Logical reasoning PrepTest 122 · Section 1 · Question 21

Incorrect. not Successful graphic designer → Ignore wishes of client. This answer is an illegal negation of statement #3. In general, when a stimulus features a conditional statement and quantified statements, conditional statements are incorrect as any combination of a conditional and quantified statement will yield a quantified statement.

Correct. Argument or Facts:
Facts

Question Type:
Must Be True

Stimulus Summary:
(1) Successful graphic designer—some— Formal training
(2) Successful graphic designer —some— Learned on the job
(3) Successful graphic designer → not Ignore wishes of client

Answer Anticipation:
Time to dust off our conditional/quantifier inference skills!

This stimulus features two some statements ([m]any" and "a significant number" both guarantee some but don't rise to the level of most) before ending with a conditional statement ("no . . . ").

Since we have only 3 statements, we should make our inferences ahead of looking at the answers:
1+2) No inference ("some" + "some" will never lead to an inference)
1+3) Formal training —some— not Ignore wishes of client
2+3) Learned on the job —some— not Ignore wishes of client

If these inferences aren't making sense to you, review the rules for making these inferences! Since the third statement is about all successful graphic designers, and the other two statements that each talk about some successful graphic designers, those groups must overlap.

Answer Explanation:
"Not all" is the same as "Some don't." This answer can therefore be diagrammed as Formal training —some— not Ignore wishes of client. That's the inference we drew from statements 2+3, so this is the correct answer.

Key Takeaway:
Learn how to combine quantified statements and conditionals! It's usually good for a point or two on the test, and it can be memorized in an afternoon. That's a great investment of time.

Incorrect. This answer creates a proportional relationship ("more attentive" . . . "more likely") which is unsupported by the stimulus. Proportional relationships will almost always need to be directly established to be supported.

Incorrect. Learned on the job → not Ignore wishes of client. This answer is too strong—we can infer that some graphic designers who learned on the job don't ignore the wishes of their clients (the successful ones), but not that all of them don't do so. In general, when a stimulus features a conditional statement and quantified statements, conditional statements are incorrect as any combination of a conditional and quantified statement will yield a quantified statement.

Incorrect. The stimulus treats success as something designers have or don't have, so what is true of the most" successful designers is out of scope and unsupported. The stimulus also doesn't compare the success of the two groups of designers discussed. "Many" and "a significant number" can't be compared as to size—either of those words could refer to a larger group.