Summarize Argument
The stimulus concludes that a meeting must have a clear time frame and be no longer than 30 minutes to be maximally productive. It draws this conclusion from a company study about meeting productivity.
Identify Conclusion
The conclusion states conditions for a meeting to be maximally productive: “it needs to have a clear time frame and be no more than 30 minutes long.”
A
In general, a meeting at the company that is no more than 30 minutes long and has a clear time frame will achieve maximum productivity.
This answer is confusing necessary and sufficient. Our stimulus tells us what a meeting must do to be maximally productive. Here, we’re talking about what will guarantee a meeting being maximally productive.
B
Most meetings at the company show diminishing returns after 30 minutes, according to a study.
This is a premise that supports the conclusion, not a conclusion itself.
C
A meeting at the company will be maximally productive only if it has a clear time frame and lasts no more than 30 minutes.
This answer rephrases the last sentence in our stimulus, which is what the rest of the argument supports. What does a meeting need to be maximally productive? A clear time frame and a duration no longer than 30 minutes.
D
According to a study, meetings at the company were the most productive when they had clear time frames.
This is a premise supporting our partial conclusion that meetings must have clear time frames to be maximally productive.
E
A study of meetings at the company says that little productivity should be expected after the 60-minute mark.
This is a premise that supports our conclusion. The study isn’t what the stimulus is arguing for, but rather the conditions that a meeting must have to be maximally productive.
Summary
The author concludes that the journalist will reveal the informant’s identity. This is based on the following:
If she is ordered to do so by a judge or by her editor, the journalist will publicly reveal the informant’s identity.
The information provided by the informant concerns safey violations at the power plant.
If she is ordered to do so by a judge or by her editor, the journalist will publicly reveal the informant’s identity.
The information provided by the informant concerns safey violations at the power plant.
Missing Connection
We know what is sufficient to infer that the journalist will publicly reveal the identity — a judge or her editor orders her to. Do we have enough to establish that a judge or her editor will order her to reveal the identity? No. But we do know that the information concerns safety violations. If we can get from the fact that the information concerns safety violations to the idea that a judge or her editor will order her to disclose, that would make the argument valid.
A
The information that the informant provided is known to be false.
(A) doesn’t establish that a judge or her editor will order disclosure. So it doesn’t trigger the premise concerning when the journalist will reveal the informant’s identity.
B
The journalist’s editor will not order her to reveal the informant’s identity unless the information is accurate and concerns public safety.
(B) tells us that if the information is not accurate or does not concern public safety, then the editor will NOT order disclosure. But we’re trying to prove that the judge or editor WILL order disclosure.
C
If the information concerns safety at the power plant, a judge will order the journalist to reveal her informant’s identity.
We know that the information concerns safety at the power plant. Based on (C), we can infer, then, that the judge will order disclosure of the identity. Based on the first premise, then, we can conclude that the journalist will reveal the informant’s identity.
D
The truth of the information provided by the informant can be verified only if the informant’s identity is publicly revealed.
(D) doesn’t establish that a judge or her editor will order disclosure. So it doesn’t trigger the premise concerning when the journalist will reveal the informant’s identity.
E
The informant understood, at the time the journalist promised him confidentiality, that she would break this promise if ordered to do so by a judge.
(E) doesn’t establish that a judge or her editor will order disclosure. So it doesn’t trigger the premise concerning when the journalist will reveal the informant’s identity.
"Surprising" Phenomenon
How could the 2009 analysis have detected cobalt and proceeded to suggest that the painting was produced before 1804 while the presence of cobalt led the 1955 analysis to date the painting to post-1804?
Objective
The right answer will describe a difference between the 2009 and the 1955 analyses. That difference must show why, unlike the 1955 analysis, the 2009 study determined that the presence of cobalt does not mean that the painting had to be produced after 1804.
A
The 2009 analysis revealed that cobalt was located only in the topmost paint layer, which was possibly applied to conceal damage to original paint layers.
This shows how the 2009 analysis differed from the 1955 analysis: the 2009 analysis revealed that there was no cobalt in the lower paint layers, so the original work could have been produced before 1804. The topmost layer—the layer containing cobalt—could have been added later.
B
The 2009 analysis used sophisticated scientific equipment that can detect much smaller amounts of cobalt than could the equipment used for the 1955 analysis.
This difference between the analyses doesn’t help explain why the studies led to different conclusions about the painting’s production date. It doesn’t matter how much cobalt the analyses found, just that they both detected some amount and still reached different conclusions.
C
The 2009 analysis took more samples from the painting than the 1955 analysis did, though those samples were smaller.
This provides a difference between the analyses, but it’s not a difference that helps explain why they led to different conclusions about the painting’s production date. The sample sizes and quantities don’t tell us anything about the presence of cobalt or its implications.
