Summarize Argument: Phenomenon-Hypothesis
The author recommends that we make available to middle-level managers a time management training seminar in order to improve their productivity. This is based on a report by consultants that the most efficient managers have excellent time management skills.
Notable Assumptions
The author assumes that excellent time management skills is the cause of the most efficient managers’ level of efficiency. The author assumes that there isn’t some other explanation for the association between efficiency and time management skills observed in managers.
A
The consultants use the same criteria to evaluate managers’ efficiency as they do to evaluate their time management skills.
(A) suggests that the purported correlation between efficiency and time management among managers doesn’t actually measure a meaningful relationship. The consultants aren’t measuring the connection between two different qualities.
B
Successful time management is more dependent on motivation than on good technique.
This provides a reason to think a seminar training managers on time management techniques is less likely to be successful.
C
Most managers at other companies who have attended time management seminars are still unproductive.
This provides a reason to think attendance at time management seminars is less likely to have a significant impact on productivity.
D
Most managers who are already efficient do not need to improve their productivity.
The author recommends that we make a seminar available. If some managers don’t need it, they don’t have to attend. (D) doesn’t provide a reason to think the seminars might not be effective, nor does it criticize the reported association between efficiency and time management.
E
Most managers who are efficient have never attended a time management seminar.
This provides a reason to think time management training seminars are not going to be as helpful as the author believes.
"Surprising" Phenomenon
Why did most of the healthy warblers transplanted to the neighboring island maintain a pattern of cooperative breeding when the neighboring island was much larger than Seychelles?
Objective
The correct answer must address something about the nature of the transplanted warblers or environmental factors affecting the warblers that help explain why most of the warblers maintained a pattern of cooperative breeding.
A
Many of the Seychelles warblers that were transplanted to the neighboring island had not yet reached breeding age.
Regardless of how many of the warblers had reached breeding age, we know the majority of the healthy warblers transplanted to the island maintained a pattern of cooperative breeding. (A) doesn’t help explain this phenomenon.
B
The climate of the island to which Seychelles warblers were transplanted was the same as that of the warblers’ native island.
We don’t know if climate affects warblers’ breeding habits. (B) gives us information that doesn’t aid our understanding of the phenomenon in the stimulus.
C
Most of the terrain on the neighboring island was not of the type in which Seychelles warblers generally build their nests.
This identifies an environmental factor on the neighboring island that could affect warbler breeding habits. If most of the terrain on the new island was not of the type warblers typically use for their nests, it may have caused many to maintain a pattern of cooperative breeding.
D
Cooperative breeding in species other than the Seychelles warbler often results when the environment cannot sustain a rise in the population.
We don’t know if the cooperative breeding habits of other species are indicative of the breeding habits of Seychelles warblers. (D) is irrelevant.
E
The Seychelles warblers had fewer competitors for nesting territory on the island to which they were transplanted than on their native island.
This may compound the phenomenon, as less competition for nesting could provide warblers with more space to raise offspring. The transplanted warblers having fewer nesting competitors isn’t an explanation for why many of those warblers maintained a cooperative breeding pattern.
Summarize Argument: Phenomenon-Hypothesis
The researcher hypothesizes that guinea pigs do not share a common ancestor with mice. Although guinea pigs and mice are both rodents, the researcher found that they have very different genetic patterns—as different as between mice and some nonrodent species.
Notable Assumptions
The researcher assumes that dissimilar genetic patterns are sufficient to conclude that two species have separate ancestors.
A
The researcher examined the genetic material of only 3 of over 2,000 species of rodents.
This does not affect the argument. The researcher hypothesizes that guinea pigs and mice stem from separate ancestors based on her finding that they have dissimilar genetic patterns—the researcher does not make an argument about rodents broadly.
B
Some pairs of species not having a common ancestor are genetically more similar to each other than are some pairs that do have a common ancestor.
This weakens the argument. It attacks the researcher’s assumption that dissimilarity in genetic patterns is enough to conclude two species lack a single common ancestor by noting that some species who do share an ancestor also lack similar genetic patterns.
C
The researcher selected nonrodent species that have the specific cell structures she wanted to analyze genetically, though many nonrodent mammals lack these cell structures.
This does not affect the argument. The researcher only claims that the genetic difference between mice and guinea pigs is as great as between mice and “some” nonrodent species.
D
For some genuine biological orders, the most recent common ancestor dates from later epochs than does the most recent common ancestor of other biological orders.
This does not affect the argument, which is that given their dissimilar genetic patterns, mice and guinea pigs do not share a single common ancestor at all. The recency of a common ancestor is irrelevant.
E
Peculiarities of body structure, such as distinctive teeth and olfactory structures, are shared by all rodents, including guinea pigs.
This does not affect the argument, which already notes that guinea pigs and mice share similar physical forms.
