"Surprising" Phenomenon
Why are patients at large, urban hospitals less likely to recover than patients at small, rural hospitals?
Objective
The correct answer must offer an unsatisfactory hypothesis, one that fails to explain the different recovery rates. Every wrong answer, meanwhile, will give a reason that patients at small, rural hospitals recover at higher rates than those at large, urban hospitals.
A
Because there are fewer patients to feed, nutritionists at small hospitals are better able to tailor meals to the dietary needs of each patient.
This would explain the different recovery rates. Because patients at small hospitals are more likely to get personal dietary attention, they are more likely to recover.
B
The less friendly, more impersonal atmosphere of large hospitals can be a source of stress for patients at those hospitals.
This would explain the different recovery rates. Because patients at large hospitals are subject to stress from the impersonal atmosphere, they are less likely to recover.
C
Although large hospitals tend to draw doctors trained at the more prestigious schools, no correlation has been found between the prestige of a doctor’s school and patients’ recovery rate.
This rules out an explanation for the opposite discrepancy, but does not explain the discrepancy at hand. It implies that doctors at both types of hospitals are equally likely to help their patients recover, leaving the difference in recovery rates unexplained.
D
Because space is relatively scarce in large hospitals, doctors are encouraged to minimize the length of time that patients are held for observation following a medical procedure.
This would explain the different recovery rates. Because patients at large hospitals tend to be observed for less time, they are less likely to recover.
E
Doctors at large hospitals tend to have a greater number of patients and consequently less time to explain to staff and to patients how medications are to be administered.
This would explain the different recovery rates. Because patients and staff at large hospitals are more likely to misunderstand how to administer medication, they are less likely to benefit from that medication and thus the patients are less likely to recover.
Summarize Argument
The author concludes that risk-averse lenders shouldn’t lend to worker-owned businesses. This is because worker-owned businesses have inefficiencies that can lead to low profits.
Notable Assumptions
Perry assumes that these inefficiencies aren’t offset by some feature of worker-owned businesses that goes unmentioned. The fact that worker-owned businesses continue to exist, despite their inherent inefficiencies, suggests there’s some hidden factor here that Perry has neglected.
A
Businesses with the most extensive divisions of labor sometimes fail to make the fullest use of their most versatile employees’ potential.
This supports Perry’s argument. Worker-owned business have extensive divisions of labor, so this points to yet another inefficiency.
B
Lenders who specialize in high-risk loans are the largest source of loans for worker-owned businesses.
Perry concludes what risk-averse lenders should do. We don’t care about ones who specialize in high-risk loans.
C
Investor-owned businesses are more likely than worker-owned businesses are to receive start-up loans.
Like (A), this supports Perry’s argument. Worker-owned businesses are less likely than investor-owned business to receive the necessary funding to grow. Thus, these businesses likely aren’t a great investment for risk-averse investors.
D
Worker-owned businesses have traditionally obtained loans from cooperative lending institutions established by coalitions of worker-owned businesses.
This tells us how worker-owned businesses are usually funded. We need to know why risk-averse lenders should actually be interested in worker-owned businesses.
E
In most worker-owned businesses, workers compensate for inefficiencies by working longer hours than do workers in investor-owned businesses.
Worker-owed businesses mitigate their inherent inefficiencies through hard work. Thus, worker-owed businesses might not actually be any riskier than other businesses.
Summary
Some paleontologists think the fact that fossilized hadrosaur babies and adolescents were found in nests proves that hadrosaurs guarded their young in nests long after the young were hatched from eggs. The author points out that similar nests for young crocodiles are made by modern crocodiles, even though crocodiles do not guard their young for a long time after hatching.
Strongly Supported Conclusions
The discovery of fossilized hadrosaur babies and adolescents in their nests does not prove that hadrosaurs guarded their young in nests long after the young were hatched from eggs.
