PrepTest 141

Incorrect. The conclusion is that this executive is "definitely" overpaid, which is a stronger conclusion than the principle would allow to be drawn, so this answer is incorrect.

Incorrect. The premise of this answer has nothing to do with consultants, so it's incorrect.

Incorrect. The principle in the stimulus allows a conclusion to be drawn that an executive is "likely to be overcompensated," not that they are probably not overpaid, so this answer is incorrect.

Correct. Argument or Facts:
Facts

Question Type:
Must Be True (Principle)

Stimulus Summary:
Consultant has business interests with executive's company → Likely that the executive whose salary is set by that consultant will be overpaid

Answer Anticipation:
For these Must Be True (Principle) questions, the principle(s) will generally be phrased as a conditional. We need to get that conditional right, and then apply it to the answer choices, paying attention to details that could throw the answer off.

Here, some important details to look out for. First, we need to make sure that the consultant who's determining the executive salary has a business interest with that same company. Also, the strength is weaker than absolute ("likely"), so the correct answer should use similar language.

Answer Explanation:
This answer concludes that an executive is "probably overpaid" based on the salary being set by a consultant with "many other contracts" with the same company the executive works for—and other contracts certainly count as business interests. This answer aligns with the details of the principle in the stimulus and reaches a conclusion that can be justified by it, so it's the correct answer.

Key Takeaway:
Must Be True (Principle) questions are all about the details—make sure they line up. Also, make sure you keep the necessary condition of the principle in mind—that's the only conclusion that can be validly drawn. Any answer choice that has a conclusion that doesn't match up with it can be immediately eliminated.

Incorrect. This answer's conclusion is that someone is definitely not overpaid—stronger and the opposite of the conclusion that can be drawn based on the principle in the stimulus.