Examkin

Soru

Zorluk: OrtaStrengthen

Urban Planner: In the city of Oakhaven, the local government recently implemented a "smart traffic light" system at all major intersections in an effort to reduce commute times. Since the system was activated six months ago, the average commute time for residents driving to the city center during peak hours has decreased by 15%. Therefore, it is clear that the new smart traffic light system is responsible for this reduction in commute times.

Which of the following statements, if true, most strengthen the argument? Select all that apply.

  1. Over the past six months, the total volume of vehicular traffic entering Oakhaven's city center during peak hours has steadily increased.Cevap
  2. B
    Shortly before the smart lights were activated, a major highway bypass was completed, diverting a significant amount of through-traffic away from Oakhaven's city center.
  3. C
    The percentage of Oakhaven's annual budget allocated to road maintenance and infrastructure is significantly higher than that of most similarly sized cities.
  4. Neighboring cities with similar infrastructure that did not install smart traffic lights experienced no decrease in average commute times over the same six-month period.Cevap
  5. E
    Prior to the installation of the smart traffic lights, fluctuations in Oakhaven's average commute time were heavily correlated with the occurrence of severe weather events.

Cevap

The correct statements are the one indicating an increase in total traffic volume and the one demonstrating that neighboring cities without the system saw no reduction in commute times.
To strengthen a causal argument, one must provide evidence that supports the proposed cause over alternative explanations. The statement showing an increase in traffic volume strengthens the argument by ruling out 'fewer cars on the road' as an alternative cause (in fact, if volume increased but times decreased, the lights must be highly effective). The statement showing no improvement in neighboring cities acts as a control group, demonstrating that where the cause (smart lights) is absent, the effect (reduced commute time) is also absent.

Adım Adım Çözüm

1
Identify the main conclusion of the argument.
The new smart traffic light system is responsible for the 15% reduction in commute times.
This establishes the core causal claim that must be strengthened.
2
Identify the premises supporting the conclusion.
The system was activated six months ago, and commute times decreased by 15% during that exact same timeframe.
Understanding the evidence reveals that the argument relies entirely on a chronological correlation.
3
Identify the logical gap (flaw) in the argument.
The argument assumes causation based solely on correlation. It fails to account for other factors that might have reduced commute times over the last six months.
To strengthen a causal argument, you must usually patch its core vulnerability by ruling out alternative causes or confirming the cause-and-effect relationship.
4
Evaluate options to find those that bridge the logical gap.
One correct option shows that traffic volume increased (eliminating 'fewer cars' as an alternative cause). The other correct option shows that without the new lights, similar cities saw no improvement (showing cause-without-effect controls).
Both selected options independently bolster the causal claim using standard logical reasoning techniques.

Anahtar Kavram

Strengthening Causal Arguments (Ruling out alternatives and showing control groups)
Bu soruyu puanla

Konular

Strengthen

Bu konudan daha fazla soru