Logical reasoning PrepTest 119 · Section 2 · Question 6

Even so, it’s noted that natural-grass fields are more expensive to maintain, so this answer doesn’t provide a reason to switch.

This answer undercuts one of the perceived benefits mentioned for artificial-turf fields while raising a benefit of natural-grass fields. If the more-frequent injuries on these fields are faster to heal and require less expensive treatment, then not only does it seem as if these fields are safer, they might also cost less when taking the cost of injuries and treatment into account. By providing a benefit of natural-grass fields over artificial-turf ones, this answer provides support for the paradoxical recommendation made by the Committee, and it is therefore correct.

If anything, this answer suggests a reason to go with the cheaper, safer, and currently installed artificial-turf instead of switching. This answer brings up a similarity, and we’re looking for a difference.

Whatever the specific maintenance steps are, the stimulus has established that natural-grass fields are more expensive to maintain than artificial-turf ones, so this answer doesn’t provide any information that adds to the stimulus.

There’s no indication that the athletes at this university are used to natural-grass fields. If anything, the fact that there are currently artificial-turf fields suggests the athletes have played on that type of field. Additionally, it’s not clear that athlete preference should outweigh safety and budgetary concerns.