Summarize Argument: Counter-Position
The author concludes that the results of a recent election poll are questionable. The support for this comes from the idea that the poll was conducted in high-priced shopping malls. Because Perkins’s policies support the upper-middle class, it is likely that her supporters are overrepresented at the expensive malls. This means that the sample for the poll was biased, so the results of the poll are probably not representative of the views of eligible voters in general.
Identify Conclusion
The conclusion is that the results of the election poll may not be accurate: “the results of that poll are dubious.”
A
The poll was intentionally designed to favor Perkins over Samuels.
There is no indication in the argument that the problematic design of the poll was intentional, so this is not the conclusion.
B
Samuels’s supporters believe that they were probably not adequately represented in the poll.
There is no discussion of what the supporters of Samuels believe, so this is not the main conclusion.
C
The poll’s results probably do not accurately represent the opinions of the voters in the coming election.
This is the main conclusion. This is a paraphrase of the part of the argument that was identified as the conclusion. Further, the rest of the argument acts as support for this claim.
D
Samuels is quite likely to have a good chance of winning the coming election.
The argument does not give any indication of the accurate polling numbers; we just know that the poll discussed in the argument might not be accurate. This is unsupported from the argument, so it is not the main conclusion.
E
Those who designed the poll should have considered more carefully where to conduct the survey.
This kind of value judgement (what poll designers “should have considered”) is not included in the argument, so this is not the main conclusion.
Summarize Argument: Phenomenon-Hypothesis
The author hypothesizes that REM sleep relieves stress. This is based on the phenomenon that people who don’t get REM sleep become grumpy.
Notable Assumptions
The author assumes causation from correlation. In other words, the author assumes that a lack of REM sleep makes REM sleep-deprived individuals cranky, and there isn’t some other factor that causes the crankiness.
A
Test subjects who are chronically deprived of non-REM sleep also become irritable during waking life.
This weakens the argument. It attacks the author’s assumption that a lack of REM sleep makes REM sleep-deprived individuals cranky, as people deprived of non-REM sleep also become cranky. This weakens the causal relationship between a lack of REM sleep and crankiness.
B
Chronically having bad dreams can cause stress, but so can chronically having pleasant but exciting dreams.
This does not affect the argument. The nature of the dreams one has in REM sleep does not affect the phenomenon the author seeks to explain, which is that a lack of REM sleep makes people more irritable.
C
During times of increased stress, one’s REM sleep is disturbed in a way that prevents one from dreaming.
This does not affect the argument. While we know that dreams only occur during REM sleep, we don't know how, or whether, a lack of dreams impacts the stress relief process the author claims occurs during REM sleep.
D
Only some people awakened during REM sleep can report the dreams they were having just before being awakened.
This does not affect the argument. We don't know how, or whether, remembering the dreams that occur during REM sleep affects the stress relief process the author claims occurs during REM sleep.
E
Other factors being equal, people who normally have shorter periods of REM sleep tend to experience more stress.
This strengthens the argument. It offers more evidence to support the causal relationship the author assumes exists. In other words, it supports the author’s assumption that a lack of REM sleep (as opposed to some other factor) makes REM sleep-deprived individuals cranky.
Summary
Since 1989, importing ivory from African elephants into the US and Canada has been illegal. But, importing ivory from ancient mammoths is legal. Following the 1989 ban on importing elephant ivory, there was a sharp uptick in ivory imports labeled as mammoth ivory. However, once a technique was developed to reliably distinguish between elephant and mammoth ivory, there was a dramatic decline in the amount of imported ivory labeled as mammoth ivory.
Strongly Supported Conclusions
Before the technique to distinguish between the two types of ivory was introduced, much of the ivory labeled mammoth ivory was actually elephant ivory.
A
Customs officials still cannot reliably distinguish elephant ivory from mammoth ivory.
This is antisupported. The stimulus says that a technique was discovered and widely known.
B
Most of the ivory currently imported into the U.S. and Canada comes from neither African elephants nor mammoths.
The stimulus does not provide information about the current sources of most ivory imports.
C
In the period since the technique for distinguishing elephant ivory from mammoth ivory was implemented, the population of African elephants has declined.
The stimulus does not give any information about the population of elephants. You need a few assumptions to make this work.
D
Much of the ivory imported as mammoth ivory just after the ban on ivory from African elephants went into effect was actually elephant ivory.
The stimulus explains that following the ban, there was a significant increase in mammoth ivory imports and a massive decrease once a technique to distinguish between the two ivories was implemented. You can assume that many ivory imports were mislabeled to get around the law.
E
Shortly after the importation of ivory from African elephants was outlawed, there was a sharp increase in the total amount of all ivory presented for importation into the U.S. and Canada.
The stimulus says that there was a massive increase in mammoth-labeled ivory, not an overall increase in the *total* amount of ivory imported.