Logical reasoning PrepTest 145 · Section 4 · Question 4

Incorrect. If anything, this presents an alternative explanation strongly related to the opposing explanation, so it doesn't support the explanation that it was competition instead of reviews that led to the poor attendance.

Correct. Argument or Facts:
Argument

Valid or Flawed:
Flawed

Question Type:
Strengthen

Stimulus Summary:
Phenomenon Ð A movie had a small opening-weekend audience
Opposing explanation Ð One or two bad reviews caused people to stay away
Director's explanation Ð The film appeals to a specific type of filmgoer and several films that appealed to them all opened that weekend

Answer Anticipation:
This argument sets up a phenomenon (a small opening weekend for a film) and then argues between two competing explanations for why that phenomenon happened. Some might argue that it was the bad reviews, but the Director chalks it up to a small built-in audience and a lot of competition.

We're tasked with strengthening the latter—that it was because of competition and not bad reviews that her movie had such a small opening weekend. As such, anything that suggests people were seeing other movies instead of her movie will serve to strengthen that explanation. That's a wide open anticipation, so let's stay flexible as we analyze the answers.

Answer Explanation:
This answer does support the Director's explanation. She argues that her movie had a small audience because there was competition. If filmgoers almost never see more than one film in a weekend, then competition would naturally lower the viewership of any competing movie—people would pick one option and skip the others.

Key Takeaway:
Phenomenon/explanation arguments are generally about thinking through alternatives, but here the stimulus presented two and asked us to strengthen one. When that happens, the correct answer can deal with an alternative, but it will generally end up more directly dealing with the explanation the question stem asks about.

Incorrect. If anything, this suggests that there was a large enough audience to "go around" and see both competing films and the Director's.

Incorrect. This answer, if anything, supports the explanation that reviews played a part if the other movies had larger audiences than the Director's. This answer requires an assumption and, even then, undermines the Director's explanation, so it's incorrect.

Incorrect. This answer is trying to get you to select it by making you think that it's bringing up even more competition—it wasn't just the other films of the same type, but other films not of the same type. However, the argument already established that the Director's film had a limited audience and stiff competition, so this doesn't add anything new.