Logical reasoning PrepTest 114 · Section 1 · Question 10

Correct. Argument or Facts:
Question/Argument/Argument

Valid or Flawed:
NA/Flawed/Flawed

Question Type:
Weaken

Stimulus Summary:
B: QWERTY keyboard - Why?!?!

C: You're assuming the keyboard was built for speed. It wasn't—it was built to slow people down so it wouldn't jam.

B: That can't be right since computer keyboards don't have that issue but we still use QWERTY.

Answer Anticipation:
This stimulus involves a lot more back-and-forth than the usual two-person stimulus!

Bernard kicks us off by bringing up a question about the keyboard layout. Cora responds by stating that his question shows that he's working off of a mistaken assumption—that it was designed for speed. She mentions that it wasn't—it was designed to prevent typewriters from jamming.

Bernard responds to this by saying she must be wrong. Why? Because the problem that Cora says the layout was designed to solve is no longer a problem, and yet the design is still around. We need to come up with a counter that Cora can use for this argument—in other words, how can she weaken Bernard's response?

To do so, she needs to establish that her explanation is correct, but the layout still wouldn't have changed even when the threat of the keyboard jamming was no longer a problem. Any reason that the design wouldn't change once implemented, even if the underlying reason for it went away, will serve here. One springs to mind—people wouldn't want to learn a whole new layout on the keyboard!

Answer Explanation:
This answer provides a reason that the less efficient design would persist even when no longer needed—people learned on the QWERTY keyboard and don't want to switch out. By explaining why the design persists after the problem it was designed to solve is no longer present, this answer weakens Bernard's charge and strengthens Cora's explanation.

Key Takeaway:
Always be sure to understand what the question is asking, especially when the stimulus is as complex as this one! Getting the question type right is key to finding the correct answer.

Incorrect. This answer doesn't address why they've inherited that design despite it no longer being needed. It would seem as if the switch to computers should have led to a switch to a more efficient layout.

Incorrect. There's no indication that a different design wouldn't lead to even faster typing speeds with an even lower level of difficulty.

Incorrect. If it's easy to switch to a new layout, then that lowers a barrier of entry and suggests that the switch should have occurred when the design was no longer necessary.

Incorrect. This is another answer that suggests the switch would be relatively easy and thus doesn't help Cora's response!