A
paleontologists who believe that hadrosaurs guarded their young long after the young hatched have no evidence to support this belief
Antisupported. The paleontologists do have evidence. The author’s point is that this evidence does not prove what the paleontologists think it does, but this doesn’t mean the evidence doesn’t exist.
B
we will never be able to know the extent to which hadrosaurs guarded their young
Unsupported. The author criticizes an argument based on particular evidence. It’s possible that we will discover how long hadrosaurs guarded their young based on other evidence.
C
hadrosaurs guarded their young for at most very brief periods after hatching
Unsupported. The author points out that the paleontologists’ evidence doesn’t guarantee that hadrosaurs guarded their young for a long time. This doesn’t imply that hadrosaurs did not guard their young for a long time.
D
it is unclear whether what we learn about hadrosaurs from their fossilized remains tells us anything about other dinosaurs
Unsupported. The author doesn’t criticize the paleontologists’ argument by suggesting that hadrosaurs were different from other dinosaurs.
E
the construction of nests for hatchlings and adolescents is not strong evidence for the paleontologists’ belief
Strongly supported. The author points out that some animals build similar nests, but don’t guard their young for a long time. So, the fact hadrosaurs had nests for their young doesn’t mean they guarded their young for a long time.
"Surprising" Phenomenon
Why did researchers conclude that studying increases a student’s chances of earning a higher grade when many students who did not study got better grades than the students who studied the most?
Objective
The correct answer must state a reason for researchers to conclude that studying increased a student’s chances of getting a higher grade. It must allow for some students who did not study to get better grades than those students who studied the most.
A
The students who spent the most time studying earned higher grades than did some students who studied for less time than the average.
This is not enough to justify the researchers’ conclusion. It is possible that students who studied the most earned better grades than only a small proportion of the students who studied little, in which case their conclusion remains unexplained.
B
The students tended to get slightly lower grades as the academic year progressed.
This does not imply that students studied less as the year progressed, only that they received lower grades. Without information about the time students spent studying, this does not support the researchers’ conclusion.
C
In each course, the more a student studied, the better his or her grade was in that course.
This states that students in a given course are more likely to succeed with more study. It is consistent with the evidence because it implies the students who studied the most were in different courses than the students who performed better with less studying.
D
The students who spent the least time studying tended to be students with no more than average involvement in extracurricular activities.
This does not explain the researchers’ conclusion. It is not implied that involvement in extracurriculars makes a student more or less likely to earn high grades.
E
Students who spent more time studying understood the course material better than other students did.
Researchers concluded that studying leads to higher grades, not a better understanding of the course material. This does not explain why some students who did not study got better grades than students who did.
Summary
Researchers conducted a study where three groups of cyclists cycled for one hour at differing levels of intensity. Group A cycled at 60% of the recommended maximum pulse rate, Group B cycled at 70%, and Group C cycled at 85%. Most of the members of Group A reported feeling less depressed and angry afterward. Most of Group B did not report these benefits. Most of Group C said that they felt more depressed and angry than before the exercise.
Strongly Supported Conclusions
The intensity of an exercise can impact someone’s psychological state
A
The higher the pulse rate attained in sustained exercise, the less psychological benefit the exercise tends to produce.
The stimulus only provides data between 60-85%. It could be that higher pulse rates provide great psychological benefits like a runner’s high. It is too strong to suggest that the higher the pulse rate, the less physiological benefits are provided.
B
The effect that a period of cycling has on the mood of professional cyclists tends to depend at least in part on how intense the cycling is.
The stimulus well supports the idea that the intensity of a workout impacts the mood of professional cyclers. Those whose heart rates were lower (less intense workout) felt much better than those with a higher pulse rate (more intense workout).
C
For professional cyclists, the best exercise from the point of view of improving mood is cycling that pushes the pulse no higher than 60 percent of the maximum pulse rate.
There is no information about what the *best* exercise is for cyclists. You have to assume that feeling less depressed and angry are the only criteria for what makes something the best exercise for professional cyclists.
