When you circled (B) for a second i literally screamed WHAT

This question hurts my brain. In the written explanation for (B) it says "There’s no reason to believe these computer experts have expertise in hospital management." but they're at a nonprofit management conference which includes hospitals so why would you think otherwise that they didn't have the expertise to comment on this? I concede to the point that it may not actually be the greatest threat to this hospital which was one of my first thoughts. But it never crossed my mind to think that these computer experts shouldn't have been given a seat at the table to state their opinion. Its far more likely that we should believe they have expertise than not? with that all being said I eliminated all 5 answer choices many times over, and am not completely sold on B.

aint that the TRUTH

if i got this as my third question on the test, im just hitting end and submit....

Agreed, it's as simple as that, and I use this approach.

damn got any pointers?

I agree but I also find a lot of their explanations for why the wrong answer is wrong is too simplistic. They all follow the common theme that we are dumb and how could that possibly be the answer saying "thats not what the passage is even talking about". Which is great and there is truth to that lol. But 7sage is telling me why the wrong answer is wrong on every question and goes in depth about what choosing that answer means.

I used the demon for over 6 months and got some improvement and a better understanding of the test where I now cut through a lot of the BS very quickly. On month 2 of 7sage I find that im scoring a lot higher and in a better position to tackle level 4 and 5 questions. Im still working on timing but my review process is a lot better here.

Find what processes work for you and use them together. There is no single right way. I stand by never diagramming but understanding conditional chain lawgic and through practice here has allowed me to intuitively do it.

.

thanks for this

I chose E because I thought adolescent car thief's were just a subset of overall car thief's and the total number of total car thief's who are not adolescent can decrease with an increase in adolescent thief's but still = a decrease in total car thefts. For instance adults caught on that if they get the young-ins to steal the cars and are caught its a slap on the wrist vs if they were to do themselves it more likely to be convicted. Overall there are less people stealing the cars and if they are, then they are young. Explaining the decrease in car thefts and but the increase in convictions.

After writing this out I see my mistake. its not reasonable to assume that there are more convictions it would actual be the opposite based on my reasoning above. Kids are stealing cars not adults and the kids receive a slap on the wrist. less/ or no adults are stealing and in that case means little to no convictions.

Answer choice A seems way more reasonable. If owners are noticing their cars missing while thief's still have them its more likely to be caught. if you're caught with the stolen vehicle = more likely to be convicted.

Maybe this will help if anyone else had the same thought process as me.