Logical reasoning PrepTest 114 · Section 4 · Question 11
Question prompt
Why the credited answer is right
Credited answer: E
The notes below walk through why it fits the stem and how to eliminate the rest.
Question Type
Answer choices
-
AIf earlier North American Remaining source text redacted.
Why choice A is not credited
Incorrect. This answer is about restoring agricultural techniques, whereas the conclusion recommended restoring the land to an "uncultivated" state, which by definition is untouched by agricultural techniques. -
BProtecting the habitat of Remaining source text redacted.
Why choice B is not credited
Incorrect. Cost effectiveness is never mentioned in the stimulus. -
CThe biodiversity of the Remaining source text redacted.
Why choice C is not credited
Incorrect. Similar to (B), there's no mention of economic consequences. Additionally, the Environmentalist is in favor of restoring biodiversity. -
DPreservation of the remaining Remaining source text redacted.
Why choice D is not credited
Incorrect. The Environmentalist argues a return to an era where there were many more bison than there are currently, so she argues for more than merely preserving the current bison. -
EThe devastation of the Remaining source text redacted.
Why choice E matches the stem
Correct. Argument or Facts:
Argument
Valid or Flawed:
Valid
Question Type:
Main Point
Stimulus Summary:
Bison vs. Cattle:
(1) Cattle require a lot of upkeep for 50m
(2) Bison require little upkeep for 30-70m
(3) They provide about the same amount of meat
Therefore - Returning land to an uncultivated state could help the environment without hurting meat production
Answer Anticipation:
Going through this stimulus, we can identify several things that will help us find the main point, but we can also use that to help with future questions!
The opening line talks about something that has already happened. While there is a little bit of an opinion in stating that the ecosystem has been destroyed, the rest of the argument doesn't talk about that destruction, so this is background.
It then moves to a discussion of numbers. Such fact-based statements are almost always premises of arguments.
After that, it starts a sentence with, Since, telling us that we're being presented with a premise that's going to lead into a conclusion (but potentially an intermediate conclusion, not the main point). Here, however, the conclusion part of the sentence ("returning as much land . . . ") is the end of the stimulus, so it must be the main point.
That statement is also a prediction and soft recommendation for what should be done, or at least the outcome that can be expected if a certain course of action is followed. Such predictions are almost always the main point of an argument that features one, so we've identified our main point—returning the land to an uncultivated status can restore biodiversity while allowing for sufficient meat production.
Answer Explanation:
This answer restates the concluding line of the stimulus, which is supported by the rest of the stimulus and represents the Environmentalist's opinion about what can/should be done.
Key Takeaway:
Predictions—especially those that are made as soft recommendations—are almost always the main point of an argument that features one.
What this tests
Question analytics
Based on historical answer selection rates for this question.
Answer choice distribution
Accounts
Save your place across PrepTests
Bookmark questions, build weak-spot lists, and pick up exactly where you left off—built for serious repeat practice.
No payment yet. We will only email when accounts open.
Already have an account? Log in
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
-
Started by JohnSummers
-
Started by Meredith
-
Why not answer choice (D)? 1 reply
Started by JShahar