Logical reasoning PrepTest 114 · Section 1 · Question 16

Incorrect. The solution in this answer is noted as making the problem worse, whereas the Analyst noted that more police would address the problem—just the effect of it, though, and not the underlying cause. It wouldn't make things worse, as the solution in this answer does, so it's wrong.

Incorrect. This answer recommends against a solution to a problem because it solves a subset of the problem but makes another subset worse. That's different from failing to address the root cause while still addressing the effects.

Incorrect. This answer recommends a solution instead of against one. It also does a cost/benefit analysis. Both of those aren't parallel to the stimulus.

Correct. Argument or Facts:
Argument

Valid or Flawed:
Flawed

Question Type:
Flawed Parallel Reasoning

Stimulus Summary:
Problem - Crime
Solution 1 - Increase police force
Problem with Solution 1 - It doesn't address root causes of crime
Recommendation - Cities shouldn't increase the police if crime goes up

Answer Anticipation:
This argument has a few common elements to it that we can focus on to find the correct answer.

First, it falls into the Problem/Solution pattern. Specifically here, the Analyst brings up a problem (crime), a potential solution (increasing the police force), and a reason that this solution isn't ideal.

From that, she reaches a specific type of conclusion—a recommendation ("shouldn't"). She argues against the solution based on the reason she presented—while it may help in alleviating the problem, it's a partial or temporary ("stopgap") solution—it doesn't address the root cause of the problem. However, that's assuming that a stopgap solution shouldn't be implemented, at least for the short-term!

Let's find an answer that does something similar—it presents a solution to a problem, shows that the solution doesn't address the cause of the problem, and then recommends against that solution.

Answer Explanation:
This answer establishes a problem—a disease. A drug is a potential solution to it, but it addresses only the effects, not the disease (the root cause). From this, the answer recommends against the drug. That's the same structure and logic as the stimulus, so this is the correct answer.

Key Takeaway:
Identifying elements that are relevant across question types can be a very helpful way in determining what elements to focus on in a Flawed/Parallel Reasoning question.

Incorrect. This answer doesn't discuss a specific solution, and it recommends in favor of something. It's missing almost every element from the stimulus outside of identifying a problem!