Logical reasoning PrepTest 155 · Section 1 · Question 24

If this were true, it would prove that at least some poll respondents were dishonest. But it wouldn't help prove they were answering based on how they wanted to be perceived. Maybe they didn't care about how their answers would make them seem, and they were answering dishonestly for some other reason? At any rate, this doesn't strengthen the argument, so it is incorrect.

This strengthens the argument, so it's an appealing answering choice. There's a sampling problem in this argument. Maybe the people who claimed they were unwilling to watch these scurrilous new programs do not watch these programs? Yes, the programs' ratings are "soaring," but that could be entirely attributable to the minority of folks who didn't express their distaste for these programs to pollsters. In that case, we'd have no evidence that these people were answering based on "how they wished to be perceived, rather than as they actually are." They'd be answering based on how they "actually are." This answer choices fixes that problem, showing that "almost everything" who claimed they wouldn't watch this program watched the program anyway.

Still, we need to confirm that this answer choice is necessary to the argument. So we need to use the negation test. Suppose that it wasn't the case that almost everyone in the editorialist's country who claimed to be unwilling to watch these shows continued to watch these shows. In other words, suppose at least some people who claimed they were unwilling to watch these shows stopped watching these shows. Does that wreck this conclusion? Not really. To support the claim that people "often" portray themselves as they wish to be perceived, we just need evidence that "some" people who claimed they wouldn't watch the shows watched the shows anyway (while harboring a desire to be seen as someone who wouldn't watch such programming). Negating this answer choice doesn't preclude this possibility.

In short, this answer choice is simply stronger than what is necessary. We need to know that at least some people who claimed they'd stop watching the show continued to watch it to draw this weak ("often") conclusion. We don't need to know that almost everyone who claimed they'd stop watching the show continued to watch it.

This doesn't strengthen the argument, and it's not necessary to the argument. Maybe some people didn't believe they were portraying themselves "as they actually are." There are a couple problems with that, though. First, that doesn't necessarily mean that they were portraying themselves "as they wished to be seen." Second, we don't need to know that people were aware that they were misportraying their authentic selves — notice how the conclusion says "whether or not they are aware of it."

This is essentially the same answer choice as (B), and it's wrong for the same reason. This fixes the sampling problem in this argument — it shows that same people who claimed to be unwilling to watch these sordid news programs were watching the programs anyway. However, it's too strong to be necessary to the conclusion. We need to know that some people who claimed to be unwilling to watch the news programs continued watching. But we don't need to know that all people who claimed to be unwilling to watch the news programs continued watching.

Argument or Facts:
Argument

Valid or Flawed:
Flawed

Question Type:
Strengthen with a Necessary Premise

Stimulus Summary:
People claimed in polls that they were tired of TV news shows' obsession with celebrity scandals. But at the time of those polls, TV news programs' ratings were increasing. So people answer polls based on how they want to be perceived, not based on their actual beliefs.

Strategy Overview:

1. Argument or facts? Always argument, so identify premises and conclusions of argument
2. Anticipate why the premises are not enough to show that the conclusion is true
3. Use anticipations to select the answer choice that:
   1. Strengthens the conclusion of the argument, and
   2. Is necessary for the conclusion of the argument
      1. Can use "negation test" to double-check: if this answer choice isn't true, does the conclusion become untrue as well? If so, it's necessary for the conclusion of the argument, and it is the correct answer

Answer Anticipation:
On Strengthen with a Necessary Premise questions, we have to find the answer choice that: (a) strengthens the conclusion of the argument and (b) must be true to draw the conclusion. Finding an answer choice that matches both criteria is, at first, very challenging for many test-takers.

Fortunately, these questions follow a predictable pattern. For most Strengthen with a Necessary Premise questions, the author will introduce a "new," important idea in the argument's conclusion. The premises will not touch on this "new" important idea. In introducing this new idea, the author creates a gap between the premises and conclusion. The correct answer will address the gap between the premises and the new idea, often simply linking the two concepts. After all, bridging the gap — at least partially — will strengthen the argument, and showing that the gap is fixable is necessary to draw the conclusion.

In this case, where did this argument get that whole "as they want to be perceived" concept from? Perception of the poll respondent doesn't appear in any premises, but it shows up as a key element in the conclusion. So, we'll need a correct answer choice that connects "how people want to be perceived" to the rest of the argument. Ideally, the correct answer will say that most people want to be perceived as unwilling to watch news programs covering celebrity scandals.

Finally, we can double-check answer choices with the negation test if we need to. To apply the negation test, we can simply ask, "If this answer choice weren't true, does the conclusion become untrue as well?" If so, that answer choice is necessary for the argument's conclusion. If the conclusion could still be true, then that answer choice is wrong.

Answer Choice Explanation:
Finally, an answer choice that connects wanting to be perceived as unwilling to watch news programs to respondents of this poll. And, importantly, it does so in a weak way. By showing that some respondents said they were unwilling to watch television news programs becuase they wanted to perceived as a person who wouldn't deign to watch such sordid programming, this strengthens the conclusion.

It also passes the negation test, proving that it is necessary. Suppose it wasn't true that at least some respondents wanted to perceived as a person who wouldn't watch to watch the news programs. Suppose no one who responded to the poll wanted to be perceived as someone unwilling to watch the program. In that case, would we have any evidence that poll respondents sometimes portray themselves as they want to be perceived? Nope — we'd have no evidence to support that claim. This wrecks the argument, confirming that (E) is a necessary premise.

Key Takeaway:
Many Strengthen with a Necessary Premise answer choices are wrong because they are stronger than they need to be — particularly when the conclusion uses weak, wishy-washy language like "often." Noticing the strength of the conclusion and comparing it to answer choices (B) and (D) helped us eliminate two answer choices that strengthened but were not necessary to the argument. It also helped us select (E), which used the weak language common to many necessary premises.