PT124.S1.Q23 > Analytics

SECTION 1 · lr

Question 1 Question 2 Question 3 Question 4 Question 5 Question 6 Question 7 Question 8 Question 9 Question 10 Question 11 Question 12 Question 13 Question 14 Question 15 Question 16 Question 17 Question 18 Question 19 Question 20 Question 21 Question 22 Question 23 Question 24 Question 25

SECTION 2 · lr

SECTION 3 · lr

SECTION 4 · rc

PASSAGE 1

Question 1 Question 2 Question 3 Question 4 Question 5 Question 6

PASSAGE 2

Question 7 Question 8 Question 9 Question 10 Question 11 Question 12 Question 13 Question 14

PASSAGE 3

Question 15 Question 16 Question 17 Question 18 Question 19

PASSAGE 4

Question 20 Question 21 Question 22 Question 23 Question 24 Question 25 Question 26 Question 27

The author concludes that growing crops in good soil is preferable to using pesticides. Why? Because robust crops are less vulnerable than weaker crops, and pesticides don’t address this vulnerability.

The author is claiming that good soil is preferable to pesticides because pesticides do not address plant vulnerability—but we don’t know that good soil does address those vulnerabilities. We need to know that good soil has a positive relationship with plant robustness.

(A) chooses two elements of good soil and causally links it to a third element of good soil. We don’t need that relationship to be true. It doesn’t matter how good soil is composed as long as it helps crops be less vulnerable.

Too strong. It isn’t necessary for good soil to be a surefire way to avoid all insect attacks. It’s only minimally necessary that good soil is linked to lower crop vulnerability.

(C) is describing a shortcoming of pesticides, but we don’t need this. The argument has already addressed a failing of pesticides. We need something to close the gap between good soil and lowered crop vulnerability.

This must be true for the author’s premises to support her conclusion. If negated, there is no link between good soil and crop robustness/lowered crop vulnerability.

(E) says that abstaining from pesticides produces a more vulnerable plant than if pesticides had been used. The author argues that pesticides are less preferable to good soil because they don’t address robustness, but (E) is trying to introduce something contrary to that premise.

Question

89% of people who answer get this correct

This is a moderately difficult question.

CURVE

Score of students with a 50% chance of getting this right

25% 140

147

75% 155

Question Stem Tags

Necessary assumption

Stimulus Tags

Causal reasoning

Net effect

Popularity Avg. score

153

156

157

89%

165

156

You don't have any history with this question.. yet!

PrepTest 124 - Section 1 - Question 23

Difficulty

Analysis

Answer Popularity

Question history

Confirm action