#7- Consultant: Most workers do not have every item they

[jgray]

I took the stimulus to be a Must Be True. I focused on the most aspect, and tried recalling formal logic to diagram. When I didn't see the answer, I guessed. For some reason, I believed that ONLY freelancers have everything inspected. I diagrammed the statement as
workers not judged
workers not judged

Maybe a bi-conditional arrow would have helped.

[Francis O'Rourke]

Definitely, reading an "only" into this stimulus will cause some headaches. While what you diagrammed is accurate, I'm not sure how the bi-conditional arrow would help you in this stimulus.

Let us know how you think it would add to your understanding, so that we can help you out better on this question.

[ShannonOh22]

Hi guys,

I'm confused on this question, and how B is correct. I chose A, and my thought process was as follows...

The stimulus doesn't say or imply anything about "workers" as a general group producing high-quality. In fact, it says that "most workers do not have every item they produce judged for quality". It then separates out freelance writers from the general group of workers, saying that they DO have each and every piece evaluated for quality.

A) "A piece authored by a freelance writer is generally evaluated more strictly than the majority of items most workers produce."

Is A incorrect because we don't know for sure that they are evaluated "strictly"?

B) "By having every piece of their work evaluated, some workers are caused to produce high-quality work." This seems to go against the stimulus...unless B is grouping everyone together as "workers", including the freelance writers?

[KelseyWoods]

Hi Shannon!

Exactly as you say, the stimulus does not imply that workers in general produce high-quality work. But it does state that freelance writers produce high-quality work and freelance writers are workers! Therefore, SOME (it says some, not all!) workers (the freelance writers) produce high-quality work. So answer choice (B) is supported.

Answer choice (A), on the other hand, is not supported. We don't have enough evidence in that stimulus to say that a piece authored by a freelance writer is generally evaluated more strictly than the majority of items most workers produce. The author makes no comment on how strictly items are evaluated. The difference is more about quantity (for freelance authors, every piece is judged for quality; for most workers, not every piece is judged for quality).

Hope this helps!

Best,
Kelsey

[mab9178]

Hi

D is not supported because it reverses the logic of the stimulus. Correct?

My reasoning is:
D states that if an item is evaluated for quality, then the item is that of a freelance writer; whereas the stimulus posits that if it's an item is that of freelance writer, then it is evaluated. So D is wrong because according to the stimulus, an entity other than a freelance writer could effect the outcome of having their produced work evaluated. In other words, the stimulus is consistent with the statement that freelance writers are not the only ones who get their work evaluated. But D states that only freelance writers have their work evaluated.

Is my reasoning correct?

Thank You
Mazen

[katehos]

Hi Mazen!

Yes, you're correct! While the stimulus asserts that work done by freelance writers will be evaluated, it does not go so far as to say that work done by freelance writers is the ONLY type of work that is ever evaluated. So, (D) is incorrect.

Good work
Kate

[mab9178]

Kate: Thank You

Respectfully,
Mazen