@OwenTrela That may be for assumption questions, but this is not an assumption question. We are simply asked to infer the reason for the trend and choose the answer that does not infer because it is an "except" question. That trend that is given is that over time journalists have been less likely to challenge the veracity in the claims in articles. D does not explain that trend.

@EmmaHulbert This makes sense and I thought that at first too. Then I took the part "not subject to environmental influences" into more consideration bc even though it does not say the twins were separated, they were heavily subject to the environmental influences of each other.

@coleknight42 Here is why I quickly ruled out choice A in favor of B. It has everything to do with the passage's conclusion: "Thus, the advertising campaign was ill-conceived." if we test AC A that choice has little to do with the conclusion because that choices implies a comparison. Now if the conclusion were more along the lines of, "x campaign would have been better than chosen campaign." AC A would be more likely, but the conclusion given allows us the criticism on the grounds that any alternative to how it was conceived other than simply the campaign is more likely than solely what the market consultant predicted. It only gives one possible reason and ignores any other possible outside reason. Does this make sense?

@LSATgoat All you need to do is look at the very first sentence Waller says. He states D exactly.

This is a very poor question and answer. This whole time we are taught not to add assumptions especially to a question like which statement is most supported. for C we have actual assumptions like the fact that the evidence shows concerns and interest, all that were listed were things, no indication that those things listed can be classified as concerns or interests. In fact C is a great example of an answer that we've been widely taught to avoid. This is a poor question.

@sapalmeri Also, the wording, D says "is being insincere," making an assertion. A only says "should be regarded as insincere." The political scientist doesn't explicitly say people should regard differently.