aragonn wrote:
In 1990, television owners in the town of Mayfield received only one public station. During an average prime-time hour, that station attracted 75,000 viewers. In 1991, another public station began broadcasting in the region. In 1991, the two stations together attracted 150,000 viewers during an average prime-time hour. With two public stations represented on television, the number of Mayfield residents who watched public prime-time programming doubled.
Which of the following, if true, most seriously weakens the author's conclusion?
A. The second public station is received by many television viewers outside the Mayfield area, and the station's figures for prime-time viewership represent viewers from its entire broadcast region.
B. The cost of opening and operating a second public station in the region has placed a serious financial burden on the state.
C. In a recent survey, one in ten Mayfield residents reported watching public television for the first time in 1991.
D. The two stations show the same programming during prime time, although their schedules vary slightly during nonprime-time hours.
E. It was hoped by public station programmers that, in 1991, the two stations would attract 190,000 viewers during an average prime-time hour.
Official Explanation:
Conclusion: With two public stations represented on television, the number of Mayfield residents who watched public prime-time programming doubled.
Premise: During an average prime-time hour, that station attracted 75,000 viewers. In 1991, the two stations together attracted 150,000 viewers during an average prime-time hour.
Assumption: There is no other way to interpret the facts. The only viewers who watched in 1991 were Mayfield residents.
This is a weaken question, as evidenced by the phrase Which of the following…most seriously weakens the author's conclusion. The passage uses the premise that In 1990, television owners in…Mayfield received only one public station...During an average prime-time hour, that station attracted 75,000 viewers. In 1991, another public station began broadcasting…the two stations together attracted 150,000 viewers during an average prime-time hour. The passage concludes that With two public stations represented on television, the number of Mayfield residents who watched public prime-time programming doubled.
The passage contains an interpretation of evidence reasoning pattern because it interprets statistics. The argument provides two sets of data, from 1990 and 1991. Because the values for 1991 are twice as much as 1990, the argument concludes that Mayfield residents who watched public prime-time programming doubled. The standard assumption of an argument with an interpretation of evidence reasoning pattern is that there is no other way to interpret the facts.
This argument assumes that the data about viewers during an average prime-time hour can be generalized to support a conclusion about Mayfield residents who watched public prime-time programming, and that no other conclusion is possible. There is a language shift between the premise, which refers to viewers, and the conclusion, which refers to Mayfield residents. Therefore, another assumption is that these two ideas are equivalent—that the viewers referred to in the data were all Mayfield residents. Because this is a weaken question, the correct answer either provides an alternative explanation or interpretation of the data, or challenges the assumption that the viewers referred to in the data were all Mayfield residents. Evaluate the answer choices.
Choice A: Correct. If The second…station is received by many television viewers outside the Mayfield area, and the station's figures for prime-time viewership represent viewers from its entire broadcast region, then the conclusion that the number of Mayfield residents who watched public prime-time programming doubled is not necessarily true. The number of viewers doubled, but the percentage of those viewers that were Mayfield residents is uncertain.
Choice B: No. The cost of opening and operating a second public station is out of scope. The passage is concerned with the number of people who may have watched the station’s programming.
Choice C: No. The fact that one in ten Mayfield residents reported watching public television for the first time is out of scope, since it is not relevant whether the viewers in the statistical data were first-time viewers.
Choice D: No. The fact that The two stations show the same programming during prime time is out of scope. The passage is concerned with the number of viewers who are residents.
Choice E: No. The phrase hoped by public station programmers is out of scope. The passage is concerned with the number of viewers who are residents.
The correct answer is choice A.