Logical reasoning PrepTest 136 · Section 2 · Question 6

Incorrect. The conclusion talks about studio apartments, but none of the premises do. Without establishing something about studio apartments, the argument can't justify the conclusion.

Incorrect. The conclusion talks about studio apartments, but none of the premises do. Without establishing something about studio apartments, the argument can't justify the conclusion.

Incorrect. Even if this were true, those studios could all be on the lower floors, with the upper floors reserved for bigger apartments. This answer doesn't connect the upper floors to the studio apartments, so it doesn't allow the conclusion to be drawn.

Incorrect. The conclusion talks about studio apartments, but none of the premises do. Without establishing something about studio apartments, the argument can't justify the conclusion.

Correct. Argument or Facts:
Argument

Valid or Flawed:
Flawed

Question Type:
Strengthen with Sufficient Premise

Stimulus Summary:
Vista upper floor apartment-most-Scenic view
Therefore - Studio apartment-some-Scenic view

Answer Anticipation:
While questions that heavily rely on making inferences from quantified statements are much more common in Must Be True questions, they do show up in Strengthen with Sufficient Premise questions, as well. And when they do, they tend to require a very strong understanding of the concepts behind it to get the correct answer!

Here, we need a premise that is going to combine with the provided premise to lead to the answer. There are a couple things we can tell right off the bat. First, since the premise and conclusion both talk about having a scenic view, the correct answer will need to connect the Vista upper floor with studio apartments. Second, in order to allow an inference to be made, the strength of the answer will either have to be most or a conditional.

For a most answer, there's only one option—to allow an inference to be made, the first term has to be shared:
Vista upper floor apartment-most-Studio apartment

For a conditional, there is also only one direction that works:
Vista upper floor apartment → Studio apartment
If we try to combine the reverse, we'll see that it doesn't work since we can't chain from a conditional to a most statement, just the other way around.

Our two answers are similar, so let's head to the answers looking for either.

Answer Explanation:
This answer provides the statements we need. If most apartments on the upper floors of Vista are studio apartments, and most of the apartments on the upper floors have scenic views, those groups must overlap in at least 1 apartment—a studio with a scenic view.

Key Takeaway:
When you're dealing with a Strengthen with Sufficient Premise question that involves inferring from quantified statements, identify what terms need to be connected and the minimum strength needed to connect them. That is often enough to find the correct answer (it was here). If multiple answers have those features, however, you'll also need to determine the direction of the connection.