Quote:
Marketing Analyst:
Despite the recent spike in online advertising by most competitors, our company has not increased its digital marketing budget and has seen no decrease in market share. Given that the cost of online advertising has significantly increased due to higher demand, we can conclude that our existing marketing strategies are still effective. Furthermore,
our sales team has reported an increase in customer engagement and satisfaction with current marketing efforts.
In the analyst's reasoning, the two portions in boldface play which of the following roles?
(A) The first is the analyst's main conclusion; the second provides evidence to support that conclusion.
(B) The first is evidence that serves as the basis for rejecting one explanation; the second is the analyst's additional explanation.
(C) The first is a statement of fact that the analyst disputes; the second provides an alternative explanation that the analyst offers.
(D) The first presents a scenario that seems contradictory to expected outcomes; the second provides supporting evidence that explains the actual outcome observed.
(E) The first outlines an initial observation that is under question; the second provides evidence to refute a potential objection to the analyst's final conclusion.
To solve this question, let us deploy
IMS's four-step technique.
STEP #1 ->
IDENTIFY THE QUESTION TYPETo identify the question type, we need to read the question stem. The stem states, 'In the analyst's reasoning, the two portions in boldface play which of the following roles?' What we have is a
boldface question.
Now that the question type is identified, let us proceed to the second step.
STEP #2 ->
X-RAY THE ARGUMENTIn a boldface question, it is a must to figure out the role of each sentence. Let us therefore x-ray it.
SENTENCE #1 ->
Despite the recent spike in online advertising by most competitors, our company has not increased its digital marketing budget and has seen no decrease in market share. - This first portion of this sentence states a
fact; the second portion consists of two
observed results.
SENTENCE #2 -> Given that the cost of online advertising has significantly increased due to higher demand, we can conclude that our existing marketing strategies are still effective. - This sentence draws a
conclusion in the second part; the first part is an
observation that the analyst takes into consideration while drawing his conclusion.
SENTENCE #3 -> Furthermore,
our sales team has reported an increase in customer engagement and satisfaction with current marketing efforts. - This sentence consists of a piece of
evidence that explains the observed results in the first sentence
.Now that the argument is x-rayed, let us proceed to the third step.
STEP #3 ->
FRAME A SHADOW ANSWERTo frame a shadow answer, we need to know what the right answer should do. Based on the steps we have executed, let us frame a shadow answer.
SHADOW ANSWER: The first is a fact coupled with two observed results; the second is a piece of evidence that explains the observed results.
Now that we have a shadow answer, let us proceed to the process of elimination.
(A) The first is the analyst's main conclusion; the second provides evidence to support that conclusion. -
NOT A MATCH -
The first is not the analyst's main conclusion. -
ELIMINATE(B) The first is evidence that serves as the basis for rejecting one explanation; the second is the analyst's additional explanation. -
NOT A MATCH -
There is no explanation that is rejected. -
ELIMINATE(C) The first is a statement of fact that the analyst disputes; the second provides an alternative explanation that the analyst offers. -
NOT A MATCH - The analyst does not dispute what is stated in the first boldface. - ELIMINATE(D) The first presents a scenario that seems contradictory to expected outcomes; the second provides supporting evidence that explains the actual outcome observed. -
MATCHES THE SHADOW ANSWER -
Does the first boldface present a scenario/fact? Yes! And is the scenario contradictory to expected outcomes? Yes! One would expect a company to increase its digital marketing budget and witness a decrease in its market share if there is a spike in online advertising by most competitors. Now, does the second provide supporting evidence that explains the actual outcome observed? Yes! The actual outcome is this: Our company has not increased its digital marketing budget and has seen no decrease in market share. The second boldface 'our sales team has reported an increase in customer engagement and satisfaction with current marketing efforts' tells us why the company has not increased its digital marketing budget and has seen no decrease in market share. -
KEEP(E) The first outlines an initial observation that is under question; the second provides evidence to refute a potential objection to the analyst's final conclusion. -
NOT A MATCH -
The observation is not under question. -
ELIMINATEHence, (D) has to be the right answer.