PrepTest 151

Incorrect. By drawing a similarity between office workers and laborers after hours, this answer suggests that the reason for the disparate rates of injury must occur during the day. If anything, this strengthens the argument.

Incorrect. What insurance companies like is irrelevant to the argument. Their willingness to cover a company doesn't speak to the reasons that office workers see higher rates of back injuries; just that they do.

Incorrect. This answer would be a lot better if it stated that the laborers used these techniques, instead of just being encouraged to use them. Also, even if the stress is reduced, there's no guarantee it's enough to prevent a heightened level of injury.

Incorrect. If anything, this helps the argument by connecting injury to the job. (That said, we wouldn't pick it for a Strengthen question, but it is closer to correct there than here.)

Correct. Argument or Facts:
Argument

Valid or Flawed:
Flawed

Question Type:
Weaken

Stimulus Summary:
Office workers get back injuries less than construction workers. Therefore, office furniture must be designed poorly.

Answer Anticipation:
First, the opening statement is a comparison. Are office workers particularly susceptible to back injury, or are the manual laborers particularly resilient? If office workers don't suffer many injuries (just more than another group), then office furniture is probably just fine.

Additionally, even if we accept that office workers are injured at a significant rate, there are plenty of reasons for that other than the office furniture being poorly designed. Maybe sitting itself causes injury, no matter how comfy your chair. Or maybe office workers tend to do things that injure their backs after work hours. Any other potential explanation of why office workers are injury prone (or why manual laborers aren't) would weaken this argument.

Answer Explanation:
By stating that laborers are likely to see lower rates of back injury by engaging in a practice that prevents them, the comparison between them and office workers takes on a new light. It's not that office workers get injured a lot, but rather laborers don't. If this is the case, then there might not be anything causing back injuries in office workers—they're getting injured at a standard rate, just more than the lower rate associated with being a laborer!

Key Takeaway:
When two groups are compared to each other, we only learn relative information. Here, it would be easy to assume that laborers are injured a lot, and office workers even more. Or that laborers are injured at a standard rate, and office workers above average. However, it's also possible that laborers are almost never injured, and office workers, while more injury-prone, are still below average. Be careful with comparative statements!