Logical reasoning PrepTest 123 · Section 2 · Question 19

Question prompt

Historian:  The Land Party achieved Remaining source text redacted.
Why the credited answer is right

Credited answer: A

The notes below walk through why it fits the stem and how to eliminate the rest.

Argument or Facts

Argument

Valid or Flawed

Flawed

Question Type

Bizarro / Cause & Effect / Strengthen Questions

Stimulus Summary

The Land Party focused on economic issues of farmers and small businesses/semi/rural areas, and won their only national election. Therefore, this focus (along with economic issues facing those groups) was the cause of their success.

Answer Anticipation

The argument starts with a correlation—the Land Party won an election the same year that they focused on certain issues. From there, it concludes that the focus was the cause of their electoral success. That's a jump from correlation to causation, so that's the error in the reasoning.
To strengthen causal relationships, we are looking for answers that eliminate alternative causes (such as the other political party having a major scandal), examples of the cause and effect going together in other situations (e.g., the party focusing on the economic issues of these groups usually winning), or situations where both the cause and effect are both missing (for example, the Land Party focusing on other issues in all the elections they lost). And since this is a Bizarro Strengthen question, we're going to get a mix of these as answers.

Answer choices

  1. A
    In preceding elections the Remaining source text redacted.
    Why choice A matches the stem
    Correct. This answer would appear to strengthen the argument through showing that in all the elections the Land Party lost (note that it states 1935 is the only national victory they had), there's a small term shift here. The stimulus specifically mentions semi-urban and rural areas, and this answer choice is about ignoring urban economic interests. Because of that shift, this answer is out of scope and, since we're looking for something that doesn't strengthen the argument, it's correct.
  2. B
    Voters are more likely Remaining source text redacted.
    Why choice B is not credited
    Incorrect. This answer strengthens the argument by connecting the proposed cause with the proposed effect. If focusing on voters' problems increases the chances they vote for you, then the Land Party's focus on these economic issues was probably a factor in their victory.
  3. C
    The Land Party had Remaining source text redacted.
    Why choice C is not credited
    Incorrect. The argument connects a focus on agricultural economic issues to the Land Party's victory. If their successes coincided with areas where there were economic problems, then that strengthens the relationship between the focus and the success and strengthens the argument.
  4. D
    No other major party Remaining source text redacted.
    Why choice D is not credited
    Incorrect. If the Land Party won the election and focused on specific issues, and others lost the election and didn't focus on the issues, then that strengthens the argument that the specific issues were a factor in the victory. This is an example of showing the cause being absent and the effect being absent, which strengthens a causal relationship.
  5. E
    The greater the degree Remaining source text redacted.
    Why choice E is not credited
    Incorrect. This answer choice connects being in distress to voting. While it doesn't connect directly to voting for the Land Party, it does connect the targets of the Land Party's platform with increasing in turnout, which would increase their chances at victory. It strengthens the relationship between focusing on certain issues and victory, so it strengthens the argument.

What this tests

Question analytics

Based on historical answer selection rates for this question.

Answer choice distribution

  1. A Credited 48%
  2. B 8%
  3. C 12%
  4. D 14%
  5. E 17%

Deeper help

Ask follow-ups on any step

Optional AI tutor mode will let you interrogate assumptions, compare answers, and drill weak patterns without leaving the page.

Human-written explanations stay primary; AI is an add-on when you want it.

Discussion

No threads yet—be the first to ask a question or share an approach.

View all discussions Start a discussion