Summary
The author concludes that gesturing helps speakers quickly find the phrases they want. This is supported by an experiment.
A group of randomly selected people was divided into two groups. One group was allowed to gesture while describing action-packed scenes from cartoons. Another group was NOT allowed to gesture while describing those scenes.
There was a correlation between gesturing and speaking more quickly, as well as repeating one’s self less often.
A group of randomly selected people was divided into two groups. One group was allowed to gesture while describing action-packed scenes from cartoons. Another group was NOT allowed to gesture while describing those scenes.
There was a correlation between gesturing and speaking more quickly, as well as repeating one’s self less often.
Missing Connection
The conclusion brings up the new concept of “helping speakers quickly find the phrases they want.” The premises don’t say anything about helping speakers quickly find the phrases they want. Rather, the premises simply describe an experiment in which those who gestured while describing scenes from a cartoon spoke more quickly and repeated themselves less. But the correlation between gesturing and speaking quickly / repeating less often doesn’t prove a causal relationship. We want to establish that the experiment proves gesturing “helps speakers quickly find the phrases they want.”
A
Ordinarily almost everyone regularly gestures when speaking quickly and with little repetition, regardless of the topic being discussed.
(A) doesn’t establish that gesturing helps people quickly find the phrases they want. It simply establishes that most people under ordinary conditions regularly use gestures. But it doesn’t create a causal relationship between gesturing and speaking more quickly / repeating one’s self less often.
B
The cartoons were chosen by those who conducted the experiment and were selected from a variety of sources.
The origin of the cartoons that were described has no impact on the reasoning. We want to establish that gesturing helps people find phrases more quickly. (B) doesn’t do that.
C
Any form of behavior correlated with quicker speech and less repetition in speech helps speakers find the phrases they want quickly.
The premises describe an experiment in which gesturing was correlated with quicker speech and less repetition. According to (C), then, the correlation observed in the experiment would establish that gesturing helps speakers find the phrases they want quickly.
D
Any form of behavior that helps speakers quickly find the phrases they want also enables them to speak more quickly and repeat themselves less than they would if they were not engaged in that behavior.
We want to prove that gesturing helps speakers quickly find the phrases they want. We don’t want an answer that tells us what happens IF gesturing helps speakers quickly find the phrases they want. In other words, we’re looking for “gesturing correlated with speaking quickly / less repeats → helps speakers find phrases quickly.” (E) puts “helps speakers find phrases quickly” on the left side of the arrow.
E
Of the subjects who were allowed to gesture, those who spoke the most quickly and repeated themselves least were among those who gestured the most.
(E) might strengthen the argument by strengthening the correlation between gesturing and speaking faster / repeating less. But it doesn’t prove, with 100% certainty, a causal relationship.
Summary
The author concludes that most children shouldn’t have pets until they’re at least 6 years old. Why?
Because most children under 6 are egocentric and selfish in their attitudes toward animals.
In addition, most children under 6 don’t understand that animals are independent creatures with their own feelings and needs.
Because most children under 6 are egocentric and selfish in their attitudes toward animals.
In addition, most children under 6 don’t understand that animals are independent creatures with their own feelings and needs.
Missing Connection
The conclusion brings up a new concept — shouldn’t have pets. The premises don’t say anything about who shouldn’t have pets. So, at a minimum, the correct answer needs to tell us about people who shouldn’t have pets.
To go further, we can anticipate a more specific connection between the premises and the conclusion. Any answer that connects a feature we know about most children under 6 to “should not have pets” can be correct:
If one is egocentric and selfish in attitudes toward animals, then one shouldn’t have a pet.
or
If one doesn’t understand that animals are independent creatures with their own feelings and needs, then one shouldn’t have a pet.
To go further, we can anticipate a more specific connection between the premises and the conclusion. Any answer that connects a feature we know about most children under 6 to “should not have pets” can be correct:
If one is egocentric and selfish in attitudes toward animals, then one shouldn’t have a pet.
or
If one doesn’t understand that animals are independent creatures with their own feelings and needs, then one shouldn’t have a pet.
