Logical reasoning PrepTest 135 · Section 1 · Question 14

Question prompt

Principle: If an insurance Remaining source text redacted.
Why the credited answer is right

Credited answer: B

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

Strengthen Questions

Stimulus Summary

P: Insurance policy written so reasonable person wouldn’t read → Reasonable expectations should take legal precedence over contract language
A: Celia’s insurance didn’t cover hail damage, but the insurance company should cover the hail damage to her car.

Answer Anticipation

The principle here establishes a situation under which insurance should cover something not in the contract - the contract is written in a manner that a reasonable person wouldn’t thoroughly read it.
However, when that happens, it’s the case that the reasonable expectations of the policyholder should have legal precedence over the contract language. So for this question, it’s not enough to establish that the insurance policy was written in a manner that triggers the conditional - it must also be established that Celia had expectations that hail damage to a car would be covered, and that those expectations were reasonable.
This is an interesting Principle (Strengthen) question in that we need to establish something from both the sufficient and necessary condition. Be sure that you check to make sure the conclusion is justified as much as the sufficient condition is met!

Answer choices

  1. A
    Celia is a reasonable Remaining source text redacted.
    Why choice A is not credited
    This answer choice doesn’t establish or even discuss the triggering condition for the principle - the policy written in such a manner so that a reasonable person wouldn’t read it thoroughly before signing.
  2. B
    Given the way it Remaining source text redacted.
    Why choice B matches the stem
    This answer both establishes the sufficient condition of the principle, and the relevant portions of the necessary condition that weren’t established in the Application. If the policy was written so a reasonable person wouldn’t have read it thoroughly, then the principle applies. And if Celia reasonably expected the policy to cover hail, then the principle guarantees that expectation should take legal precedence over the language in the policy itself.
  3. C
    The insurance policy that Remaining source text redacted.
    Why choice C is not credited
    This answer establishes that the sufficient condition of the Principle is met, but it then states that Celia did thoroughly read the policy. If anything, that suggests any expectation that she had of the policy covering hail damage would be unreasonable since she presumably read that it didn’t.
  4. D
    Celia did not read Remaining source text redacted.
    Why choice D is not credited
    This answer doesn’t establish that Celia was acting like a reasonable person in failing to read the policy thoroughly before signing it, so the Principle doesn’t necessarily apply to her case.
  5. E
    Celia did not read Remaining source text redacted.
    Why choice E is not credited
    This answer does establish that the sufficient condition of the Principle is met in Celia’s case, but it doesn’t talk to the reasonable expectation of covering hail damage, so it fails to justify the conclusion of the Application.

What this tests

Question analytics

Based on historical answer selection rates for this question.

Answer choice distribution

  1. A 6%
  2. B Credited 79%
  3. C 2%
  4. D 8%
  5. E 5%

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

View all discussions Start a discussion