Examkin

Soru

Zorluk: OrtaWeaken

A recent study of municipal programs found that cities instituting "pay-as-you-throw" waste disposal systems—where residents are charged a fee based on the weight of their non-recyclable trash—saw a 40 percent increase in the total tonnage of materials collected in residential recycling bins during the first year. The study's authors conclude from this that the financial penalty successfully motivated residents to properly sort and recycle a much larger proportion of their eligible household waste.

Which one of the following, if true, most seriously weakens the argument?

  1. A
    Many neighboring municipalities that use traditional flat-fee waste disposal systems have recently been forced to reduce the frequency of their recycling collection.
  2. B
    Residents in the studied cities received monthly utility statements that prominently displayed the exact financial savings they achieved by utilizing the recycling bins.
  3. In the year following the system's implementation, recycling facilities in these cities reported a drastic increase in heavy, non-recyclable garbage being improperly disposed of in residential recycling bins.Cevap
  4. D
    The scales used by the municipal trucks to weigh the recycling bins were found to be defective, consistently overestimating the weight of the collected materials.
  5. E
    A 40 percent increase in recycling tonnage in the studied cities constitutes a smaller absolute weight than a 15 percent increase would in most major metropolitan areas.

Cevap

The correct answer is the one stating that facilities reported a drastic increase in heavy, non-recyclable garbage being improperly disposed of in residential recycling bins.
The correct answer successfully weakens the argument by providing an alternative explanation for the 40 percent increase in tonnage. If residents are putting heavy, non-recyclable trash into their recycling bins to avoid paying the new weight-based fees for normal trash, then the increased weight in the recycling bins does not mean they are 'properly sorting and recycling' more eligible waste. This completely severs the logical link between the statistical premise and the behavioral conclusion.

Adım Adım Çözüm

1
Identify the argument's premise and conclusion.
Premise: Tonnage of materials in recycling bins increased by 40% after implementing a fee for non-recyclable trash. Conclusion: The fee motivated residents to properly sort and recycle more eligible waste.
Isolating the gap between the evidence provided and the author's interpretation is the first step in any Weaken question.
2
Analyze the logical gap in the author's reasoning.
The author assumes that the increased weight in the recycling bins is composed strictly of properly sorted, eligible recyclable waste.
In Weaken questions based on statistics or data, the conclusion often misinterprets what the data actually represents or ignores alternative causes.
3
Evaluate the answer choices to find a statement that exploits this specific logical gap.
The option regarding heavy, non-recyclable garbage being improperly placed in recycling bins directly attacks the assumption by providing an alternative explanation for the increased tonnage.
If the increased weight is actually due to residents cheating the system to avoid fees, then they are not properly sorting their waste, which destroys the conclusion.

Anahtar Kavram

Identifying Alternative Explanations for Correlated Data
Tahmini Süre:1m 30s
Bu soruyu puanla

Konular

Weaken

Bu konudan daha fazla soru