Examkin

Question

Difficulty: MediumMethod of Reasoning

Economist: Proponents of municipal water conservation programs claim that providing rebates for high-efficiency household appliances will substantially reduce overall residential water use. However, this projection is flawed. When residents install high-efficiency appliances, such as low-flow irrigation timers and dual-flush toilets, the effective cost per unit of water consumed decreases. This reduction in marginal cost typically induces consumers to increase their frequency of usage and expand irrigated lawn areas, thereby counteracting the per-unit savings. Consequently, appliance rebate initiatives cannot be counted on to achieve net reductions in residential water demand.

Which one of the following most accurately describes the method of reasoning employed in the economist's argument?

  1. A
    It attacks a proposed policy by challenging the empirical data used by proponents to calculate baseline water consumption.
  2. B
    It rejects an environmental initiative by citing historical evidence from analogous conservation programs implemented in other municipalities.
  3. It undermines a prediction about the efficacy of a policy by identifying behavioral responses to the policy that offset its intended benefits.Answer
  4. D
    It treats a factor that is merely sufficient to cause increased water usage as though it were a necessary condition for that increase.
  5. E
    It attempts to discredit the proponents' position by arguing that their recommendation is motivated by commercial rather than environmental goals.

Answer

The argument undermines a prediction about the efficacy of a policy by identifying behavioral responses to the policy that offset its intended benefits.
The correct response accurately captures the structural progression of the argument: the economist presents a mechanism (lower marginal cost leading to increased consumption frequency) to show that the expected net reduction from the policy will be neutralized by user behavior.

Step-by-Step Solution

1
Identify the main conclusion and the opposing claim in the stimulus.
The opposing claim is that appliance rebates will substantially reduce residential water demand; the economist's main conclusion is that these rebate initiatives cannot be counted on to achieve net reductions.
Accurately identifying the conclusion is the essential first step in determining how the author arrives at their claim.
2
Analyze the premises and the intermediate logic connecting them to the conclusion.
The economist explains that high-efficiency appliances lower the marginal cost of water use, which in turn incentivizes consumers to use appliances more frequently and expand watering areas, offsetting per-unit savings.
Understanding the functional role of each premise clarifies the argumentative strategy.
3
Abstract the argumentative strategy to match the correct descriptive choice.
The strategy consists of refuting an expected policy outcome by demonstrating that the policy induces offsetting consumer behavior.
Method of reasoning questions require translating specific argumentative content into an abstract logical description.

Key Concept

Evaluating argumentative structure and identifying how an author uses behavioral incentives to challenge a predicted policy outcome.
Estimated Time:1m 15s
Rate this question

Topics

Method of Reasoning

More questions from this topic