Examkin

Soru

Zorluk: ZorLogical Arguments and Causal Relationships

A national logistics enterprise equipped 60 of its fulfillment centers with automated climate-controlled hydration micro-hubs. Over the subsequent 12-month evaluation period, heat-related employee fatigue incidents across these facilities decreased by 35%. Company executives concluded that the installation of the micro-hubs directly caused the reduction in heat-related fatigue incidents. Match each logical role on the left with the statement on the right that best fulfills it.

  • Statement that most strengthens the executive board's causal conclusionFatigue incidents decreased significantly only at fulfillment centers where workers actively utilized the micro-hubs, while remaining unchanged at ten regional centers where hub installation was delayed.
  • Statement that provides a confounding alternative explanation for the drop in fatigue incidentsDuring the same 12-month period, the company upgraded the primary facility ventilation and roof insulation across all 60 fulfillment centers, lowering average indoor floor temperatures by 6°F.
  • Statement that illustrates a causal direction reversal or selection biasFulfillment centers were selected to receive micro-hubs primarily because their facility managers had already recorded steep drops in worker fatigue following earlier shift-scheduling reforms.

Cevap

The statement strengthening the conclusion matches the observation that fatigue drops occurred exclusively where hubs were actively used compared to delayed control centers. The statement providing an alternative explanation matches the facility-wide ventilation upgrade reducing indoor temperatures. The statement illustrating causal direction reversal matches the selection of facilities based on pre-existing fatigue reductions.
The correct pairings establish precise alignment between logical evaluation roles and empirical statements. Isolating the effect to active intervention sites relative to delayed control sites strengthens a causal claim. Identifying simultaneous environmental upgrades provides a confounding alternative explanation. Pointing out that pre-existing drops in fatigue dictated site selection exposes reverse causality and selection bias.

Adım Adım Çözüm

1
Analyze the core causal claim in the stem.
Cause: Installation of hydration micro-hubs. Effect: 35% reduction in heat-related fatigue incidents.
Evaluating causal arguments requires identifying the explicit cause-and-effect structure asserted by the author.
2
Evaluate the statement strengthening the conclusion.
The statement detailing that fatigue decreased only in facilities actively using micro-hubs while remaining constant in control facilities provides a controlled comparison supporting causation.
A valid control group comparison rules out baseline temporal trends.
3
Evaluate the statement providing an alternative explanation.
The statement mentioning ventilation upgrades that reduced ambient temperatures provides a confounding variable that could explain the drop independently of the micro-hubs.
Alternative explanations weaken causal claims by attributing the effect to an unmanaged variable.
4
Evaluate the statement showing causal reversal/selection bias.
The statement showing hubs were installed because fatigue had already dropped demonstrates that prior fatigue trends caused hub allocation, rather than hub allocation causing the drop.
Selection bias occurs when the outcome variable influences treatment assignment.

Anahtar Kavram

Causal Argument Evaluation & Two-Part Logical Analysis
Bu soruyu puanla

Konular

Logical Arguments and Causal Relationships

Bu konudan daha fazla soru