"Surprising" Phenomenon
Why were children who watched programs with an average violence rating of “three” or higher 50 percent more likely to have been disciplined in school than other children?
Objective
The correct answer must be the only answer that doesn’t help to explain why children who watched television programs with a violence rating of “three” or higher were 50 percent more likely to be disciplined in school. The correct answer choice could fail to address the relationship between the violence levels of television programs and the rate at which children who watch them are disciplined in school or could provide information that only makes the phenomenon more confusing.
A
Children who are excited by violent action programs on television tend to become bored with schoolwork and to express their boredom in an unacceptable fashion.
Children excited by violent action are probably more likely to watch more violent television programs than other children. In turn, they’re more likely to become bored with their schoolwork and express their boredom in unacceptable ways that can be disciplined in school.
B
When parents watch violent programs on television with their children, those children become more likely to regard antisocial behavior as legitimate.
Children who watch violent programs with their parents are probably more likely to watch violent programs with violence ratings of “three” or higher. Therefore, these children are more likely to exhibit antisocial behavior in school and be disciplined for it.
C
Parents who rated their children’s television viewing low on violence had become desensitized to the violence on television by watching too much of it.
(C) is silent on the subject of children’s discipline or behavior, so it fails to offer any connection between violence ratings and the rate at which children are disciplined in school. It just comments on how some parents rate the violence levels of programs.
D
Children learn from violent programs on television to disrespect society’s prohibitions of violence and, as a result, are more likely than other children to disrespect the school disciplinary codes.
If this is true, then children who watch programs with an average violence rating of “three” or higher are more likely to learn to disrespect society’s prohibitions of violence and disregard school disciplinary codes, resulting in them being disciplined more frequently in school.
E
Parents who do not allow their children to watch programs with a high level of violence are more likely than other parents to be careful about other aspects of their children’s behavior.
If this is true, then children who aren’t allowed to watch highly violent television programs are probably more likely than other children to respect various disciplinary rules at school, resulting in them being disciplined less frequently at school.
Summarize Argument: Phenomenon-Hypothesis
The author concludes that last year’s 15 percent decrease in the rate of violent crime was caused by the new mandatory sentencing law. This is because the law was passed at the beginning of last year, and no other major policy changes were made last year.
Notable Assumptions
The author assumes that there was no alternate cause of the decreased crime rate. (Even though there were no other major policy changes last year, the crime rate could have decreased for some other reason that wasn’t a policy change, or from a policy change enacted before last year.)
A
Studies of many other cities have shown a correlation between improving economic conditions and decreased crime rates.
We have no idea whether the author’s city had improved economic conditions. So, (A) doesn’t act as an alternate explanation for the decreased violent crime rate.
B
Prior to the enactment of the mandatory sentencing law, judges in the city had for many years already imposed unusually harsh penalties for some crimes.
The mandatory sentencing law required prison time for all violent criminals. We have no idea whether the “unusually harsh penalties for some crimes” involved prison time for violent crimes.
C
Last year, the city’s overall crime rate decreased by only 5 percent.
We know the violent crime rate decreased by 15 percent, which is higher than 5 percent. (C) helps support the theory that the decreased crime rate can’t be explained by a general decrease in crime.
D
At the beginning of last year, the police department’s definition of “violent crime” was broadened to include 2 crimes not previously classified as “violent.”
This strengthens the argument, because broadening the definition of “violent crime” would lead us to expect an increase in violent crime. This helps eliminate the explanation that the decreased violent crime rate was caused by a narrowing of the definition of violent crime.
E
The city enacted a policy 2 years ago requiring that 100 new police officers be hired in each of the 3 subsequent years.
This provides a potential alternate explanation for the decreased violent crime. (E) describes a policy change that was made prior to last year, but continued to have effects into last year. It’s reasonable to think increased numbers of police officers could reduce violent crime.