Logical reasoning PrepTest 151 · Section 4 · Question 6
Question prompt
Why the credited answer is right
Credited answer: E
The notes below walk through why it fits the stem and how to eliminate the rest.
Question Type
Answer choices
-
AFewer new apartments were Remaining source text redacted.
Why choice A is not credited
Incorrect. Even if fewer were constructed than planned, the overall supply of housing went up, which usually leads to lower rents, so this doesn't resolve the paradox. -
BThe new apartments were Remaining source text redacted.
Why choice B is not credited
Incorrect. This might explain why rents on the new apartments were higher, but the paradox we're tasked with explaining is why rents on existing apartments rose. -
CRents in some areas Remaining source text redacted.
Why choice C is not credited
Incorrect. This answer doesn't explain why they didn't drop in Brewsterville as expected. -
DA sizeable number of Remaining source text redacted.
Why choice D is not credited
Incorrect. If demand was lower (people moved) and supply increased, if anything, there'd be an even bigger expectation that rents would drop! -
EThe new apartments were Remaining source text redacted.
Why choice E matches the stem
Correct. Argument or Facts:
Facts
Question Type:
Paradox
Stimulus Summary:
Usually, increasing the number of apartments (as Brewsterville did) is expected to lower rents, but the recent construction coincided with an increase in rents.
Answer Anticipation:
Note how the two sides of this paradox are presented. The expected outcome is presented as a causal relationship—more apartments "leads to" lower rents. However, the situation in Brewsterville is presented as a correlation—new apartments were built, and rents for existing apartments rose. Normally, when thinking about correlation and causation overlapping—even when a bit messy, as in here—alternative causes or explanations are common answer choices. That's likely to apply here—let's look for an answer that raises an alternative cause for the rents rising that could overcome the increase in supply (possibly a massive increase in demand).
Answer Explanation:
If the demand for housing increased because many people were moving into the area, then it'd be expected that prices would go up. This answer allows for an explanation—the number of people moving in outstripped the new housing being made—and thus allows for an explanation for the situation in Brewsterville.
Key Takeaway:
Even when a question isn't clearly falling into a correlation/causation trap, when those issues are coming up, alternative causes, explanations, and reasons are always relevant. Be on the lookout for them in the answer choices!
What this tests
Question analytics
Based on historical answer selection rates for this question.
Answer choice distribution
Accounts
Save your place across PrepTests
Bookmark questions, build weak-spot lists, and pick up exactly where you left off—built for serious repeat practice.
No payment yet. We will only email when accounts open.
Already have an account? Log in
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
-
Please explain 2 replies
Started by Deidra-McCall