71 LR Two Question 21
- « 71 LR Two Question 20
- 2614 of 3815
- 71 LR Two Question 22 »
Comments
I have a bone to pick with this one. Doesn't answer choice A attack the study itself? Is it not unreasonable to conclude that if the smells were not perfect reproductions, then it attacks the validity of the results (i.e. maybe the factory bros didn't recognize the smell).
Just for full disclosure, I originally put D, and I am still having some trouble eliminating it. Isn't this beyond the scope? So what if the factory is emitting the perfume that my ex-girl friend uses?
(A) would tend to strengthen the argument—if the chemicals closely reproduced the intended scents, and yet people in factories could only identify those scents at 20% the rate of the control group, then that misidentification didn't arise from a poor reproduction. Maybe it was the posion fumes.
For (D), does your girlfriend wear poison for perfume? I guess that would explain why she's an ex... (D) weakens, because if the factories are releasing poisonous fumes other than sulfur, then maybe those other fumes—and not the sulfur—are causing the damage.
Clearer?
Hi Dave,
Just want to point out I eliminated a for the reason stated above...
I chose c and justified it by thinking that participants in a blind smell test don't necessarily find out if their guesses in previous tests were right, and if we aren't told that, we can't assume it. Therefore having smelled the scent before doesn't mean you know what it is. Did I totally overthink this or what?
(C) does not disprove the claim, at least in part for the reason you've identified. But we haven't been asked to disprove it—just to cast doubt on it, which (C) does. Even if the participants didn't learn anything from those experiences, we now know that our control group was not a random group. Note that almost any characteristic shared by the sample population would have the same weakening effect.
Hello Dave
I easily anticipate C,D, E and eliminate them.
but I couldn't eliminate A. I thought A was possible to weaken because the point ' not perfectly reproduced' is possible to be other causes for damage. That is while reproducing the chemical instance other things without sulfur is included and result in the damaging one's sens of smell.
I might think too much could you express why this idea is not considered?
(A) has no effect on the argument, in large part because it offers no explanation for the difference between the factory workers and the control group. Notice that all the other answer choices do offer possible reasons for the difference. That's the key!