PrepTest 134

Incorrect. While it is a conclusion of the argument, it supports the main point about proposals allowing phone use on planes are ill-advised. It's an intermediate conclusion, not a main point.

Incorrect. The Editorialist is against allowing phones to be used on planes, and it being annoying there is a part of that argument, not something that's being rebutted.

Incorrect. This answer would describe a premise for an intermediate conclusion, not the intermediate conclusion itself. (A premise supported by a premise is an intermediate conclusion.)

Correct. Argument or Facts:
Argument

Valid or Flawed:
Flawed

Question Type:
Argument Structure

Stimulus Summary:
People using their phones on buses/trains is annoying. On planes:
(1) People are closer together
(2) People can't move to another seat if annoyed
So - Phone usage on planes is more annoying
Therefore - Proposals to allow phones on planes are bad

Answer Anticipation:
There's a lot going on in this argument, which is par for the course on a difficult Argument Structure question. When this happens, it's important to look for structure keywords in order to help you through it.

Here, there's a key one—the second sentence starts with, "This suggests that," indicating that the first sentence is support for the second. The second sentence is therefore a conclusion of the argument.

However, the statement following it—without a structure keyword—is also an opinion ("far more upsetting") and a prediction ("would be"). Those both hint that it's also a conclusion, and this is backed up by the following two statements providing reasons to believe that phone usage on a plane would be more annoying than on a bus or a train.

So since we've identified two conclusions, we need to figure out which one is subsidiary to the other—especially since that second conclusion is the statement in question. Reading them back-to-back to figure out which one supports the other, it becomes clear that the statement in question supports the other conclusion. If phone use on planes is particularly annoying, then proposals to allow it are ill-advised—that might not be a valid argument, but it makes sense as one (the opposite doesn't particularly make sense as an argument).

So the statement in question is an intermediate conclusion.

Answer Explanation:
This answer highlights the role of the statement as an intermediate conclusion.

Key Takeaway:
Argument Structure questions throw difficult arguments your way since all they're testing is your ability to break it down into its component parts. Because of this, it's even more important to rely on structure keywords and use our rules of thumb to help identify conclusions and premises.

Incorrect. The statement in question plays a primary role in establishing that proposals to allow phone use on planes are bad—by bringing up how annoying it would be.