PT127.S3.Q6 > 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 Question 26

SECTION 2 · lr

SECTION 3 · lr

SECTION 4 · rc

PASSAGE 1

Question 1 Question 2 Question 3 Question 4 Question 5 Question 6 Question 7

PASSAGE 2

Question 8 Question 9 Question 10 Question 11 Question 12 Question 13 Question 14 Question 15

PASSAGE 3

Question 16 Question 17 Question 18 Question 19 Question 20 Question 21

PASSAGE 4

Question 22 Question 23 Question 24 Question 25 Question 26 Question 27

The executive concludes that consumers’ response to a recent run of print ads in a magazine was probably below the average response to print ads. In support, the executive points out that the consumer response to digital ads on the magazine’s website was below the average response to digital ads.

The executive draws an analogy between two similar cases (print ads and digital ads) to justify drawing conclusions about one based on evidence from the other. This is how the executive comes to a conclusion about the response to the print ads based on response statistics from the digital ads.

The executive doesn’t make predictions based on the cause of a phenomenon. There’s no discussion at all about the “intensity” of whatever might have caused a poor response to the ads.

The executive doesn’t draw conclusions about a particular event based on the typical event of that kind. The executive’s conclusion about a particular case, print ads, is drawn from evidence from another particular case, digital ads, which is claimed to be analogous.

The executive doesn’t make any generalizations, and only ever discusses two specific instances—definitely not a large number.

The executive uses the case of digital ads, for which direct evidence of poor consumer response is available, to draw a conclusion that the consumer response was also poor for print ads. This is necessary because there’s no direct evidence about the print ads.

The executive doesn’t make any future predictions, instead only drawing a conclusion about one recent event based on an analogy to another recent event.

Question

95% of people who answer get this correct

This is a slightly challenging question.

CURVE

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

25% 130

138

75% 147

Question Stem Tags

Method of reasoning or descriptive

Stimulus Tags

Analogy

Popularity Avg. score

156

155

95%

165

154

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

PrepTest 127 - Section 3 - Question 6

Difficulty

Analysis

Answer Popularity

Question history

Confirm action