D
Physical factors, including pulse rate, contribute as much to depression as do psychological factors.
The stimulus does compare physical factors and other psychological factors (much less that they contribute as much).
E
Moderate cycling tends to benefit professional cyclists physically as much or more than intense cycling.
The stimulus does not mention how much physical benefit moderate vs. intense cycling provides.
This is a Sufficient Assumption question so our job is to add a premise to make the existing argument valid.
It's a very difficult question because you had to realize that they fed you the definition of "prudent" in the premises. The definition is "forming opinions of others only after cautiously gathering and weighing the evidence."
If you can't get over that hurdle, you're likely getting this question wrong.
Assuming you made that connection, then replace that long definition in the premises with the word "prudent" and you should see that this is like any other SA question.
Premise in English: being prudent will make people resent you.
Premise in Lawgic: P --> R
Conclusion in English: appearing prudent is imprudent
Conclusion in Lawgic: P --> Imp
What's the missing SA?
SA in Lawgic: R --> Imp
SA in English: making people resent you is imprudent.
That's (E)
Journalist: Recent studies have demonstrated that a regular smoker who has just smoked a cigarette will typically display significantly better short-term memory skills than a nonsmoker, whether or not the nonsmoker has also just smoked a cigarette for the purposes of the study. Moreover, the majority of those smokers who exhibit this superiority in short-term memory skills will do so for at least eight hours after having last smoked.
Summary
A smoker who has just smoked a cigarette will typically display significantly better short-term memory skills than a nonsmoker, even if the nonsmoker has also just smoked.
Most of these regular smokers will continue to display superior short-term memory skills for at least eight hours after their last cigarette.
Notable Valid Inferences
Most smokers will display better short-term memory skills than will most non-smokers immediately after both parties have smoked a cigarette.
Most smokers will display better short-term memory skills than will most non-smokers immediately after the smoker smoked a cigarette and the nonsmoker did not.
Most smokers will display better short-term memory skills than will most non-smokers for at least eight hours after the smoker’s last cigarette.
A
The short-term memory skills exhibited by a nonsmoker who has just smoked a cigarette are usually substantially worse than the short-term memory skills exhibited by a nonsmoker who has not recently smoked a cigarette.
Could be true. We have no information about how short-term memory skills exhibited by nonsmokers who have not recently smoked a cigarette compare with those exhibited by nonsmokers who have recently smoked, so we can’t conclude that (A) must be false.
B
The short-term memory skills exhibited by a nonsmoker who has just smoked a cigarette are typically superior to those exhibited by a regular smoker who has just smoked a cigarette.
Must be false. This directly refutes the information in the stimulus: we know that the short-term memory skills exhibited by the typical nonsmoker who has just smoked a cigarette will be worse than those exhibited by the typical regular smoker who has just smoked a cigarette!
C
The short-term memory skills exhibited by a nonsmoker who has just smoked a cigarette are typically superior to those exhibited by a regular smoker who has not smoked for more than eight hours.
Could be true. We don’t know how nonsmokers’ short-term memories stack up against smokers’ short-term memories once those smokers have gone over 8 hours without a cigarette!
D
A regular smoker who, immediately after smoking a cigarette, exhibits short-term memory skills no better than those typically exhibited by a nonsmoker is nevertheless likely to exhibit superior short-term memory skills in the hours following a period of heavy smoking.
Could be true. The stimulus does nothing to rule out the possibility that the regular smoker described in (D) could experience a boost in short-term memory skills after smoking heavily, even if their short-term memory skills were not superior immediately after one cigarette.
E
The short-term memory skills exhibited by a regular smoker who last smoked a cigarette five hours ago are typically superior to those exhibited by a regular smoker who has just smoked a cigarette.
Could be true. We have no information about what happens to smokers’ superior short-term memories during the five hours after their last cigarette—maybe they improve before dropping off later!