- Wed Jul 20, 2016 1:50 pm
#27401
Complete Question Explanation
Evaluate the Argument. The correct answer choice is (A)
The argument in this stimulus is also causal in nature: the decal program has caused the rate of automobile theft to decrease. As we discussed in question #1, if you want to assess the strength of a causal argument it is important to consider the possibility of alternate causes being present. So the correct answer here will likely provide information suggesting that an alternate cause could potentially be present (in addition to the decals). In other words, once you are told that cars with decals are stolen less often than cars without decals, ask yourself “Why? Was it the decals or something else?” Since that is the questionable element in this argument, the correct answer choice will speak to that uncertainty.
Answer choice (A): This is the correct answer choice. It calls into question the possibility of additional security measures, a clear alternate cause to the decals. You can test the relevance of this answer with the Variance Test: yes, owners with the decals are taking additional security measures (severely weakens the conclusion as the additional measures could have cause the reduced theft rate); no, owners with the decals are not taking additional security measures (strengthens the relationship between decals and lowered theft rates).
Answer choice (B): The number of neighborhoods with the police program is not important, since the argument is only about the neighborhoods where it is already operating (a high number or a low number does not affect the conclusion).
Answer choice (C): Again, the argument is only about the relationship between the decals and the reduced rate of theft. When the cars are stolen does not matter.
Answer choice (D): This is a tempting answer choice for many students, but remember, the conclusion is simply about what has caused the reduction in auto theft in certain cases (decals? something else?). What happens to owners when they drive between 1 AM and 5 AM does not address the relationship in question. That is, if owners are harassed or not, it does not change the potentially validity of the decals deterring thieves from stealing cars.
Answer choice (E): It does not matter if the neighborhoods with the program are representative of all other neighborhoods. The only question is whether the decals caused the observed effect, or if something else might have.
Evaluate the Argument. The correct answer choice is (A)
The argument in this stimulus is also causal in nature: the decal program has caused the rate of automobile theft to decrease. As we discussed in question #1, if you want to assess the strength of a causal argument it is important to consider the possibility of alternate causes being present. So the correct answer here will likely provide information suggesting that an alternate cause could potentially be present (in addition to the decals). In other words, once you are told that cars with decals are stolen less often than cars without decals, ask yourself “Why? Was it the decals or something else?” Since that is the questionable element in this argument, the correct answer choice will speak to that uncertainty.
Answer choice (A): This is the correct answer choice. It calls into question the possibility of additional security measures, a clear alternate cause to the decals. You can test the relevance of this answer with the Variance Test: yes, owners with the decals are taking additional security measures (severely weakens the conclusion as the additional measures could have cause the reduced theft rate); no, owners with the decals are not taking additional security measures (strengthens the relationship between decals and lowered theft rates).
Answer choice (B): The number of neighborhoods with the police program is not important, since the argument is only about the neighborhoods where it is already operating (a high number or a low number does not affect the conclusion).
Answer choice (C): Again, the argument is only about the relationship between the decals and the reduced rate of theft. When the cars are stolen does not matter.
Answer choice (D): This is a tempting answer choice for many students, but remember, the conclusion is simply about what has caused the reduction in auto theft in certain cases (decals? something else?). What happens to owners when they drive between 1 AM and 5 AM does not address the relationship in question. That is, if owners are harassed or not, it does not change the potentially validity of the decals deterring thieves from stealing cars.
Answer choice (E): It does not matter if the neighborhoods with the program are representative of all other neighborhoods. The only question is whether the decals caused the observed effect, or if something else might have.