­In an economic downturn, companies tempted to take advantage of job

­In an economic downturn, companies tempted to take advantage of job applicants as unemployment rates rise should reconsider, for such actions could hurt these companies when the economy recovers. Researchers surveyed employees about their experiences as applicants with their current employers. Those who felt they had been treated unfairly during hiring were twice as likely to respond that they were looking for jobs outside their company, even after five years. Among the actions applicants considered unfair were slow responses from employers and pressure to accept offers quickly.

The conclusion of the argument is the following:

­In an economic downturn, companies tempted to take advantage of job applicants as unemployment rates rise should reconsider

The support for the conclusion comes from this intermediate conclusion:

such actions could hurt these companies when the economy recovers

That intermediate conclusion is supported by these premises:

Researchers surveyed employees about their experiences as applicants with their current employers. Those who felt they had been treated unfairly during hiring were twice as likely to respond that they were looking for jobs outside their company, even after five years.

We see that the reasoning of the argument is that, since employees who felt they had been treated unfairly during hiring were twice as likely to be looking for jobs outside their companies, even after five years, taking advantage of job applicants, in other words, treating them unfairly, during an economic downturn could hurt companies, and therefore, companies should reconsider taking advantage of applicants.

Which of the following would, if true, most strengthen the reasoning above?

This is a Strengthen question, and the correct answer will somehow strengthen the support for the conclusion.

A. Recovery from an economic downturn usually affects company profits before it affects hiring practices.

This information on how a company is affected by an economic recovery doesn't indicate anything about what a company should do with regard to applicants.

Eliminate.

B. The unwillingness of a company to negotiate compensation levels is often considered unfair.

This detail about what's considered unfair doesn't provide any support for the conclusion that companies should reconsider taking advantage of job applicants.

Anything a company does that involves taking advantage of applicants could be considered unfair. So, this choice just provides an example of what the passage says companies should not do rather than helps to confirm that they shouldn't do it.

Eliminate.

C. During an economic downturn, the jobs available outside one’s current company are usually limited.

This choice explains why employees are unlikely to leave companies during an economic downturn.

OK, great, but we don't need such an explanation. We need a reason to believe the companies should reconsider taking advantage of applicants, and the fact that jobs outside of one's current company are limited during a downturn is not a reason why companies should reconsider taking advantage of applicants.

If anything, it's a reason why companies can take advantage of applicants: applicants' alternatives are limited.

Eliminate.

D. An economic recovery usually occurs less than five years after the start of an economic downturn.

To see why this choice strengthens the argument, we have to pick up on the connection between this choice and a key detail of the passage.

The key detail is that the passage says, "Those who felt they had been treated unfairly during hiring were twice as likely to respond that they were looking for jobs outside their company, even after five years."

Having noticed that detail, we can see that if, as the passage says, employees are still looking for their jobs outside their companies five years after being treated unfairly and, if as this choice says, "an economic recovery usually occurs less than five years after the start of an economic downturn," then an economic recovery will likely occur while employees are still looking for jobs outside their companies. In that case, the employees looking for jobs will likely be able to find them since it's relatively easy to find a job during an economic recovery.

So, this choice helps to support the intermediate conclusion that "such actions (taking advantage of applicants) could hurt these companies when the economy recovers." After all, this choice indicates that, if companies do take advantage of applicants, the economy will likely recover while employees who were taken advantage of as applicants are still looking for jobs outside their companies and that, therefore, companies are likely to lose employees they took advantage of during a downturn.

By providing support for the intermediate conclusion, this choice also strengthens the support for the main conclusion.

Keep.

E. A rising unemployment rate is a widely accepted indication of an economic downturn.

This general information about what indicates an economic downturn does not indicate that companies should reconsider taking advantage of applicants during an economic downturn. After all, the fact that the unemployment rate is rising is not a reason not to take advantage of applicants.

Eliminate.

Correct answer: D­