Logical reasoning PrepTest 152 · Section 4 · Question 17
Question prompt
Why the credited answer is right
Credited answer: D
The notes below walk through why it fits the stem and how to eliminate the rest.
Question Type
Answer choices
-
AHealth-care facility employees do Remaining source text redacted.
Why choice A is not credited
The argument only cares about the protection of the patients, not the rights of the workers. This argument can still be valid even if the employees are mad about the policy. -
BInfluenza viruses are the Remaining source text redacted.
Why choice B is not credited
The flu doesn't have to be the most harmful threat to patients for a mandatory policy protecting patients from it to be warranted. That would be like saying tarantulas aren't as harmful as rattlesnakes, so no need to worry about those spiders. -
CMost patients in health-care Remaining source text redacted.
Why choice C is not credited
While this might make it more important to ensure the people under the hospital's control are vaccinated, it doesn't need to be true for the argument to work. Even if only a minority of patients are unvaccinated, it still might be warranted to protect that group by forcing employees to get vaccinated. -
DVoluntary vaccination policies at Remaining source text redacted.
Why choice D matches the stem
Correct. Argument or Facts:
Argument
Valid or Flawed:
Flawed
Question Type:
Necessary Assumption
Stimulus Summary:
Hospitals must protect their patients. The flu is dangerous. Vaccines reduce transmission of the flu. Thus, hospitals must make flu vaccines mandatory for all employees.
Answer Anticipation:
That conclusion is an extreme recommendation. Whenever an argument concludes a recommendation like this, an error in the reasoning is usually that it didn't consider other solutions. For a Necessary Assumption question with an extreme recommendation in the conclusion, the correct answer will usually rule out an alternative. Why? Because if an alternative exists, then the hospital doesn't have to enact this policy, so it's necessary to rule the alternatives out.
Answer Explanation:
This answer rules out an alternative policy—a voluntary vaccination policy. If a voluntary policy would be enough to protect patients, then the mandatory one isn't a requirement, and the argument falls apart.
Key Takeaway:
Most arguments that make a recommendation in the conclusion do so at the expense of alternative options. Thinking of those alternatives is often the key to success in those questions. -
ESociety has already accepted Remaining source text redacted.
Why choice E is not credited
What society has accepted doesn't necessarily impact the policies of a hospital. Society hasn't accepted people walking around wearing those hospital gowns, either, but it's still acceptable when you're in the ICU.
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
No threads yet—be the first to ask a question or share an approach.