Examkin

Soru

Zorluk: Çok zorLogical Arguments and Causal Relationships

A metropolitan transportation authority implemented a peak-hour congestion pricing toll for private vehicles entering District X. Over the following 18 months, private vehicle traffic entering District X decreased by 22%22\%, while retail foot traffic in District X increased by 14%14\%. The transit board concluded that the congestion toll directly caused the increase in retail foot traffic by eliminating traffic congestion and encouraging suburban shoppers to visit downtown via public transit.

Match each logical argument role below with the statement that best exemplifies that role when evaluating the transit board's causal claim.

  • A statement that demonstrates a reverse causal relationship (the outcome causing the alleged factor)Local retail merchant associations in District X began lobbying city officials for congestion pricing tolls only after experiencing sustained increases in pedestrian shoppers.
  • A statement that identifies an independent confounding variable explaining both observed changesSimultaneous with the toll implementation, the city launched a zero-fare high-speed light rail extension connecting dense suburban centers directly to District X.
  • A statement that invalidates a necessary assumption regarding transit infrastructure capacityPublic transit lines serving District X were operating at 99%99\% of maximum commuter capacity prior to the toll and received no additional vehicles or service frequency.

Cevap

The statement describing retail merchant lobbying matches the reverse causal relationship role; the statement concerning the launch of a zero-fare light rail line matches the confounding variable role; and the statement regarding transit lines operating at 99% capacity matches the invalidation of a necessary assumption role.
Each argument role correctly aligns with its corresponding logical effect: the merchant lobbying statement reverses the temporal and causal sequence; the zero-fare light rail statement introduces a concurrent external factor driving both observed trends; and the 99% transit capacity statement demonstrates a physical bottleneck that breaks a required link in the board's proposed mechanism.

Adım Adım Çözüm

1
Analyze the board's core causal hypothesis.
Cause = Congestion pricing toll → Effect = Reduced car traffic & increased retail foot traffic via public transit conversion.
Establishing the explicit mechanism (toll → less car congestion → suburban shoppers take transit → higher foot traffic) is necessary to evaluate logical flaws.
2
Evaluate the statement concerning merchant lobbying.
This statement indicates that higher pedestrian traffic came first and caused the political demand for the toll.
This directly reverses the direction of causality (Y→XY \rightarrow X instead of X→YX \rightarrow Y), matching the reverse causal relationship role.
3
Evaluate the statement concerning the zero-fare light rail extension.
The light rail extension introduces an external event occurring at the same time that independently drives both observed trends.
A third factor (ZZ) that causes both decreased vehicle traffic and increased foot traffic constitutes a classic confounding variable alternative explanation.
4
Evaluate the statement concerning transit capacity operating at 99%.
Because transit was already saturated and received no upgrades, it physically could not carry new shoppers into District X.
The board's conclusion hinges on the unstated premise that transit could accommodate modal shift; proving capacity was zero invalidates this necessary assumption.

Anahtar Kavram

Evaluating Causal Arguments in Two-Part Analysis
Bu soruyu puanla

Konular

Logical Arguments and Causal Relationships

Bu konudan daha fazla soru