How to diagram the passage + answer choices?

@JeremyG, Happy to help. This is a tough question, and the truth is that the stimulus and answer choices don't diagram super cleanly. We know from the stimulus that when spies are caught, they have failed. The only way in which we learn how spies accomplish their goals is by catching them. This means that we know more about what makes a spy fail than we know about what makes a spy succeed. The question says, "Which one of the following arguments is most similar in its reasoning to the argument above?" We know that spies either fail or succeed. The argument looks at this and gives us an explanation for why there exists more information about the ones who fail than the ones who succeed. We're looking for an answer choice that mimics this structure: it should explain why there is more information about one thing vs. the opposite of that thing because we only find about one of the sides (the side that we have more information about). (E) says, "Because someone intervened in the conflict, the effects of that intervention can be discerned. But since no one can investigate what does not happen, it is impossible to discern what would have happened had someone not intervened." This is a tempting choice, but it's not what we're looking for. The stimulus discusses spying in general, but this answer choice is only about a single conflict. Hypothetically, if there exist other conflicts in which no one intervenes, then we would be able to find out about the effects of intervening vs. not intervening. Thus, (E) does not give an explanation for why there is more information about one side of something vs. the other side of something, so it doesn't match the stimulus. We can therefore get rid of (E). (B) says, "People who are aware of their motives can articulate them. But unconscious motives are usually impossible to acknowledge. So people are more likely to hear about other people's conscious motives than their unconscious ones." (B) does a great job in mirroring the stimulus. It's basically saying that there is more information about one side of something (conscious motives) than there is about the other side of something (unconscious motives) due to the fact that we hear about one of them, but we don't hear about the other one. This closely resembles the structure of the stimulus, so it's the correct answer choice. Does this make sense? Let us know if you have any more questions! I think for these types of questions, it's sometimes best to zoom out and think of the big picture of the argument. For this question, in particular, I find that it's easiest to solve doing this vs. trying to diagram since some of the statements aren't easily diagrammable.

Thank you!