PT154.S4.Q19 > 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 Question 26

SECTION 2 · lr

SECTION 3 · 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 Question 20

PASSAGE 4

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

SECTION 4 · lr

The author concludes that crime isn’t adversely affecting his business by reducing the number of people willing to shop at his store. He supports this main conclusion with the subsidiary conclusion that his customers aren’t worried about crime in the neighborhood. This sub-conclusion is supported by the fact that people he talks to in his store say that they’re not worried about crime.

The author overlooks the fact that the people in his store who aren’t worried about crime might not be representative of the people who might want to shop at the store. Other people who aren’t shopping at the store might be worried about crime.

The conclusion is not based on a claim that there’s only a small amount of evidence that crime is reducing the number of people willing to shop at the store. The conclusion is based on the conversations the author has had with people who say they aren’t worried about crime.

There’s nothing flawed about relying on what people say about their fear of crime to establish whether those people are afraid of crime. This isn’t a case of using personal opinion inappropriately to establish a factual matter.

The conclusion is just about the author’s store. It’s not about the whole neighborhood.

The conclusion is based on the sample of people who shop at his store. They are not necessarily representative of people generally. People who aren’t shopping at the store might be too afraid to shop there, whereas the people who do shop there are the ones who aren’t afraid.

The conclusion is just about whether crime is reducing the number of people shopping at the store. Whether the neighborhood is affected in other weighs is irrelevant.

PrepTest 154 - Section 4 - Question 19

Difficulty

Analysis

Answer Popularity

Question history

Confirm action