PT140.S3.Q18 > Question

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

PASSAGE 3

Question 14 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 the article is wrong. As support, she cites a recent survey of businesses that bought videoconferencing equipment; most respondents said it was worth the cost.

This is the cookie-cutter flaw of using an unrepresentative sample, where a conclusion about a group is based on a sample that is likely meaningfully different from the group.

There are two reasons that the sample could be meaningfully different from “most companies.”

(1) The survey only includes companies who have purchased the equipment. Presumably these companies needed the equipment. This doesn’t mean “most companies” wouldn’t be wasting their money; maybe most companies don’t need it.

(2) It’s possible that only companies that were happy with the equipment responded to the survey, so the “respondents” are even less reflective of the whole group.

Her conclusion isn’t just based on the fact that many businesses have purchased the equipment, but on the fact that many of those businesses said the equipment was worth the cost.

This is the cookie-cutter flaw of confusing necessary and sufficient conditions. The author doesn’t make this mistake; she never presents a condition that is sufficient to justify purchasing the equipment. Instead, she uses an unrepresentative sample to support her conclusion.

This is the cookie-cutter flaw of assuming that a conclusion is false simply because the support for that conclusion is weak. The author doesn’t make this mistake. She rejects the article’s position, but she does provide evidence to support her claim.

The author relies on the survey’s respondents, which are probably not representative of “most companies.” Companies that bought the equipment likely needed it, while those that haven’t bought equipment may not.

By arguing that most businesses would not be wasting their money by purchasing the equipment, the author is actually distinguishing between value and cost, not confusing them. She’s suggesting that, even though it’s expensive, the equipment will still have value to the companies.

PrepTest 140 - Section 3 - Question 18

Difficulty

Analysis

Answer Popularity

Question history

Confirm action