#13 - Consumer advocate: A recent study concluded that

[Administrator]

Complete Question Explanation

Assumption. The correct answer choice is (A)

In this stimulus, the consumer advocate disagrees with the claim that top-loading washers are superior overall. The argumentation is as follows:

• Premise: For some consumers, top-loaders are inconvenient.
  
  Sub-conclusion: Therefore, for some consumers front-loaders are superior.
  
  Conclusion: Therefore, for some front-loaders are superior overall.

In order to logically draw this conclusion, the consumer advocate must assume that for some of those consumers who find front-loaders more convenient, they also find those front-loaders superior overall—so the correct answer choice must link greater convenience to overall superiority.

Answer choice (A): This is the correct answer choice. Answer choice (A) provides the needed supporter assumption: if some consumers consider the convenience of front-loaders to outweigh the other advantages, then the advocate can logically draw the conclusion that for some consumers, front-loading washers are superior to top-loaders overall.

Answer choice (B) is incorrect; the advocate obviously compares two different kinds of washing machines, so this answer choice cannot be an assumption required by the argument.

Answer choice (C) is wrong because the advocate does not make or require this claim—there could be many important factors in this determination.

Incorrect answer choices (D) and (E) reflect a similar idea—presenting issues of convenience—but the assumption required by the consumer advocate’s argument must link greater convenience to greater overall superiority.

[LustingFor!L]

Would answer choice c be considered one of the three assumption question quirks discussed because it says "only important factor"?

[Dave Killoran]

Yeah, it would—good eye on your part!

Although the language is not exact, the idea is close enough to basically act in the same fashion. Good job!

[Blueballoon5%]

Hi! What is the "one of the three assumption question quirks" mentioned in LustingFor!L's comment (above)?

Moreover, how do we negate answer choice C? When determining between answer choice A and C, I used the Assumption Negation Technique and negated answer choice C like this: "Convenience is the NOT the only important factor in determining which type of washing machine is superior." I thought this negated answer choice attacked the conclusion because, if convenience for wheelchair users was not the only important factor, then the argument would fall apart. The argument in the stimulus rest on the example that some wheelchair users find front-loaders more superior because these machines are more convenient (e.g. convenient superior). However, if convenience wasn't the only important factor in determining superiority, then wouldn't the conclusion be weakened?

I hope you can help!

[Emily Haney-Caron]

Hi Blueballoon,

The three quirks are:
Watch for answers starting with "at least one" or "at least some"
Avoid answers that claim an idea was the most important consideration for the author
Watch for the use of "not" or negatives in assumption answer choices

Your negation of answer choice C was correct - great job! Where you got tripped up here was in your reasoning for the impact of that negation on the conclusion. Convenience could be the most important factor for wheelchair users, but there could still be other important factors (e.g., size of the machine, cost, how clean it gets the clothes, how big of a load it can take, etc.). Even if all those reasons are important, convenience could be SO important that it dwarfs the others for some wheelchair users. Accordingly, the negation of C has no impact on the conclusion.

Hope that helps!

[aghartism]

Hi,

I'm wondering about how to interpret (A).

On one interpretation, (A) says: there are some consumers such that, if front-loaders are more convenient than top-loaders for these consumers, then the former are superior for those consumers than the latter. However, assuming this is insufficient for the conclusion of the argument to be validly drawn; the consumers in (A) need not be wheelchair users.

On another interpretation, (A) says: there are some consumers such that both (i) if front-loaders are more convenient than top-loaders for these consumers, then the former are superior for those consumers than the latter and (ii) front-loaders are more convenient than top-loaders for these consumers. The problem with this interpretation is that, on this interpretation, the conclusion validly follows from (A) alone, without any other premises. This is somewhat strange, no, given how the argument is presented in this stimulus?

[Rachael Wilkenfeld]

Hi aghartism,

It seems like you are asking more of the answer choice than you need to get here. It's not asking us to find a statement that will prove the conclusion. That's not the goal of this question type; that would be a Justify the Conclusion question.

This question type asks us to find what is required for the argument. It very well might not be enough to prove it. Whether or not the answer choice proves the conclusion is irrelevant here. You are looking for an answer choice that is required for the conclusion.

The most plain meaning answer choice (A) is that at least one person exists in the world for whom the convenience of front-loaders outweighs the benefits of the top-loaders in determining superiority. It's not conditional, it's factual. It's stating that such a person DOES exist. For that person, they find front-loaders superior, as for them, the convenience of front-loaders outweighs the benefits of the top loaders. It could be more people than just the one person. But at minimum there's at least one, according to answer choice (A).

Hope that helps!