Mismatched premises. The stimulus outlines a conditional chain of A→B→C then negates the final necessary condition. (A) gives a sufficient condition (Janice coming to visit) and two necessary conditions (Mary not paying bills and Janice locating baby sitter). This does not parallel the conditional chain of A→B→C from the stimulus.

The diagram for (B) parallels the diagram of the stimulus:

Mismatched premises. The stimulus outlines a conditional chain of A→B→C then negates the final necessary condition. (C) gives two sufficient conditions (/rain and fresh trout) for a necessary condition (barbecuing fish) then fails one of the sufficient conditions (/fresh trout).

Mismatched premises. The stimulus outlines a conditional chain of A→B→C; (D) gives a sufficient condition (Lisa attending) and a necessary condition (Jared OR Karl attends) and confirms one of the necessary conditions (Jared will attend).

Mismatched premises. The stimulus outlines a conditional chain of A→B→C; (E) gives also gives a conditional chain (George goes→Mark goes→ Mark can postpone most appointments). However, the stimulus then negates the final necessary condition, but (E) does not do this. (E) only says that Mark has postponed “some” appointments.