Logical reasoning PrepTest 122 · Section 1 · Question 16

Incorrect. This answer happens after the prices go up, so it can't speak to what caused those price increases in the first place.

Incorrect. While this answer does establish a separate change made in response to decreases in rice production, it aligns with the explanation. If governments respond to a production shortfall by limiting the supply of rice even further, that suggests supply will fall well short of demand, thus spiking prices.

Correct. Argument or Facts:
Argument

Valid or Flawed:
Flawed

Question Type:
Weaken

Stimulus Summary:
Phenomenon — Rice production is down, leading to price increases
Analyst explanation — Rice production is predominantly controlled by governments and distributed locally, and so the other supply is small and thus vulnerable to production changes

Answer Anticipation:
There's a subtle comparison in this argument, but we can learn a lot in what to look for in future questions by exploring it.

The structure of the argument itself falls into the phenomenon/explanation pattern (which was highlighted by the question stem itself). When this is true, the phenomenon will generally fall into one of two categories—an unexpected observation, or the impact of some change.

This argument falls into the latter camp—the entire argument is about the impact of a given change. The phenomenon is about decreased production of rice and increased prices. The explanation goes into why the analysts believe this connection exists.

Whenever the impact of a change is being discussed, the situation before is being compared to the situation after—we see that here with language such as decreased" and "increased." Generally, when that's the case, the argument assumes that nothing else is changing, and thus it relates the changes that are established to each other.

However, there's no indication that some other relevant change wouldn't follow the decrease in production. Any other change that might be made in response to a decrease in rice production—countries releasing grain reserves, or governments deciding to sell some rice on the open market to take the opportunity to make some money—could undercut the explanation in this stimulus that the decrease in rice production can explain the increase in prices.

Answer Explanation:
This answer establishes a separate change made in response to decreases in rice production that could offset the decrease in supply. As such, it undercuts the explanation that the decrease in supply due to governmental control of rice production is to blame for the increase in prices since those governments put more rice on the open market, thus calling into question whether "so little" rice is being traded freely.

Key Takeaway:
When an explanation for a phenomenon attempts to explain a change, correct answers will generally deal with other changes that aren't considered by the initial argument.

Incorrect. If anything, this suggests the governments increase demand on the open market in response to rice production decreasing, thus aligning with the blame placed by the analysts.

Incorrect. In noting that the other crops fail to compensate for the lower levels of rice, this answer makes itself out of scope.