Summarize Argument
Retailers make use of advertised price cuts to attract consumers more often than they should. Why are such price cuts a problem? Because they lower profits and undermine customer loyalty.
Identify Conclusion
The conclusion is the author’s stance on retailers’ behavior: “too often they resort to using advertised price cuts to promote their wares.”
A
Feeling lucky is the most enjoyable emotional experience garnered from shopping.
This is context that helps to explain retailers’ motivation for using price cuts in the first place. This claim doesn’t receive support from anywhere else in the stimulus, so it cannot be the conclusion.
B
Retailers take advantage of the fact that shoppers enjoy feeling lucky.
This is context that helps to explain retailers’ motivation for using price cuts in the first place. This claim doesn’t receive support from anywhere else in the stimulus, so it cannot be the conclusion.
C
Advertised price cuts are overused as a means of gaining retail sales.
This accurately paraphrases the main conclusion. The author believes that retailers use advertised price cuts “too often” in order to attract sales.
D
Using advertised price cuts to promote retail products reduces profit margins and undermines customer loyalty.
This is the author’s premise. These two downsides of using advertised price cuts support the conclusion that such price cuts are used more often than they should be.
E
Making consumers feel lucky is usually not a good formula for retail success.
This is an overgeneralization of the main conclusion. The author merely concludes that one specific way of making consumers feel lucky—namely, advertised price cuts—is used too often. She doesn’t raise any concerns with the broader principle of making consumers feel lucky.
Summarize Argument
The author concludes that there is reason to believe that there may be life on Europa. As support for this conclusion, the author cites photographs that show that the icy surface of the moon seems to have buckled because of turbulent water underneath the surface. The author claims that this buckled ice is evidence that there is a warm sea underneath Europa’s icy surface. Scientists believe that a warm sea is a factor in the development of life, so the presence of a warm sea would support the author’s conclusion that there may be life on Europa.
Identify Argument Part
The claim in the question stem is an intermediate conclusion. It receives support from the observation that the icy surface seems to have buckled. This claim then provides support for the main conclusion that there may be life on Europa.
A
It is a subsidiary conclusion used by the argument to support its overall conclusion.
The claim in the question stem is a subsidiary conclusion because it receives support from the observation that the icy surface seems to have buckled, and it goes on to support the argument’s main conclusion that there may be life on Europa.
B
It is the overall conclusion of the argument.
The overall conclusion of the argument is that there may be life on Europa, not that there is a warm sea beneath Europa’s icy surface.
C
It is used to discredit a theory that the argument disputes.
The argument does not discuss a theory that it disputes. The argument just works to support the claim that there may be life on Europa.
D
It is the only consideration presented in support of the argument’s overall conclusion.
It is not the only consideration used to support the main conclusion; there is additional evidence offered (for example, that such warm seas are thought to be a primary factor in the development of life).
E
It is presented as support for a subsidiary conclusion drawn in the argument.
The claim in the question stem is the subsidiary conclusion, it is not used to support the subsidiary conclusion.
"Surprising" Phenomenon
When a babbler spots a predator, that babbler and its group make loud, barklike calls despite the fact that the loud noise itself is typically the reason why the predator discovers that the birds are there.
Objective
The right answer will be a hypothesis that explains why babblers make their barklike call in response to predator sightings even though the call is often what draws their predator’s attention. That explanation will either describe some survival benefit of the barklike call which could outweigh the risks, or a way in which alerting predators of their presence is beneficial to the babblers’ chances of survival.
A
Babblers fly much faster than the predators that prey upon them.
While this answer might explain a way by which babblers escape their predators, it does nothing to explain why the birds would make a noise that alerts the predators to their presence in the first place.
B
Babblers’ predators are generally intimidated by large numbers of babblers.
This explains why it might be a good idea for babblers to make noise when predators are near. Predators are intimidated by large numbers of babblers, and only by hearing their collective call do predators become aware that there are many babblers nearby.
C
There is more than one type of predator that preys upon babblers.
The fact that there are multiple types of predators preying on babblers does nothing to explain why the babblers would want to call any predator’s attention to their presence.
D
Babblers’ predators have very good eyesight but relatively weak hearing.
This may seem to mitigate the potential damage of the babblers’ loud call—maybe the predators can’t hear them well anyway?—but it does nothing to explain why the babblers would want to make any noise at all in the presence of predators.
E
Animals that live in close proximity to babblers are also preyed upon by the predators that prey upon babblers.
Even if the babblers’ call tells predators that other prey are nearby, it still also proves that the babblers themselves are there. Predators could easily decide to eat the babblers instead of the other animals, and this answer doesn’t explain why babblers would take that risk.
Summarize Argument: Counter-Position
The argument evaluates a hypothesis about why mechanist arguments in support of monarchies were so prolific. The author rejects the hypothesis that there were so many arguments because the principles of mechanism are in tension with democracy. The author instead claims the arguments multiplied because none of them worked. They didn’t work because the principles of mechanism support democracy.
Identify Argument Part
This is the claim that the author is rejecting and offering an alternative theory for. The author’s alternative theory for the proliferating arguments is that the arguments didn’t work because mechanism supports democracy.
A
It states a principle that the argument seeks to establish.
The argument rejects this claim. It is trying to establish that it is false by presenting an alternative explanation.
B
It describes a general phenomenon that the argument seeks to explain.
The author is trying to explain the proliferation of arguments, but he rejects the explanation contained in this claim.
C
It introduces a hypothesis that the argument challenges.
The argument presents an alternative hypothesis and rejects this idea of why the arguments proliferated.
D
It provides evidence in support of the conclusion of the argument.
This is what the argument is refuting. It doesn’t support the author’s claim, which is an alternative explanation.
E
It expresses the conclusion of the argument.
This is what the conclusion of the argument rejects and presents an alternative for.