D
Many experts, based on the style and the subject matter of the painting, have dated the painting to the 1700s.
This isn’t relevant information. We’re trying to figure out why there’s a discrepancy between the conclusions of the 2009 and 1955 analyses, not when the painting was actually created or what other people think.
E
New information that came to light in the 1990s suggested that cobalt blue was used only rarely in Italy in the years immediately following 1804.
This doesn’t help us understand how the 2009 study and the 1955 study reached different conclusions about the painting’s production date. It doesn’t matter to us whether cobalt was used all the time or only rarely in the years immediately following 1804!
Summarize Argument: Phenomenon-Hypothesis
The author hypothesizes that a public health campaign against influenza was heeded by the public. This is based on an observation that the duration of the public health campaign correlated with a much lower rate of influenza than had been predicted.
Notable Assumptions
The author assumes that there is no alternative explanation for the lower influenza rates that simply coincided with the public health campaign.
The author also assumes that the measures encouraged by the campaign are effective against the spread of influenza, so that the public’s following of those measures could cause the lower rates.
The author also assumes that the measures encouraged by the campaign are effective against the spread of influenza, so that the public’s following of those measures could cause the lower rates.
A
The incidence of food-borne illnesses, which can be effectively controlled by frequent hand washing, was markedly lower than usual during the six-month period.
This strengthens by providing further evidence that hand-washing rates were higher during the six-month period. This makes it more likely that during this time period, the public was actually heeding the campaign, which encouraged hand-washing.
B
During the six-month period, the incidence of the common cold, which has many of the same symptoms as influenza, was about the same as usual.
This might actually weaken, since the spread of the common cold would probably also be limited by the measures encouraged by the public health campaign. So if common cold rates were not lower, the campaign may not have caused the lower influenza rates.
C
There were fewer large public gatherings than usual during the six-month period.
It’s not clear without more information whether this is connected to the public health campaign, so it doesn’t help us. This might be due to the campaign’s advice to avoid gatherings when ill, but it could also be unrelated—we can’t jump to either assumption.
D
Independently of the public health campaign, the news media spread the message that one’s risk of contracting influenza can be lessened by frequent hand washing.
This weakens by providing an alternative explanation for the reduction of influenza rates: instead of heeding the public health campaign itself, the public may have just been listening to the news media’s reports.
E
In a survey completed before the campaign began, many people admitted that they should do more to limit the spread of influenza.
This is irrelevant, since the public’s desire to limit the spread of influenza does not provide evidence that they followed the instructions of the public health campaign later on.
Nutritionist: Most fad diets prescribe a single narrow range of nutrients for everyone. But because different foods contain nutrients that are helpful for treating or preventing different health problems, dietary needs vary widely from person to person. However, everyone should eat plenty of fruits and vegetables, which protect against a wide range of health problems.
Summary
Most fad diets prescribe a narrow range of nutrients for everyone. But dietary needs vary widely from person to person because different foods have different nutrients for treating and preventing different health problems. However, everyone should eat plenty of fruits and vegetables because these foods protect against a range of health problems.
Strongly Supported Conclusions
Most fad diets do not meet the dietary needs of at least some people.
A
Most fad diets require that everyone following them eat plenty of fruits and vegetables.
This answer is unsupported. We don’t know what specifically most fad diets require. We only know that most fad diets prescribe a narrow range of nutrients.
B
Fruits and vegetables are the only foods that contain enough different nutrients to protect against a wide range of health problems.
This answer is unsupported. Saying these are the “only” foods with these characteristics is too strong. We only know that fruits and vegetables are an example of a food group containing a diversity of nutrients.
C
Any two people have different health problems and thus different dietary needs.
This answer is unsupported. It is possible that you could have two people with the same health problems.
D
Most fad diets fail to satisfy the dietary needs of some people.
This answer is strongly supported. We know that the dietary needs of people vary widely and that most fad diets prescribe a narrow range of nutrients. It’s inevitable that most fad diets don’t meet some people’s dietary needs.
E
There are very few if any nutrients that are contained in every food other than fruits and vegetables.
This answer is unsupported. We don’t know what nutrients are contained in other foods.
Summarize Argument: Phenomenon-Hypothesis
The author hypothesizes that darker coffee roasts irritate the stomach less than lighter roasts. This is because darker roasts contain more NMP, which suppresses production of irritating stomach acid.
Notable Assumptions
The author assumes that darker roasts don’t stimulate greater production of irritating stomach acid (i.e. through more caffeine) than lighter roasts. Alternately, the author assumes that the NMP in darker roasts outweighs this additional acid production, if such additional acid production in fact occurs.
A
Does extending the roasting time of coffee beans increase the amount of caffeine present in the brewed coffee?
