Examkin

Question

Difficulty: MediumIdentifying Premises and Evidence

Consider the following argument:

Recent economic reports show that small retail businesses in Sector 7 increased their digital marketing spend by 30 percent over the past year. Industry analysts maintain that this increase explains the 12 percent rise in local consumer traffic during the same period. However, urban planning researchers note that a major light-rail line extension connecting Sector 7 to the downtown core opened precisely one year ago. Therefore, the rise in consumer traffic was likely driven by improved transit access rather than digital marketing spending.

Statement: In the argument above, the claim that a major light-rail line extension opened one year ago functions as a premise supporting the claim that digital marketing drove the rise in local consumer traffic.

Answer: Answer

Answer

False. The referenced claim serves as evidence supporting the rebuttal argument (improved transit access), not the claim that digital marketing drove consumer traffic.
The statement is False. In the argument, the light-rail extension is factual evidence used as a premise to support the author's final conclusion—that transit access, not digital marketing, caused the increase in consumer traffic. Therefore, it opposes rather than supports the digital marketing claim.

Step-by-Step Solution

1
Analyze the structure of the argument and identify key positions
Position A (Analysts): Digital marketing spend caused the traffic increase. Position B (Researchers): Transit access caused the traffic increase.
Understanding the opposing viewpoints is required to accurately assign structural roles to specific statements.
2
Determine the functional role of the target statement
The statement that the light-rail extension opened one year ago provides factual evidence (a premise) introduced by researchers.
It offers empirical backing for the alternative explanation (improved transit access).
3
Evaluate the statement in the question stem against the argument's logic
The target statement supports the researchers' counter-conclusion, which refutes the analysts' claim. Thus, it does not support the digital marketing claim.
Evidence used to rebut a hypothesis cannot be categorized as supporting that same hypothesis.

Key Concept

Identifying Premises and Evidence in Counter-Arguments
Rate this question

Topics

Identifying Premises and Evidence

More questions from this topic