PT129.S1.Q23 > Question

SECTION 1 · lr

Question 1 Question 2 Question 3 Question 4 Question 5 Question 6 Question 7 Question 8 Question 9 Question 10 Question 11 Question 12 Question 13 Question 14 Question 15 Question 16 Question 17 Question 18 Question 19 Question 20 Question 21 Question 22 Question 23 Question 24 Question 25

SECTION 2 · lr

SECTION 3 · lr

SECTION 4 · rc

PASSAGE 1

Question 1 Question 2 Question 3 Question 4 Question 5

PASSAGE 2

Question 6 Question 7 Question 8 Question 9 Question 10 Question 11 Question 12

PASSAGE 3

Question 13 Question 14 Question 15 Question 16 Question 17 Question 18 Question 19

PASSAGE 4

Question 20 Question 21 Question 22 Question 23 Question 24 Question 25 Question 26 Question 27

The argument describes a situation wherein which individuals may be acting with ulterior, self-interested motives and concludes that the public should therefore be informed of how those individuals might stand to benefit from their actions. Since authors in scientific journals have money invested in the companies they’re praising, the author claims that the public should be made aware of those authors’ investments.

The argument conforms to the principle that the public should be informed when someone could personally benefit from the course of action they are promoting.

This principle tells us how certain people should invest their money. However, the stimulus concludes that the public should know what companies the authors are invested in, not that the authors shouldn’t be invested in any particular companies.

This principle is about what should serve as the grounds for the claims one makes. The argument in the stimulus doesn’t say that the authors should justify their claims in a certain way; it concludes that the public should know what companies they’re invested in.

This principle is about whether people with insider information should be allowed to trade stocks. There’s no indication that the authors in the stimulus have private information, and the argument makes no claim about what stocks they shouldn’t be allowed to trade.

This principle tells us that certain people shouldn’t be allowed to make certain investments. The stimulus doesn’t claim that the authors shouldn’t be allowed to make any particular investments, only that the public should be aware of their holdings.

This principle applies to a situation where one party stands to benefit from taking a particular course of action. It tells us that other parties should be informed of that potential conflict of interest. This parallels the argument in the stimulus.

PrepTest 129 - Section 1 - Question 23

Difficulty

Analysis

Answer Popularity

Question history

Confirm action