If the answer is “yes,” then the NMP in darker roasts might not be enough to counteract the additional caffeine and subsequent stomach acid production. If the answer is “no,” then darker roasts likely would be less irritating—more NMP means less irritating stomach acid.
B
Does a reduction in acid production in the stomach have an adverse effect on stomach function?
We’re evaluating whether darker roasts really do decrease acid production in the stomach. This concedes that point in advance, which means it has little to no bearing on the author’s argument.
C
Would coffee drinkers who drink caffeinated coffee increase their coffee consumption if the coffee they drank contained less caffeine?
Irrelevant. We don’t know if lighter or darker roasts have more caffeine.
D
Do some coffee drinkers who switch from lighter to darker roasts of coffee increase their daily coffee consumption?
Irrelevant. We have no idea what the effects of switching from lighter roast to darker roast coffee would be in regards to stomach irritation, which is what the author’s argument is about.
E
Do lighter roasts of coffee have any important health benefits that darker roasts of coffee lack?
We don’t care about other health benefits. The author’s argument is about stomach irritation, so we need to evaluate if darker roasts really would cause less stomach irritation than lighter roasts for the reason the author cites.
Summarize Argument
The author concludes that Liang should not receive a bonus this year. This is based on the fact that the only employees who should get a bonus are those who were exceptionally productive. And the corporate division in which Liang works wasn’t met its productivity goals for the year.
Identify and Describe Flaw
The author assumes that if the corporate division in which she works wasn’t exceptionally productive, then Liang wasn’t exceptionally productive. This is a whole-to-part fallacy. This overlooks the possibility that Liang could have been exceptionally productive, even if her division wasn’t; maybe other people were dragging down the whole division despite Liang’s productivity.
A
fails to take into account the possibility that the standards by which productivity is judged might vary across different divisions of a corporation
This possibility wouldn’t undermine the argument. Even if productivity is measured in different ways, it’s still the case that we can determine whether one division is productive using the relevant ways of measuring productivity.
B
overlooks the possibility that a corporation as a whole can have a profitable year even though one division of the corporation does not
The conclusion doesn’t assert that the corporation didn’t have a profitable year. So this possibility doesn’t undermine the reasoning.
C
fails to justify its use of one group’s performance as the basis for a conclusion about a wholly different group
The conclusion isn’t about a different group. It’s about Liang, who is an individual within a group.
D
reaches a conclusion about the performance of one member of a group merely on the basis of the performance of the group as a whole
We know that Liang’s corporate division didn’t meet productivity goals. That doesn’t mean Liang herself failed to meet productivity goals or wasn’t exceptionally productive. This is why the argument’s reasoning is not persuasive.
E
takes for granted that an employee who has an unproductive year will not be exceptionally productive in subsequent years
The author doesn’t conclude that Liang shouldn’t get the bonus in subsequent years. The argument concerns only this year.
Naturalist: Different nonhuman primate species exhibit many contrasts in behavior. If a zookeeper leaves a screwdriver within reach of a chimpanzee, the animal is likely to examine and play with it for a time, and then move on to something else. In the same circumstances, an orangutan is likely to pretend to ignore the tool at first; later, in the zookeeper’s absence, the orangutan may use the screwdriver to try to dismantle its cage.
Summary
Naturalist: Different primate species behave differently. If a zookeeper leaves a screwdriver near a chimpanzee, it will likely play with it for a while and then lose interest. In contrast, an orangutan might pretend not to care at first, but later, when the zookeeper is gone, it may try to use the screwdriver to take apart its cage.
Strongly Supported Conclusions
Different nonhuman primates may engage with the same tool in different ways.
By pretending to ignore the screwdriver until the zookeeper is gone, some orangutans try to deceive zookeepers.
A
Orangutans are the most intelligent of nonhuman primates.
Unsupported. The stimulus does not compare the intelligence or orangutans to the intelligence of any other nonhuman primates.
B
Orangutans have better memories than chimpanzees have.
Unsupported. The stimulus doesn’t give any information about the memories of orangutans and chimpanzees. Just because an orangutan returns to the tool later while the chimpanzee loses interest does not mean that the orangutan has a better memory.
C
Some nonhuman primates are capable of deception.
Strongly supported. Because the orangutan pretends to ignore the screwdriver and then later tries to dismantle its cage with it, we can conclude that it is capable of deception.
D
Orangutans dislike being caged more than chimpanzees do.
Unsupported. We do not know that orangutans dislike being caged more than chimpanzees do simply based on the fact that an orangutan may try to dismantle its cage when given a screwdriver.
E
Not all nonhuman primates understand tool use.
Unsupported. Just because the chimpanzee does not try to use the screwdriver as a tool does not mean that it does not understand tool use.