A salesperson who makes a sale does not change the desires of the customer. ███████ ███ ███████████ █████ ███ ████ █████ ███████ ███ ███ ████ █████████ ███ ████████ ████ █ ██████████ ███████ ████ ███████ █████ ██████████ ██████ ██ ████ ███ █ ██████████ ██ ████ ████ ███ █████████ ███████████ ██ ███ █████████████ ██████████ █████ ███████████ ████ ████████ ███ ███████████ █████ █████ ████ ██ ███ ██ ██████ ███ █████ ██ ████████
The author tries to draw an analogy between convincing people to vote for a politician and how a salesperson convinces people to buy a products. A salesperson doesn’t change the person’s desires, but rather convinces the person that a product will satisfy the person’s existing desires. Since convincing people to vote for a politician is analogous, after finding out what policies a person supports, one should try to convince the person that a particular politician is most likely to get those policies enacted.
We’re looking to complete the analogy. The missing piece is the idea that one tries to convince a person that a particular politician is most likely to get the person’s preferred policies enacted.
Which one of the following ████ █████████ █████████ ███ █████████
show that the █████████ ██ ███ ██████████ ██ ████████ ██ ███ █████ ███ ██ █████ ████████
Unsupported. The saleperson analogy doesn’t involve pointing out the shortcomings of competing products. So a conclusion concerning the shortcomings of other politicians doesn’t fit.
disguise any difference ███████ ███ ████████ ███ ██████████ ████████ ███ ███ ████████ █████████ ██ █████ ██████████
Unsupported. The salesperson analogy doesn’t involve making people think one product is similar to others. It’s about convincing someone that a particular product will do what the customer wants.
convince the voter ████ ███ ████████ ███████ ██ ███ ██████████ ██ ████████ ███ ██████████ ██ █████ ███████ ██ ███ █████
Antisupported. The salesperson analogy involves finding out what the customer desires, not trying to change those desires. So the conclusion would not involve trying to change what policies a person prefers.
demonstrate that the ██████████ ██ █ ██████ ██ ███████████ █████████ ███ ██ ██████████ ██ ████ ██ ███ ████ ██████ ██ ███ █████
Unsupported. The conclusion should be about showing that a politician will get a person’s preferred policies enacted. The character and interests of a politician are not the same as the policies that politician will get enacted.
persuade the voter ████ ██████ ███ ███ ██████████ ██ ████████ ██ ███ ████ ███ ██ ███ █████ ████████ ███████
Strongly supported. The salesperson analogy involves getting a person to think a product will satisfy the person’s desires. So, the conclusion should be about getting a person to think a politicians will get the person’s preferred policies enacted.
Answer five questions and we'll estimate your score.
It takes about five minutes.
Take the free diagnosticWant to know why the right answer is right?
7Sage membership unlocks explanations of every question. Every answer choice. On every official PrepTest. Start with a free account.
By signing up you agree to our
terms of service.
This site is protected by reCAPTCHA and the Google
Privacy Policy
and
Terms of Service
apply.