Logical reasoning PrepTest 133 · Section 1 · Question 15

Incorrect. In concluding that it would be good to apologize, this answer applies to Hagerle, not the Counselor who is receiving the apology.

Incorrect. Very close! However, there's no indication that the physician was owed an apology, just that she received one, so this answer doesn't justify the conclusion that the Counselor is owed an apology.

Correct. Argument or Facts:
Argument

Valid or Flawed:
Flawed

Question Type:
Strengthen (Principle)

Stimulus Summary:
Hagerle apologized to the physician, but he told me the same lie, so I'm owed an apology.

Answer Anticipation:
Strengthen (Principle) questions ask us to find a principle that connects the judgment in the conclusion to the details in the premises. Here, the judgment in the conclusion is that the Counselor is owed an apology. Why? Because she was told the same lie as someone else who got an apology. The correct answer, therefore, should say something such as:

If someone was told the same lie that someone else received an apology for, that person is also owed an apology

Answer Explanation:
This answer correctly describes the situation and attached it to the conclusion. The Counselor was told the same lie as the physician, and the physician received an apology. This answer justifies the Counselor concluding she is owed an apology, as well.

Key Takeaway:
When there are multiple people involved in the scenario in a Strengthen (Principle) question, you should read the answers to see if the principle would apply to the person who is featured in the conclusion. If the principle would justify an action by someone else than the person from the conclusion, that answer can be immediately eliminated.

Incorrect. There's no indication that Hagerle is capable of sincerely apologizing to the Counselor.

Incorrect. This answer would apply to Hagerle, not the Counselor, and it would, if anything, speak to whether he should have given that apology to the physician.