A
Most children who are egocentric and selfish in their attitudes towards animals rely on others to take care of a pet.
(A) doesn’t establish anything about who shouldn’t have a pet. Since neither this answer nor the premises establish who shouldn’t have a pet, it can’t make the argument valid.
B
Children who are old enough to understand that animals are independent creatures with their own feelings and needs should be allowed to have pets.
(B) allows us to conclude that certain children SHOULD be allowed to have pets. But we’re trying to prove that certain children should NOT be allowed to have pets. (B) is the sufficiency/necessity confused version of what we want.
C
Most children who are egocentric and selfish in their attitudes towards animals do not have pets.
(C) doesn’t establish anything about who shouldn’t have a pet. Since neither this answer nor the premises establish who shouldn’t have a pet, it can’t make the argument valid.
D
Most children are egocentric and selfish in their attitudes towards their pets and do not understand that their pets are independent creatures with their own feelings and needs.
(D) doesn’t establish anything about who shouldn’t have a pet. Since neither this answer nor the premises establish who shouldn’t have a pet, it can’t make the argument valid.
E
The only children who should have pets are those who understand that their pets are independent creatures with their own feelings and needs.
(E) establishes that in order for a child to be one that should have a pet, the child must understand the pet is an independent creature. Since we know from the premises that most children under 6 don’t understand this, (E) allows us to conclude that most children under 6 shouldn’t have a pet.
Summary
The author concludes that most children today will NOT develop a lifelong interest in literature. (”Few X are Y” = “Most X are NOT Y.”)
Why?
Because most children today do NOT spend their free time reading stories.
Why?
Because most children today do NOT spend their free time reading stories.
Missing Connection
We’re trying to prove that most children won’t develop a lifelong interest in literature. But the premise doesn’t tell us anything about what leads to “won’t develop a lifelong interest in literature.” So, at a minimum, the correct answer must establish what’s necessary in order for developing a lifelong interest in literature.
To go further, we can anticipate a more specific relationship that will get us from the premise to the conclusion:
If one does not spend their free time reading stories, one will not develop a lifelong interest in literature. (Or in other words, in order to develop a lifelong interest in literature, one must spend their free time reading stories.)
To go further, we can anticipate a more specific relationship that will get us from the premise to the conclusion:
If one does not spend their free time reading stories, one will not develop a lifelong interest in literature. (Or in other words, in order to develop a lifelong interest in literature, one must spend their free time reading stories.)
A
No children who spend their free time reading stories fail to develop a lifelong interest in literature.
(A) asserts that if a child does spend free time reading stories, they will develop a lifelong interest in literature. But we want to know that if a child does NOT spend free time reading stories, they will NOT develop the interest. (A) is the sufficiency/necessity confused version of what we want.
B
Only those people who currently spend their free time reading stories will develop a lifelong interest in literature.
(B) establishes that in order to develop a lifelong interest in literature, one must currently spend their free time reading stories. Since we know that most children don’t currently spend their free time reading stories, (B) allows us to conclude that those children won’t develop a lifelong interest in literature.
C
No children who grow up in a household that lacks a television fail to spend their free time reading stories.
(C) doesn’t establish what’s required in order to develop a lifelong interest in reading literature. Since neither this answer nor the premise tells us what’s required to develop a lifelong interest in reading literature, it cannot make the argument valid.
D
Few people who watch a great deal of television develop a lifelong interest in literature.
(D) establishes that most people who watch a “great deal” of TV will not develop a lifelong interest in literature. But we don’t know whether most children spend a “great deal” of time watching TV. In addition, (D) leaves open the possibility that children could be among the minority of people who could watch a lot of TV and still develop a lifelong interest in great literature.
E
Few children who spend their free time reading stories watch television.
(E) doesn’t establish what’s required in order to develop a lifelong interest in reading literature. Since neither this answer nor the premise tells us what’s required to develop a lifelong interest in reading literature, it cannot make the argument valid.