PT133.S1.Q11

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

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 3 · 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 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

PrepTest 133 - Section 1 - Question 11

Question

Explanation

Analytics

Show analysis

Support Meyer was found by his employer to have committed scientific fraud by falsifying data. ███ ██████████ ██ █████████████ ████ █████ █████ ████ █ ████ █████████ ████ ███████ ███ ████████████ ████████████ ███████ ██ ███ █████████ ████ ██ ███ ████████ ███████ ███████ ██ ████████ ████ ██ ████ ███ ███ ██████████ ███████ ██ ██████ ███████ ███ ███████

Summary

The university decided to revoke Meyer’s PhD, even though there was no evidence that he falsified data in his thesis. They decided this because his employer found that he’d committed scientific fraud by falsifying data, and the university validated this finding.

Notable Assumptions

We need a “university policy”— or a rule or principle— that helps justify the decision to revoke Meyer’s PhD. The university revoked his PhD because he committed scientific fraud at work (not during his PhD).

To help justify this decision, we need a principle that confirms that if someone with a PhD from this university commits scientific fraud, then they will have their PhD revoked, even if that fraud wasn’t committed during their PhD.

Analysis by EleanorRoberts

Show answer

11.

Which one of the following ██████████ ████████ ████ █████████ ███ ████████ ██ ██████ ███████ ████

Anyone who holds █ ███ ████ ███ ██████████ ██ ████████████ ███ ██ █████ ██ ████ █████████ ████████ █████ ██ ███ ██████ ██ ████████ ████ ███ ████ ████ ███ ███ ████████

Wrong trigger. Meyer was not found to have committed academic fraud in the course of pursuing his PhD. He was found to have committed scientific fraud at work.

No PhD program ██ ███ ██████████ ██ ████████████ ████ █████ ███ █████████ ███ ███ ████ ██████████ ██ ████ █████████ ███ ████ ██ ████████ ██████

This leads to the wrong conclusion. We’re not trying to establish whether the university should admit Meyer into the PhD program. He’s already finished the PhD program. We’re trying to establish whether his PhD should be revoked.

Any University of ████████████ ███████ ███ ██ █████ ██ ████ █████████ █████████ ████ ██ ████████ ████ ████ ██ █████████ ████ ███ ███████████

Wrong trigger and wrong conclusion. Meyer has already graduated from the university. We’re trying to determine whether his PhD should be revoked, not whether he should be expelled. Also, he was not found to have submitted falsified data as academic work.

Anyone who holds █ ███ ████ ███ ██████████ ██ ████████████ ███ ██ █████ ██ ████ █████████ ██████████ █████ ████ ████ ███ ███ ████████

Meyer holds a PhD from the University of Williamstown and he was found to have committed scientific fraud. If anyone who has a PhD from this university and has committed scientific fraud will have their PhD revoked, this justifies the decision to revoke Meyer’s PhD.

The University of ████████████ ████ ███ ████ ██████ ███ ██ █████ █████████████ ███ ██████████ ██████

This leads to the wrong conclusion. We’re trying to determine whether Meyer’s PhD should be revoked, not whether he should be hired at the university.

Difficulty

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% 133

140

75% 147

Analysis

Question Stem Tags

PSA - find the rule

Stimulus Tags

Rule-application

Answer Popularity

Popularity Avg. score

154

150

151

95%

163

153

Question history

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