#5 - A newly developed light bulb is much more

[Administrator]

Complete Question Explanation

StrengthenX. The correct answer choice is (D)

This stimulus presents an apparent paradox. If the new light bulb costs three times the price of a conventional light bulb but its lifespan is ten times as long, then it might seem that the new bulb has a much greater lifespan-per-dollar-spent. (A mathematical demonstration: Say the old bulb costs $1 and lasts for 1000 hours. Say the new bulb costs $3 and lasts for 10,000 hours. The old bulb gives you 1000 hours per dollar spent; the new bulb gives you 3333 hours per dollar spent.)

Despite the apparent advantage, why would the new bulbs perform poorly in the market? Look carefully at the wording of the question stem. Four of these choices will resolve the paradox, but one choice will not.

Answer choice (A): The new light bulb generates unappealing light. This explains why the new light bulb might be unsuccessful with customers. This answer choice does resolve the paradox, so it cannot be the correct answer choice.

Answer choice (B): This answer choice explains exactly why people might prefer the old, inexpensive bulb over the new, durable, but expensive bulb. This answer choice does resolve the paradox, so it cannot be the correct answer choice.

Answer choice (C): If the new light bulb runs up more electricity cost than the old bulb (or at least if competitors are advertising this claim and customers believe it) then this might erase the new bulb's advantage in lifespan-per-dollar-spent. This answer choice does resolve the paradox, so it cannot be the correct answer choice.

Answer choice (D): This is the correct answer choice. The type of packaging of the bulb has little apparent connection to the market success of the bulb; we are told nothing about packaging or quantities in the stimulus. This answer choice does not resolve the paradox, so this is the correct answer choice.

Answer choice (E): If a competitor is going to introduce a "super bulb" with an absolute advantage in cost and lifespan, this would trump the second bulb's advantage in lifespan. The second bulb will lose in the market to the third bulb. This answer choice does resolve the paradox, so it cannot be the correct answer choice.

[g_lawyered]

I misunderstood what the correct answer (my prephrase) would look like. For this Strengthen EXCEPT question I prephrased that the correct answer will either Weaken or NOT Strengthen the analyst's conclusion that the new bulb WON'T sell. My analysis while solving this question was:

Find an answer that will demonstrate that the influence of publicizing the advantages of the new bulb will determine/influence the consumers into buying the new bulbs (ultimately, that the new bulbs will sell).

I narrowed down to answer choice C and E.
I understand why I got this question incorrect by choosing C because it demonstrates that the new bulbs won't sell (ultimately, strengthening the conclusion).

But why isn't E correct? E introduces a new bulb that will do the same job as the new bulb, BUT can we jump into the assumption that because the newer introduced bulb does the same job as the new bulb in the argument that the consumers WON'T buy the new bulb (from the argument). I thought that I couldn't automatically assume this and this answer choice weakens the conclusion so I labeled it as a "contender". Can someone confirm my reasoning in analyzing this answer choice?

Also, I didn't like correct answer choice C because I thought the packaging of the bulb was completely irrelevant to the argument. So I eliminated for the fact that I thought it didn't strengthen nor weaken the conclusion so why pick it? Can someone elaborate more on why C is correct and not incorrect?

Thanks in advance,
Gabriela

[g_lawyered]

In my post above I meant to ask why answer choice D is correct?*** (not why answer choice C is correct)!

[Jeremy Press]

Hi Gabriela,

Let's start with answer choice D: your reasoning about that answer choice is right on point! The packaging quantity that the new bulb comes in has nothing to do with the conclusion about how well (or how poorly) it will sell. So the answer choice does nothing to the conclusion. On a Strengthen-EXCEPT question, that's exactly what you want! You want an answer that either does nothing to the conclusion (answer choice D) or that weakens it. So you have the perfect reason to pick answer choice D, under the way you analyzed it!

The reason answer choice E strengthens the argument is the exact reason you mentioned. A competing product that is cheaper and just as good (the bulb in answer choice E is cheaper than conventional, which means it's much cheaper than the new one; and it lasts just as long as the new one) is plenty of reason to think that consumers would prefer it to the new bulb from the stimulus. This strengthens the prediction that the new bulb will sell very poorly. Don't worry that you're taking that one extra inference step--it's a very short and logical step to take in this question, and you can trust it. You can especially trust it, because answer choice D really does have no connection to the conclusion and is therefore an extremely strong answer on this Strengthen-EXCEPT.

Let me know if this helps!