PrepTest 130

Incorrect. First, the argument never discusses the satisfaction felt by residents of other areas and that doesn't make up a part of the paradox, so that part of this answer is out of scope. Second, even if this is the case, it doesn't explain how a relative improvement in living conditions is leading to a sentiment change. We'd need to know that, despite living conditions being average, the aspects that Area L values over other areas were decreased to increase other areas.

Correct. Argument or Facts:
Facts

Question Type:
Paradox

Stimulus Summary:
10 years ago: Area L had living conditions slightly below national average, but people were generally happy.
Today: Area L has living conditions at the national average, but most people are not happy.

Answer Anticipation:
This Paradox question highlights a change in attitude between residents a decade ago and today, so some change that isn't mentioned in the stimulus must account for it. We know that Area L's attitude changed, as well as their living conditions compared to the national average. Either the people changed and are pickier, or the national average went way down (and thus so did Area L's), or something else changed that could drive a change in happiness. Let's stay flexible while considering any answer that raises a relevant change over the past decade!

Answer Explanation:
The paradox revolved around Area L's relative living conditions improving but their happiness decreasing. If the average living conditions declined, then Area L could have a relative increase in living conditions compared to other areas while still seeing an absolute decline in living conditions. For example, if the entire country is now suffering through a depression, then even if Area L is doing about average, that's still likely worse than they were doing before the depression.

Key Takeaway:
Paradox questions frequently deal in comparisons and changes. Correct answers need to address and explain these changes, which generally means that they need to highlight a change themselves.

Incorrect. The paradox is about Area L's sentiment towards their own living conditions, so "optimal living conditions"—which we know aren't present in Area L—and how they're defined are out of scope.

Incorrect. Assuming that general satisfaction with living conditions means that people don't feel improvements are necessary, the stimulus still establishes that Area L's relative conditions improved. This answer may imply that they didn't actually improve, and thus the living conditions of other areas went down, but that doesn't explain why Area L is now unhappy with their living conditions—especially since this answer leaves open the possibility that while everyone else's living conditions went down, Area L's stayed the same.

Incorrect. Before we could even consider this as a correct answer, we'd need to know if the residents of Area L now do know the relative level of their living conditions. Without that, we don't know if there's been a change.