- PowerScore Staff
- Posts: 8950
- Joined: Feb 02, 2011
- Tue May 31, 2016 5:19 pm
#25836
Complete Question Explanation
Must Be True—CE. The correct answer choice is (A)
The stimulus contains a fact set discussing what has been done to protect wild animal displays in a natural history museum. The displays were created by drying and mounting animal skins. Some of the older displays are showing damage, with the animals’ skins having started to deteriorate because of low humidity and the heat of the tungsten lamps used for the display lights.
This fact about the deterioration of the displays creates a causal relationship. There are two causes of the deterioration: low humidity and heat (given off by the tungsten lamps). Next, we are told that the newer displays are not lit by tungsten lamps, but rather by compact fluorescent lamps designed for use in museums. These lamps produce less heat than the tungsten lamps.
The question stem tells you that this is a Must Be True question. For this type of question, an effective prephrase technique is to consider whether any of the information is discussed twice. If so, this repetition can create a bridge connecting the two facts, permitting an inference.
In this case, the idea of heat was mentioned in more than one fact. We know that heat from the tungsten lamps is a cause of deterioration in the older displays, and we know that the compact fluorescent lamps produce less heat than the tungsten lamps. So, your prephrase is that a display lit with a compact fluorescent lamp will suffer less deterioration from heat than a display lit with a tungsten lamp.
Answer choice (A): This is the correct answer choice. Because the heat from the tungsten lamps was contributing to the deterioration of some of the older displays, we can infer that when the excess heat from those lamps is removed, the rate of deterioration will slow.
Answer choice (B): This choice is incorrect because we do not know the precise difference in heat between the tungsten and fluorescent lamps, nor do we know whether there is some negative synergistic effect from using many fluorescent lamps to light a single display.
Answer choice (C): The stimulus does not provide any information regarding the number of tungsten lamps versus the number of fluorescent lamps used.
Answer choice (D): Since the stimulus dealt only with the lamps and said nothing about the source or remediation of the humidity affecting the displays, there is no support in the stimulus for this statement.
Answer choice (E): As in answer choice (D), the stimulus did not provide sufficient information regarding the humidity in the museum to support this inference. All you know from the stimulus is that humidity is one of the causes of the deterioration.
Must Be True—CE. The correct answer choice is (A)
The stimulus contains a fact set discussing what has been done to protect wild animal displays in a natural history museum. The displays were created by drying and mounting animal skins. Some of the older displays are showing damage, with the animals’ skins having started to deteriorate because of low humidity and the heat of the tungsten lamps used for the display lights.
This fact about the deterioration of the displays creates a causal relationship. There are two causes of the deterioration: low humidity and heat (given off by the tungsten lamps). Next, we are told that the newer displays are not lit by tungsten lamps, but rather by compact fluorescent lamps designed for use in museums. These lamps produce less heat than the tungsten lamps.
The question stem tells you that this is a Must Be True question. For this type of question, an effective prephrase technique is to consider whether any of the information is discussed twice. If so, this repetition can create a bridge connecting the two facts, permitting an inference.
In this case, the idea of heat was mentioned in more than one fact. We know that heat from the tungsten lamps is a cause of deterioration in the older displays, and we know that the compact fluorescent lamps produce less heat than the tungsten lamps. So, your prephrase is that a display lit with a compact fluorescent lamp will suffer less deterioration from heat than a display lit with a tungsten lamp.
Answer choice (A): This is the correct answer choice. Because the heat from the tungsten lamps was contributing to the deterioration of some of the older displays, we can infer that when the excess heat from those lamps is removed, the rate of deterioration will slow.
Answer choice (B): This choice is incorrect because we do not know the precise difference in heat between the tungsten and fluorescent lamps, nor do we know whether there is some negative synergistic effect from using many fluorescent lamps to light a single display.
Answer choice (C): The stimulus does not provide any information regarding the number of tungsten lamps versus the number of fluorescent lamps used.
Answer choice (D): Since the stimulus dealt only with the lamps and said nothing about the source or remediation of the humidity affecting the displays, there is no support in the stimulus for this statement.
Answer choice (E): As in answer choice (D), the stimulus did not provide sufficient information regarding the humidity in the museum to support this inference. All you know from the stimulus is that humidity is one of the causes of the deterioration.
