Logical reasoning PrepTest 117 · Section 2 · Question 7

Incorrect. The relative danger of music through headphones is out of scope as to whether teens will take steps to protect their hearing when using them. Since the argument concludes something about a subjective decision made by a group, an objective fact about the threat is unlikely to move the needle.

Incorrect. The conclusion of the argument limits itself to discussing the effectiveness of the recommendation about headphones, so other sources of hearing loss are out of scope.

Incorrect. What the parents do is out of scope—even if they're hypocrites, they could be right.

Correct. Argument or Facts:
Argument

Valid or Flawed:
Flawed

Question Type:
Strengthen

Stimulus Summary:
Problem — Teens are losing their hearing because of loud headphones
Proposed solution — Get headphone manufacturers to include headphones in their product lines that cut off when they get too loud
Problem with solution — Teens generally buy their own headphones
Conclusion — This proposed solution won't significantly cut down on the rate of teen hearing loss

Answer Anticipation:
This argument falls into a common pattern—a problem is presented, a solution is proposed, and the author weighs in on whether she thinks it's a good solution.

Here, she doesn't. When that's the case, we should start by analyzing her reasoning behind not thinking the solution will work.

Here, the reason is that teens buy their own headphones. If some headphones prevent this hearing loss and others don't (include in their product lines"), then teens could pick the ones that don't have this feature—and the author is assuming that's the case.

Since she's assuming that the teens will make this choice, any answer that supports that assumption will strengthen this argument. Maybe it'll bring up a similar situation where this group made a similar decision, such as buying a music player that itself is louder, despite knowing that it could cause hearing loss. And since it's dealing with a subjective thought process/decision—making, the answer will likely relate to what teens think or believe.

Answer Explanation:
The recommendation is that headphone manufacturers "include in their product lines" these auto—shutoff headphones. In other words, some but not all of their headphones would have this feature. Since headphones are purchased by the teens listening to the music, they would be the ones who would need to opt for these headphones. If there's evidence that they would ignore safety warnings—as this answer states—then it's more likely that they'd skip the headphones with this safety feature. This answer is therefore correct.

Key Takeaway:
Problem/Solution passages fall into two broad categories. In one, the author proposes her own solution that she believes is best, and these are generally flawed in that they don't prove it's better than alternatives. In the other (as we have here), the author undermines someone else's proposed solution, and the assumption generally connects her reasoning to that solution.

Additionally, when an argument is about the subjective decision—making of a group, facts are less important than that group's beliefs. People don't make decisions based on what is true; they make decisions based on what they believe to be true.

Incorrect. The conclusion is that doing this won't help teens avoid hearing loss. These manufacturers having decided to do this already doesn't speak to its effectiveness. Sure, they may have decided to manufacture these headphones because they don't want to cause hearing loss, but they also may have done it despite knowing it won't work because they think there's a market for it—those parents who are worried about their kids' hearing loss.