Logical reasoning PrepTest 106 · Section 3 · Question 17

Question prompt

In 1992, a major Remaining source text redacted.
Why the credited answer is right

Credited answer: B

The notes below walk through why it fits the stem and how to eliminate the rest.

Argument or Facts

Argument

Valid or Flawed

Flawed

Question Type

Weaken Questions

Stimulus Summary

Phenomenon - A major newspaper paid reporters less, on average, than competitors
Justification - The training the reporters received was valuable

Answer Anticipation

The question stem here asks us to undermine a justification offered by an executive, so we should figure out what needs to be justified, and what that justification is.
Here, the phenomenon that needs justification is the pay the newspaper offered to its reporters. What was wrong with it? It was “much lower” than the average paid by the competition. Note that this is a comparative issue - the problem isn’t that the pay was low, but that it was lower.
What justification was offered for it? That the reporters working for the newspaper were receiving valuable training.
Since the justification is for a relative practice (paying less), the value of that training compared to the salary/training offered to reporters at other newspapers is relevant. That training may be less valuable than the difference in salary, or the competition may be offering training that is just as valuable even with the higher salaries!
In short, any answer that undermines the total relative value of the salary/training at the major newspaper relative to others will undermine the justification offered here.

Answer choices

  1. A
    Senior reporters at the Remaining source text redacted.
    Why choice A is not credited
    If anything, this answer aligns with the justification by showing that, once training is no longer a factor when the reporters are senior and presumably trained up, salaries even out.
  2. B
    Most of the newspaper's Remaining source text redacted.
    Why choice B matches the stem
    This answer calls into question the value of the training. If the reporters had worked there for over 10 years, then they’re out of “rookie reporter” territory and probably aren’t receiving much value from the “education.” As such, the valuable training probably didn’t make up for the lower salaries. (Compare this answer to (A)).
  3. C
    The circulation of the Remaining source text redacted.
    Why choice C is not credited
    The circulation of the newspaper doesn’t speak to the salaries or training received by the reporters writing for it, making this answer out of scope.
  4. D
    The union that represented Remaining source text redacted.
    Why choice D is not credited
    This answer might explain how the contracts ended up with different compensation, but it doesn’t speak to the justification for the practice at all.
  5. E
    The newspaper was widely Remaining source text redacted.
    Why choice E is not credited
    First, where the newspaper is read doesn’t speak to how much the reporters are paid, or the training they receive. Second, this answer doesn’t compare the newspaper in question to the competition, making it impossible to make a call as to justification for relative experience.

What this tests

Question analytics

Based on historical answer selection rates for this question.

Answer choice distribution

  1. A 22%
  2. B Credited 57%
  3. C 13%
  4. D 6%
  5. E 2%

Deeper help

Ask follow-ups on any step

Optional AI tutor mode will let you interrogate assumptions, compare answers, and drill weak patterns without leaving the page.

Human-written explanations stay primary; AI is an add-on when you want it.

Discussion

  • Why B? 1 reply

    Started by farnoushsalimian

View all discussions Start a discussion