Examkin

Question

Difficulty: HardStrengthen

City official: Following the implementation of a new ordinance restricting construction and commercial noise after 10 PM in the downtown district, the number of reported property crimes in the district dropped by 20 percent. This reduction was likely caused by the quieter environment, which allows residents to more easily hear the sounds of forced entry or tampering, thereby deterring criminals who fear being reported.

Which one of the following, if true, most strengthens the city official's argument?

  1. A
    During the period when the crime rate dropped, the city also doubled the number of police officers patrolling the downtown district at night.
  2. B
    The city council passed the noise ordinance with the primary intention of improving the sleep quality of downtown residents, rather than reducing crime.
  3. The reduction in property crimes downtown was almost exclusively due to a drop in crimes involving loud mechanisms, such as shattering windows or prying metal doors.Answer
  4. D
    Prior to the noise ordinance, the downtown district accounted for exactly 20 percent of all noise complaints filed in the city.
  5. E
    The majority of individuals arrested for property crimes in the downtown district over the last year do not reside in the district.

Answer

The option stating that the reduction in property crimes was almost exclusively due to a drop in crimes involving loud mechanisms.
The city official concludes that the drop in crime was caused by criminals being deterred because the quieter environment allows residents to hear forced entry. The correct answer strengthens this specific causal claim by showing that the reduction in crime was limited to crimes that actually produce the type of noise residents would hear. If all types of property crime had dropped equally, it would suggest a general deterrent. By isolating the drop to loud crimes, the correct answer strongly validates the official's specific hearing-based mechanism.

Step-by-Step Solution

1
Analyze the argument's structure to identify the premise and the main conclusion.
Premise: Crime dropped 20 percent after a noise ordinance was enacted. Conclusion: The drop was caused by criminals being deterred because the quieter environment allows residents to hear forced entry.
Understanding the exact causal mechanism proposed by the author is necessary to evaluate and strengthen the argument.
2
Determine the task required by the question stem.
The task is to find the choice that most strengthens the city official's argument.
Identifying the question type guides the evaluation of the answer choices.
3
Formulate a strategy to strengthen the specific causal mechanism.
Look for an answer choice that either rules out alternative causes for the crime drop or provides data specifically validating the 'hearing-based' deterrence mechanism.
Strengthening a causal claim requires showing that the effect is specifically tied to the proposed cause.
4
Evaluate the answer choices against the strategy.
The correct option shows that the drop in crime was limited to crimes that make noise. This perfectly aligns with the official's proposed mechanism.
If silent crimes had also dropped, it would suggest a general deterrent like increased police presence. By isolating the drop to loud crimes, the correct answer strongly bolsters the official's reasoning.

Key Concept

Strengthening Causal Arguments by Validating the Proposed Mechanism
Rate this question

Topics

Strengthen

More questions from this topic