guerrero25 wrote:
A survey of charitable giving in the state found that the average dollar amount contributed annually by residents of urban areas to programs for the homeless was $15 greater than the amount contributed by residents of rural areas. The survey’s creators, an urban-promotion group known as Live in the City, concluded that city dwellers are on average more generous than residents of rural areas.
EACH of the following, if true, casts doubt on the conclusion of the survey’s creators EXCEPT
A)An unrelated survey of annual charitable giving finds that residents of rural areas give 3% less to charity than residents of urban areas.
B)There are more homeless people in urban areas than rural areas, making it more likely that urban residents would contribute to those charities.
C)There are more charities in general operating in urban areas than in rural areas.
D)The survey is calculated based on dollar amount rather than percentage of income, and does not account for the fact that incomes in urban areas are often higher.
E)The group Live in the City has been known to alter survey results for marketing purposes.
question asks "4 choices weaken conclusion, 1 does not, which one does not weaken?"
a - yes, rural residents give less to charity.
strengthens the conclusionb - something other than kindness (i.e. more homeless ppl thus more exposed to it so more likely to give) is causing urban residents to give more to charity.
thus, weakens the belief that urban residents give bc they are kinder. they are giving bc they see more homeless.c - something other than kindness (i.e. more charities in operation) is causing urban residents to give more to charity.
thus, weakens the belief that urban residents give bc they are kinderd - urban ppl give more bc they are rich, not because they are kind.
thus, weakens the belief that urban residents give bc they are kindere - survey not reliable, so claim that urban ppl give more bc they are kind could be a lie
weakens