Logical reasoning PrepTest 115 · Section 2 · Question 15

Correct. Argument or Facts:
Argument

Valid or Flawed:
Flawed

Question Type:
Weaken

Stimulus Summary:
Goal - Encourage good research
Approach - Citation analysis (seeing how often research is cited in journals)
Problem with approach - It encourages short-term, fad projects instead of multiyear ones
Conclusion - The approach discourages good research

Answer Anticipation:
This argument falls into a common pattern—it presents a goal, and then it analyzes an approach to the goal. In general, this pattern will fall into one of two categories—those where the author presents a preferred approach, and those where the author critiques someone else's approach. This argument falls into the latter. When that's the case, the argument is generally flawed in that it fails to establish that the critique of the approach actually presents a problem in reaching the goal.

Diving into the specifics here, the goal is to encourage good research. The approach that the author critiques is judging quality with citation analysis—seeing how frequently research is cited in journals.

Why does the author believe that this "works against th[e] goal"? Because it'll encourage short-term, fad projects instead of multiyear projects.

There are two issues here. First, there's no indication that short-term, fad projects are of lower quality than multi-year projects! Maybe they're fads because the issues are important, and short-term projects allow for more reliable, incremental knowledge to be gained. Second, there's no indication that short-term projects are actually cited more frequently that multiyear projects—maybe the latter release regular reports that are cited, whereas the short-term projects only release their results when completed.

As such, any answer that provides information supporting either of these assumptions will strengthen the argument. We should look out for answers establishing that short-term projects generally don't lead to quality research, or that short-term projects are more likely to be cited more frequently.

Answer Explanation:
This answer suggests that short-term projects are cited more frequently. If research isn't cited until completed, then those multiyear projects will have years without any citations being used. The short-term projects, however, would end sooner and thus be cited sooner, providing for more opportunities to be cited. This answer thus strengthens the argument.

Key Takeaway:
When an argument critiques an approach to a goal, see if it's established that the critique points out a true reason that the approach may not help accomplish the goal. Often, the argument will fail to tie specifically to the goal, requiring an assumption for the critique to stand.

Incorrect. This is a tempting answer and is related to the first assumption we anticipated! However, it fails to address short-term, faddish projects and instead deals with areas that were at one point faddish. It could be that certain areas stop being fads and then require multiyear projects, but the projects that are done in the area when it is a fad are still short-term ones. Additionally, this answer doesn't establish that projects in these areas are quality projects—it's super weak in stating that these areas are "not necessarily" lacking in "significance."

Incorrect. The argument is about work being cited in scientific journals as a proxy for quality. If anything, this answer brings up the possibility that being cited in a journal may not be a good thing—it could be that the research is being critiqued and thus may not be of good quality. While this answer specifically brings up research that is actually quality research, it brings up a possibility that would hurt the argument.

Incorrect. This answer is too weak to affect the argument in stating what "sometimes" happens. It also doesn't tie in interim assessments to either type of research. While longer-term research might have more time for an interim assessment to happen, it's possible that these assessments are done more frequently on the short-term projects!

Incorrect. This answer doesn't have to do with short- vs. long-term projects, so it doesn't affect the argument.