Summarize Argument
The author concludes that video game sales will soon decrease. This is because most video games are sold to people from 13 to 16 years old—an age group set to steadily decline over the next decade.
Notable Assumptions
The author assumes that people currently aged 13 to 16 won’t continue to buy video games at a substantial level once they leave that age group. The author also assumes that other age groups are unlikely to become more interested in video games. Finally, the author assumes that since most video games are sold to a certain age group, that age group is more interested in video games than other age groups.
A
Most people 17 years old or older have never purchased a video game.
This suggests that video game sales will indeed decrease. We’re looking for the opposite.
B
Video game rentals have declined over the past 3 years.
We don’t care about rentals. We care about sales.
C
New technology will undoubtedly make entirely new entertainment options available over the next 10 years.
The author doesn’t claim video games are popular for lack of other options. We have no idea what effect other options would have.
D
The number of different types of video games available is unlikely to decrease in the near future.
This tells us that nothing else besides demographics is changing. We need to know why that demographic argument (i.e. decline in people ages 13-16) doesn’t entail lower video game sales.
E
Most of the people who have purchased video games over the past 3 years are over the age of 16.
While most video games are sold to people ages 13-16, most people who purchase video games are over the age of 16. This suggests that people continue purchasing video games as they become adults, which may mitigate the demographic argument the author makes.
Summarize Argument
The author concludes that scientific experiments should use double-blind techniques. To support this recommendation, the author says that double-blind techniques help prevent misinterpretations that can come from pre-existing expectations or opinions. Further, the author says that scientists should try to avoid misinterpretations. So since double-blind techniques help avoid misinterpretations, scientists should use these techniques.
Identify Conclusion
The conclusion of the argument is that scientific experiments should use double-blind techniques: “Double-blind techniques should be used whenever possible in scientific experiments.”
A
Scientists’ objectivity may be impeded by interpreting experimental evidence on the basis of expectations and opinions that they already hold.
This information is offered as a premise. This information supports the recommendation to use double-blind techniques, because those techniques prevent the mis-interpretations that can come from pre-existing expectations and opinions.
B
It is advisable for scientists to use double-blind techniques in as high a proportion of their experiments as they can.
This is the conclusion. The author is recommending the use of double-blind techniques; the rest of the argument serves as support for this idea. This is a paraphrase of the first sentence of the argument, which is the conclusion.
C
Scientists sometimes neglect to adequately consider the risk of misinterpreting evidence on the basis of prior expectations and opinions.
The information in this answer could be understood as a reason that double-blind studies are beneficial, but the idea of scientists neglecting to consider the risk of misinterpretations is not explicitly mentioned in the argument. This is not the conclusion.
D
Whenever possible, scientists should refrain from interpreting evidence on the basis of previously formed expectations and convictions.
This is not a paraphrase of the first line of the argument, so it is not the main conclusion. Further, this idea is offered as support for the main conclusion, so it is a premise
E
Double-blind experimental techniques are often an effective way of ensuring scientific objectivity.
This information is a premise that supports the conclusion. This information is offered as a reason that double-blind techniques should be used: Because these techniques are effective in ensuring objectivity, we should use them.
Summarize Argument: Counter-Position
The argument refutes the complaint that electronic media are hurting intellectual skills. The author claims the mind is likely just changing instead of weakening. She uses an analogous situation - literary media was once feared to destroy the skills involved in oral tradition - to support her point.
Identify Argument Part
This is an analogy to the situation at hand that is used to support the conclusion. It is implied that because this media change ended up being embraced, then this change to electronic media will be fine as well.
A
evidence supporting the claim that the intellectual skills fostered by the literary media are being destroyed by the electronic media
This evidence is being used to refute that claim, not support it. The author is claiming that the transition to electronic media will not weaken the mind.
B
an illustration of the general hypothesis being advanced that intellectual abilities are inseparable from the means by which people communicate
The author is not advancing the claim that means and intellectual abilities are inseparable. Instead, she is claiming that intellectual abilities can remain strong, even if the means of communication change.
C
an example of a cultural change that did not necessarily have a detrimental effect on the human mind overall
This is descriptively accurate. The situation is used as an analogy - another situation that ended up ok, even though the media form changed. This shows that the current media transition will also be ok.
D
evidence that the claim that the intellectual skills required and fostered by the literary media are being lost is unwarranted
The author is refuting this claim, but there is no evidence that the author is trying to show it to be unwarranted. The author just claims that a different outcome is more likely.
E
possible evidence, mentioned and then dismissed, that might be cited by supporters of the hypothesis being criticized
This evidence supports the author’s hypothesis that the mind will not be weakened, not the opposition.
Consumer: The latest Connorly Report suggests that Ocksenfrey prepackaged meals are virtually devoid of nutritional value. But the Connorly Report is commissioned by Danto Foods, Ocksenfrey’s largest corporate rival, and early drafts of the report are submitted for approval to Danto Foods’ public relations department. Because of the obvious bias of this report, it is clear that Ocksenfrey’s prepackaged meals really are nutritious.
A
treats evidence that there is an apparent bias as evidence that the Connorly Report’s claims are false
The consumer treats evidence that the Connorly Report is biased as evidence that their claim about Ocksenfrey meals is false. He doesn’t provide any evidence that Ocksenfrey meals are actually nutritious. It’s possible they do lack nutrition, even if the report is biased.
B
draws a conclusion based solely on an unrepresentative sample of Ocksenfrey’s products
This is the cookie-cutter flaw of using an unrepresentative sample. The consumer’s conclusion is about all Ocksenfrey prepackaged meals, and he doesn't mention samples at all. So we can’t know if his conclusion is based on an unrepresentative sample or not.
C
fails to take into account the possibility that Ocksenfrey has just as much motivation to create negative publicity for Danto as Danto has to create negative publicity for Ocksenfrey
The consumer’s conclusion is that Ocksenfrey meals are nutritious. Whether Ocksenfrey has motivation to create negative publicity for Danto doesn’t affect this conclusion, nor does it affect the claim that Danto’s reporting is biased.
D
fails to provide evidence that Danto Foods’ prepackaged meals are not more nutritious than Ocksenfrey’s are
The consumer concludes that Ocksenfrey meals are nutritious; he doesn’t need to prove that they’re more nutritious than Danto meals. Even if Danto meals were more nutritious, it wouldn’t affect the conclusion or the claim that Danto’s report is biased.
E
presumes, without providing justification, that Danto Foods’ public relations department would not approve a draft of a report that was hostile to Danto Foods’ products
The consumer doesn't presume this. All we know is that Danto’s PR department did approve a draft of a report that was hostile to, or at least negative to, Ocksenfrey meals. Whether they’d also approve a draft that was hostile to Danto’s own products is irrelevant.