Dhruv0911
Virtually all eligible voters who took part in a recent survey of political attitudes in Artesiana stated that because political candidates from the major parties are incompetent or corrupt (or both), it is a complete waste of time to vote in Artesianan elections. Yet nearly 80% of eligible voters chose to vote in the most recent Artesianan election.
Which of the following, if true, most helps to explain the seeming paradox?
A) Eligible voters who chose to vote in the most recent election were compelled to vote for at least one candidate they knew to be incompetent or corrupt (or both).
B) Only eligible voters who did not choose to vote in the most recent election were included in the recent survey.
C) All eligible voters who took part in the recent survey gave truthful answers that accurately reflect their views concerning politics.
D) Candidates from some major political parties are competent but corrupt, whereas candidates from other parties are incompetent but honest.
E) Those voters who took part in the recent survey acted in accordance with their beliefs by refusing to waste time voting in the recent elections.
Observations:
A survey was conducted.
Virtually all eligible voters who took part in the survey said that candidates are incompetent or corrupt (or both), so it is a waste of time to vote.
Yet nearly 80% of eligible voters chose to vote in the most recent Artesianan election.
So as per the survey, almost everyone felt that it is a waste of time to vote (i.e. it is better to not vote) but still 80% people voted.
What can help resolve the paradox? If the people in the survey were almost all from the 20% set of people who did not vote then the paradox is resolved. The survey gave the opinion of a certain set of people and that set believed that it is a waste of time to vote. But it did not reflect the opinion of everyone. Normally, we expect a sample to give us information about the entire population but for that, the sample should be unbiased. Basically we are saying that there was a selection bias in the survey and that does explain the observations. It all makes sense then.
B) Only eligible voters who did not choose to vote in the most recent election were included in the recent survey.
That is why option (B) works.
rickyric395 - we don't have to ASSUME that the people who did not participate in the survey did not agree that voting is a waste of time. We KNOW that they did not think that voting is a waste of time. That is why they went and voted.
Option (B) tells us how we could have observed what we did - that in the survey most people said that voting is a waste of time but still 80% people voted. Because the survey participants all belonged to the 20% group.
E) Those voters who took part in the recent survey acted in accordance with their beliefs by refusing to waste time voting in the recent elections.
The statement should say "eligible voters," not voters because these people did not vote - we are told. But it doesn't change the fact that this option does not explain the paradox. It only supports the paradoxical situation.
The eligible voters who took part in the survey acted according to their beliefs. So this tells us that these people did not go to vote. Now we are still wondering that how come 80% people voted then? If people acted according to their beliefs and if it seems that most people felt that voting is a waste of time, then from where did these 80% voters come?
Answer (B)