subway line was built using the same technology and design standards as subways in other cities that experienced congestion reduction.
Answer: City X's subway line was built using the same technology and design standards as subways in other cities that experienced congestion reduction.
The authors dismiss City X as a counterexample because the subway was poorly planned and underutilized. Option e shows that the subway was built with the same standards as successful subways, suggesting that the lack of congestion reduction was not due to poor planning, thus weakening the dismissal.
5. Which of the following, if true, would most reveal a gap in the argument that the ban is beneficial overall?
- Paper bags require more energy to produce and recycle than plastic bags.
- City A's ban was accompanied by a public education campaign on reusable bags.
- The increase in paper bag usage in City A was temporary and declined after a year.
- The study measured only the weight of waste, not the full lifecycle environmental impact.
- Other cities with plastic bag bans have reported similar shifts to paper bags.
Answer: The study measured only the weight of waste, not the full lifecycle environmental impact.
The argument concludes the ban is beneficial because plastic is more harmful, but the study only measured waste weight. Option d points out that the study did not assess full lifecycle impact, revealing a gap: the environmental cost of paper bags might outweigh the benefit of reducing plastic.
6. Which of the following, if true, would most strengthen the critics' argument that the work-from-home policy is not the cause of higher productivity?
- Companies with flexible policies also had higher employee satisfaction scores.
- The study controlled for industry type and company size.
- The additional training and technology investments were made specifically to support remote work.
- Companies without flexible policies that invested equally in training and technology saw similar productivity gains.
- Employee productivity was measured using self-reported surveys.
Answer: Companies without flexible policies that invested equally in training and technology saw similar productivity gains.
The critics argue that training and technology, not work-from-home, cause productivity gains. Option d shows that companies without flexible policies but with similar investments achieved similar gains, suggesting that the policy itself is irrelevant, thus strengthening the critics' position.
7. Which of the following, if true, would most weaken the critics' argument that the example of State X disproves the study's conclusion?
- State X experienced a significant economic boom during the period studied, leading to increased demand for low-skilled labor.
- The study controlled for economic growth and other factors that might affect employment.
- State X's minimum wage increase was smaller than the average increase in the states studied.
- The critics' argument relies on a single counterexample that may not be representative.
- The study's data included only states that raised the minimum wage by at least 10%.
Answer: State X experienced a significant economic boom during the period studied, leading to increased demand for low-skilled labor.
The critics use State X as a counterexample to argue that minimum wage increases do not cause unemployment. Option a weakens this by suggesting that State X's unique economic boom offset any potential negative employment effects, so the counterexample does not disprove the general trend.
8. Which of the following, if true, would most undermine the credibility of the Pesticide Industry Association's report?
- The Pesticide Industry Association's report was not peer-reviewed.
- The university study was funded by a government grant and peer-reviewed.
- The Journal of Environmental Science study was peer-reviewed.
- The Pesticide Industry Association's report used data from studies that were not publicly available.
- The meta-analysis in the Journal of Environmental Science included studies funded by environmental groups.
Answer: The Pesticide Industry Association's report used data from studies that were not publicly available.
The credibility of a report is undermined if its data sources are not publicly available, as this prevents independent verification. The passage highlights that the industry report is funded by manufacturers, raising potential bias; using non-public data further reduces credibility.
9. Which of the following, if true, would most strengthen the argument that the study's results are unreliable?
- The participants in the study were aware that they were receiving the actual drug.
- The pharmaceutical company has a history of funding studies that produce favorable results.
- The independent review was conducted by a team of experts with no ties to the company.
- A subsequent study using a placebo control group found that Nexium was no more effective than a placebo.
- The participants in the study were not representative of the general population with acid reflux.
Answer: A subsequent study using a placebo control group found that Nexium was no more effective than a placebo.
The critics argue that the study is unreliable due to lack of placebo control and biased sample. Option d directly supports this by showing that when a proper placebo-controlled study was done, Nexium was not effective, confirming the unreliability of the original study's results.
10. Which of the following is an assumption on which the argument depends?
- Office workers who sit for long hours are less likely to exercise regularly.
- The study's participants accurately reported their sitting time.
- There is no other factor that could account for the increased risk of back pain among those who sit longer.
- Chronic back pain is primarily caused by workplace factors.
- Sitting for more than six hours per day is unavoidable for most office workers.
Answer: There is no other factor that could account for the increased risk of back pain among those who sit longer.
The argument concludes that prolonged sitting causes back pain based on a correlation. The assumption is that no other factor (like physical activity) explains the correlation. Option c states this assumption: that there is no other factor accounting for the increased risk.
11. Which of the following is an assumption on which the pharmaceutical company's response depends?
- Patients with severe migraines would not benefit from Drug X.
- The exclusion of severe migraine patients does not bias the results in favor of Drug X.
- The placebo group in the study had a similar proportion of severe migraine patients as the treatment group.
- The study's results can be generalized to patients with severe migraines.
- The competing company's argument is based on a misunderstanding of the study design.
Answer: The exclusion of severe migraine patients does not bias the results in favor of Drug X.
The company claims the study is valid despite excluding severe cases. This assumes that excluding severe patients does not bias the results (e.g., if severe patients are less likely to respond, excluding them could inflate effectiveness). Option b captures this assumption.
12. Which of the following identifies a gap in the argument?
- The training program may have been poorly designed.
- The increase in satisfaction scores might be due to the new feedback system rather than the training.
- Customer satisfaction scores are not a reliable measure of service quality.
- The training program was only implemented for a short period.
- Other companies also saw improvements in customer satisfaction.
Answer: The increase in satisfaction scores might be due to the new feedback system rather than the training.
The argument concludes that the training program caused the increase, but it ignores the new feedback system as an alternative cause. This is a gap between the evidence and the conclusion. Option b correctly identifies that the increase might be due to the feedback system.