PrepTest 149

Incorrect. Before diagramming, we can eliminate this answer choice because of a term shift between the premise about a "major" movie and the conclusion about all movies.

Incorrect. Owned by Bidmore → not Specializes in business travelers
CSP → Owned by Bidmore
Therefore, CSP → not Specializes in business travelers
This is a valid argument that arguably builds from two conditionals, but it doesn't have the timeline of the original argument ("Last year") and it also doesn't rely on a contrapositive. This would survive a first pass but have a strike against it that would eliminate it after working on the correct answer.

Correct. Argument or Facts:
Argument

Valid or Flawed:
Valid

Question Type:
Parallel Reasoning

Stimulus Summary:
Nonfiction → not Earned profit
Book from last year → Earned profit
Therefore: Book from last year → not Nonfiction

Answer Anticipation:
Working a bit to get the elements lined up, we get:

Book from last year → Earned profit
Earned profit → not Nonfiction
Therefore: Book from last year → not Nonfiction

That's a valid conclusion building off of two conditional statements, so let's head into the answer choices and eliminate ones that don't line up.

Answer Explanation:
Employee in P's marketing division → not Bonus
Systems analyst last year → Bonus
Therefore: Systems analyst last year → not Employee in P's marketing divisionThis argument is valid, has the same timeline element as the stimulus, and combines two conditionals after taking the contrapositive of one. That checks all the boxes, so this is the correct answer.

Key Takeaway:
It's completely normal to have a Parallel Reasoning question where the base diagram ends up looking a lot like more than once answer choice—especially on the harder questions later in the section. When that happens, narrow it down and then identify other relevant elements of the stimulus that match up with only certain answers. Think back to other questions for what elements might be relevant—we've seen timelines be relevant in other questions, so looking for answers that share that aspect of the stimulus reflects what we know about important logic on the test.

Incorrect. James Benson → not Done business with Waldville
Waldville file → Done business with Waldville
Therefore: James Benson → not Waldville file
First off, it's a bit of a stretch to call some of these statements conditionals. That said, there's no timeline established in this answer choice, as there was in the stimulus.

Incorrect. Without even diagramming this answer out, you should be able to tell it's flawed. It bases a very strong conclusion—they "do[] not" install hardwood flooring—based on a weaker premise—"a lot of" customers they haven't installed hardwood flooring for.