Logical reasoning PrepTest 137 · Section 4 · Question 20

Incorrect. The salesperson doesn't convince buyers that other products wouldn't meet their needs to make a sale, so this answer doesn't complete the analogy.

Incorrect. The salesperson doesn't hide differences between products, so this answer doesn't complete the analogy.

Incorrect. The salesperson doesn't change the desires of the customer, so changing the preferred policies of the voter doesn't complete the analogy.

Incorrect. The salesperson matches the pitch to the needs of the buyer, she doesn't convince them that the item is "outstanding."

Correct. Argument or Facts:
Facts

Question Type:
Argument Completion

Stimulus Summary:
Salesperson - Doesn't change desires, does convince customer that a product will meet their requirements
Campaigner - Figures out what the voter's preferred policies are and __________.

Answer Anticipation:
This Argument Completion question relies solely on an analogy in order to reach its conclusion, so we need to understand how the two sides of the analogy relate.

On the one side—the fully fleshed-out side—we have the salesperson. They're not convincing someone to buy a product that they don't want, or changing what the person wants. Instead, they're figuring out what the person wants and then convincing them that a given product meets that want.

Therefore, similarly, someone campaigning for a politician isn't convincing them to vote for someone they wouldn't like or change what the person's preferred policies are. Instead, they're identifying what that person would want in a politician and then __________. To fill in that blank in an analogous manner, it must be the case that these individuals are convincing the voter that the politician in question would meet what these voters want in a politician.

Answer Explanation:
This answer completes the analogy. Much like the salesperson matches the product to the needs of the customer, the campaigner would figure out what the voter wants in a politician and explain how the politician in question matches that.

Key Takeaway:
When an argument relies on an analogy, make sure you understand how both sides of the analogy relate to each other—and be sure to match up the related elements and identify any that are missing on either side of the analogy!