OFFICIAL EXPLANATION

Consider how the researcher reached the conclusion that having a more “take charge” personality makes a person more likely to become a corporate executive. Only one justification is given for this proposed cause and effect: the observation that a “take charge” personality tends to be observed in people who are corporate executives. However, it could be the case that the cause and effect relationship flows in the opposite direction than that proposed in the argument, as it is possible that a person first becomes a corporate executive and then develops a more “take charge” personality as a result.

(A) CORRECT. If a “take charge” personality is observed in people who are corporate executives because the job itself causes those traits to emerge, then the researcher’s conclusion that the personality traits lead to the job would be weakened.

(B) The behavior of corporate executives outside of the corporate world is not relevant to the argument.

(C) The fact that some non-executives have stronger "take charge" personalities than some people who are corporate executives does not substantially weaken the argument, as the existence of people who embody the extremes of a "take charge" personality does not disprove that those with a "take charge" personality are more likely to move into the role of corporate executive. Moreover, the personalities of non-executives are not relevant as counterexamples to the researcher’s argument about executives.

(D) The argument concerns “take charge” personality traits, not other management styles. It is possible that the people who aspire to become executives have “take charge” personalities, but have to adjust their management style according to the demands of their current jobs. Thus, this statement does not weaken the researcher’s conclusion.

(E) The success or failure of the executive’s management style, particularly outside of the corporate world, is not relevant to the conclusion.
_________________

A) Holding the job of a corporate executive causes people to develop “take charge” personality
traits.

A reverses the causal relationship.

This is another causal reasoning question.

People who have "take charge" (CAUSE) ----> (EFFECT) Become executives.
One of the way to weaken this causal relationship is to show that the REVERSE RELATIONSHIP holds true. Becoming executive lead them to develop "take charge" personality.

Option A is correct.

The argument: People with "take charge" personalities are likely to become executives. How do we weaken? By showing that people who become executive do not necessarily have "take charge" personalities.

(A) Holding the job of a corporate executive causes people to develop “take charge” personality traits.

Bullseye: Having an executive job makes someone have a "take charge" personality. That is, it is the job that causes the "take charge" personality, and not the fact that "take charge" people are drawn to the executive job.

(B) When working on charitable or community projects, corporate executives often use their ability to make decisions and lead people to make those projects successful.

Does not relate.

(C) Some people who are not executives have stronger “take charge” personalities than some people who currently serve as corporate executives.

This one is tempting. But it DOESN'T really weaken the argument. After all, the argument is that "take charge" people are the only ones that the become executives, not that the only job "take charge" people have is that of an executive.

(D) Many people who aspire to become executives exhibit different management styles in their current jobs.

Does NOT relate to those who are executives (aspiring and actually being are two different things).

(E) The executives that the researcher studied were often unsuccessful when they tried to manage their family activities as they do their business activities.

Totally unrelated.

Hope that helps .
_________________