PrepTest 122

Incorrect. The conclusion is where one potential factor is ruled out, not a premise as in the stimulus, so this answer isn't parallel.

Incorrect. This answer does bring up an effect (the belief sports fans drink beer) and two potential causes (stereotyping; number of beer ads), one of which is noted as being the true cause (number of beer ads). However, it doesn't conclude that there is no stereotyping, so this answer is incorrect.

Correct. Argument or Facts:
Argument

Valid or Flawed:
Flawed

Question Type:
Flawed Parallel Reasoning

Stimulus Summary:
Some high-fat diets - Obesity is caused by missing nutrients, not excessive calories
Conclusion - People on these diets aren't eating too many calories

Answer Anticipation:
The argument brings up an effect (obesity) and says that it's caused by one factor, not another. From that, it concludes that the other factor/cause isn't present. But just because that other factor isn't the cause of an effect doesn't mean that it's not present. That'd be like saying that the alertness that's associated with coffee is caused by caffeine, not flavor, and so coffee must be flavorless!

Let's find an answer that follows this same flawed pattern, establishing that one factor is a cause of a given effect instead of another factor, and then concluding that the non-causal factor isn't present at all.

Answer Explanation:
This answer brings up an effect (disorientation) and two potential causes (sleep deprivation; disruption in sunlight exposure), and it notes that the latter is the true cause. It then concludes that the other factor isn't present at all, matching the same flawed logic as the stimulus. This answer is therefore correct.

Key Takeaway:
Most of these answers had something approaching a similar argument up until the conclusion. That's par for the course—the conclusion is where most answers in both types of Parallel Reasoning questions go wrong. If you're short on time, you can start with a quick scan through the answers to see which ones don't line up with the conclusion of the stimulus, and which ones do.

Incorrect. This answer brings up an effect (market crashes), and a true cause (rumormongering) and a false cause (panic in the face of predicted downturns). However, it doesn't conclude that the false cause isn't present—though it does come close! That false cause is panic in the face of predicted downturns, not accurately predicted downturns, so the answer has a shift in it that isn't present in the stimulus, making it incorrect.

Incorrect. This answer brings up an effect (a lot of math majors are programmers), a true cause (math is appropriate for programming), and a false cause (intelligence of math majors). However, it doesn't conclude that programmers don't have the false cause—that they're not intelligent—so this answer doesn't line up with the stimulus.