Logical reasoning PrepTest 121 · Section 1 · Question 22

Incorrect. Their differing positions don't explain why the poll was off by so much.

Incorrect. This answer establishes that his incumbency isn't recent, but this answer doesn't tie that into the survey results being off.

Incorrect. Since these scandals were in the year leading up to the election, they should have already factored into the survey results since the survey was done "just before" the election.

Incorrect. This would expand who is an eligible voter, but the survey was done right before the election, and so calling "eligible voters" should have included the younger voters. This answer doesn't establish those voters weren't in the sample. This answer would be correct if the sample was those who voted in the previous election—that would ignore a new voting bloc that could have swayed the election.

Correct. Argument or Facts:
Facts

Question Type:
Paradox

Stimulus Summary:
Survey:
Details - Of eligible voters, in their homes, right before election
Results - Kenner (incumbent) was significantly ahead of Muratori (Challenger)

Election Results - Muratori won

Answer Anticipation:
The results of the survey didn't pan out in the election itself, so either the sample was off somehow or something changed after the survey was done. The latter seems less likely since it was done "just before" the election, but if an answer establishes a change in the race (e.g., a scandal broke after the survey but before the election), that could explain the discrepancy.

For the sampling flaw, any answer that explains why the results of the survey may not have panned out in the election will potentially be correct. However, we can anticipate a few answer based on some of the details:
(1) Kenner is an incumbent, so it's possible that the incumbent gets a "bump" in polls that doesn't translate to votes
(2) The survey was done of eligible voters in their homes, so something about asking people in their homes might have skewed the sample towards those who support the incumbent

Remember, though, that these are just potential answers—anything that would explain the skew in the survey compared to the election will resolve the discrepancy here.

Answer Explanation:
This answer suggests a possible explanation—if more of Muratori's supporters viewed the election as important, then they'd be more likely to show up to actually cast a ballot, thus shifting the results away from the survey and to Muratori.

Key Takeaway:
The details provided in Paradox questions frequently suggest specific answers. However, you're not tied into those answers. Some Paradox questions rely on them for the correct answers; others don't. Pay attention to them and think about how they could lead to a correct answer, but stay flexible.