Logical reasoning PrepTest 151 · Section 2 · Question 26

Incorrect. This answer choice is too weak and uncertain to have an impact on this argument (since sometimes could be .00001% of the time). Even if we accept that this happens a significant amount of the time, if anything, it recommends sticking to one type of ad.

Incorrect. If anything, this suggests the ads should be uniform, which is the opposite of the author's conclusion.

Incorrect. While this answer may call into question the strategy of using ads at all, it doesn't impact an argument about which ad strategy will be more effective.

Correct. Argument or Facts:
Argument

Valid or Flawed:
Flawed

Question Type:
Strengthen

Stimulus Summary:
Auto insurance companies are demographically diverse, so a variety of types of ads is a smart move by an auto insurance company.

Answer Anticipation:
There's a lot of background in this argument. When distilled down to its key elements, it's a straightforward argument with a single premise and a conclusion. Since the conclusion is a determination that a course of action is a good idea, the correct answer will likely provide additional information supporting that course of action.

Answer Explanation:
This answer suggests that following the traditional path could alienate people the ads don't target. Since auto insurance companies want to appeal to many different demographics, that would be bad, thus bolstering the author's argument that a variety of ad styles targeting a variety of demographics is smart.

Key Takeaway:
When the author of an argument makes a recommendation or endorses one course of action, current answers to Strengthen questions will frequently either provide more information about benefits of that course of action (or negatives to not taking it).

Incorrect. This answer suggests auto insurance companies shouldn't release bad ads, but no one is arguing that that's a good idea.