Jennifer: Despite the promotional campaigns, it seems that not many pe

despite promotional campaigns 'not many people' are recycling- Jennifer
Marco: 'I disagree. station near my home is always very busy '

A- seems correct, lets keep it

B- Irrelevant

C- weakens it

D. We are not considered with factories. Out of scope.

E. same as c

A. Each recycling station is responsible for collecting the waste materials of a very large area inhabited by many citizens. This statement strengthens Macros reasoning about the recycling station near his house being busy. If the station is busy then many citizens must be recycling.

B. In some countries, recycling managed to significantly reduce pollution in a period of only several years. Out of scope.

C. A recent survey shows that promotional campaigns for recycling have the lowest success rate of any advertising campaign. Weakens Marcos argument.

D. Factories that use recyclable substances have reported significant rises in profits due to an increase in the supply of recycled materials. This is the only other possible "trick" answer. I eliminated because it was out of scope by talking about factories. So not really focused on the local recycling station aspect of Marcos argument.

E. It has been noted that many promotional campaigns for recycling are ineffective as people report that they feel that they are being preached to. Out of scope.

IMO A is correct, since it talks about recycling factories serving a large area. If that station is busy, then a large number of people must be recycling. It strengthens Marco's statement.

D is the answer. It correctly strengthens Marco's point by pointing out that the profits for factories have increased due to increase in the recycled items.

{stem} promo seems ineffective; hwever, station nearby is always busy with people recycling; therefore, promo was effective.
{streg} promo was effective.

b) irev
c) irev
d) what factories, where? what supply, where?
e) wkn

(A) this explicitly str M's objection, stating that the station represents a significant portion of recycling.

OFFICIAL EXPLANATION

Jennifer: Despite the promotional campaigns, it seems that not many people are actually recycling waste materials.

Marco: I disagree. The recycling station near my home is always very busy with people bringing in various objects for recycling.

Which of the following, if true, most strengthens Marco's objection to Jennifer's claim?


A. Each recycling station is responsible for collecting the waste materials of a very large area inhabited by many citizens.

Incorrect.

This is a Conclusion Strengthening question in the Dialog format. You are asked to choose the answer choice which strengthens Marco's objection (or weakens Jennifer's position):



This answer choice weakens Marco's claim. If each station covers a large area with many people, then even if a small percentage of people recycle, the station will seem busy.


B. In some countries, recycling managed to significantly reduce pollution in a period of only several years.

Incorrect.

This answer choice neither strengthens nor weakens Marco's objection. The argument between Marco and Jennifer has nothing to do with the merits of recycling, but instead is about whether people are actively recycling. Therefore. this statement is irrelevant to the topic.


C. A recent survey shows that promotional campaigns for recycling have the lowest success rate of any advertising campaign.

Incorrect.

This answer choice strengthens Jennifer's claim and, therefore, weakens Marco's. If promotional campaigns for recycling have low success rates, then Jennifer's observation that people are still not recycling despite the campaign seems more likely. We should be looking for a statement that shows that Jennifer's claim is not true.


D. Factories that use recyclable substances have reported significant rises in profits due to an increase in the supply of recycled materials.

This answer choice gives support to Marco's claim. If factories are receiving more recycled materials, then more people must be actively recycling.


E. It has been noted that many promotional campaigns for recycling are ineffective as people report that they feel that they are being preached to.

Incorrect.

This is a Conclusion Strengthening question in the Dialog format. You are asked to choose the answer choice which strengthens Marco's objection (or weakens Jennifer's position):



This answer choice strengthens Jennifer's claim and, therefore, weakens Marco's. If promotional campaigns for recycling are often ineffective, then we are led to believe that the campaign may not have caused more people to recycle, and that Marco is wrong. However, we should be looking for a statement that supports Marco's viewpoint.




_________________

Hi Bunuel
For Option A: If each station covers a large area with many people, then even if a small percentage of people recycle, the station will seem busy.
I don't agree. What if the station has a big area and can accommodate large number of people? It will seem busy even then. We have not been given any information regarding how big/small the area is.

Please let me know where my thinking is flawed. Thank you.

Hi Bunuel yashikaaggarwal VeritasKarishma
Could you please help?

I re-tried and here is my take on Option (A)
There is a possibility that the same set of people might be visiting the station again and again so the station might look busy.
This does not guarantee that the more people are aware about re-cycling.

Am I correct?

I see where the question is going with the analysis.....a good way to weaken marco’s argument is to show him that the only reason why you see your recycling center busy is because it covers a large area and there are so many people. Of course the place will appear busy because it takes care of so many people. That fact doesn’t mean that recycling of “waste” materials has gone up.


But do companies receiving an increase “supply of recyclable substances” really strengthen marco’s point????

Don’t tell me this is a GMAC question....

Posted from my mobile device

Jennifer: Not many people are recycling.
Marco: Not so. The recycling station near my home is always very busy.

What will strengthen Marco's view? What will strengthen that many people are recycling?

A. Each recycling station is responsible for collecting the waste materials of a very large area inhabited by many citizens.

sharmashivng
If anything, this weakens Marco's argument. Marco's recycling station is very busy. But if it caters to a very large area, it will be expected to be busy even if few people recycle. Say only 1% people recycle. If there is one recycling station for every 1000 people, it will not be busy. But if there is only one recycling station for every 100,000 people, it will be very busy. Just because it is busy, it doesn't mean that many people are recycling. Still only 1% people are recycling. Option (A) very clearly mentions "very large area inhabited by many citizens". They are trying to say that that one station caters to many many people.

B. In some countries, recycling managed to significantly reduce pollution in a period of only several years.

Irrelevant what happened in some countries. We need to know about this country/area.

C. A recent survey shows that promotional campaigns for recycling have the lowest success rate of any advertising campaign.

If anything, it helps Jennifer.

D. Factories that use recyclable substances have reported significant rises in profits due to an increase in the supply of recycled materials.

Supply of recycled materials has increased. This could mean that more people are recycling. It certainly helps Marco's argument.

E. It has been noted that many promotional campaigns for recycling are ineffective as people report that they feel that they are being preached to.

Reasons for failure of promotional campaigns is irrelevant.

Answer (D)
_________________

Right, so I was trying to verify if my reason for eliminating (A) was correct.
Thank you so much!

I think what made the passage a little tricky (at least for me) is that I’m so used to focusing on the logic chain that the author uses (in this case Marco).

But “conclusion is king” and D absolutely increases the likelihood that recycling has increased.

Thank you much VeritasKarishma

Posted from my mobile device

The main issue is between A and D.

A. Each recycling station is responsible for collecting the waste materials of a very large area inhabited by many citizens.
If a station is responsible for a large area, this implies that the station would actually receive waste from a very large area, hence implying that recycling is not being done by a lot of people. Rather, if a lot of people from a large area are even sending very minimal waste, it would lead to a big heap of waste, which weakens Marco's claim.

D. Factories that use recyclable substances have reported significant rises in profits due to an increase in the supply of recycled materials.
Since factories are receiving larger sums of waste than before, this reassures that yes, recycling is being done.


B - In some countries, recycling managed to significantly reduce pollution in a period of only several years.
Out of scope. Doesn't say anything.

C - A recent survey shows that promotional campaigns for recycling have the lowest success rate of any advertising campaign.
Irrelevant. We are talking about whether recycling is being done or not. We don't care whether the campaign is a success or not.

E - It has been noted that many promotional campaigns for recycling are ineffective as people report that they feel that they are being preached to.
Sort of weakens. Discard.