Critical Reasoning

Whenever a major airplane accident occurs, there is a dramatic increase in the number of airplane mishaps reported, a phenomenon that may last for as long as a few months after the accident. Airline officials assert that the publicity given the gruesomeness of major airplane accidents focuses media attention on the airline industry and the increase in the number of reported accidents is caused by an increase in the number of news sources covering airline accident, not by an increase in the number of accidents.

Which of the following, if true, would seriously weaken the assertions of the airline officials?

(A) The publicity surrounding airline accidents is largely limited to the country in which the crash occurred.
(B) Airline accidents tend to occur far more often during certain peak travel months.
(C) News organizations do not have any guidelines to help them decide how severe or how close an accident must be for it to receive coverage.
(D) Airplane accidents receive coverage by news sources only when the news sources find it advantageous to do so.
(E) Studies by government regulations show that the number of airplane flight miles remains relatively constant from month to month.

OA IS B Could nt understand the question at all

One Major Airplane accident happens => There is increase in the no of accidents reported.
Airline officials say -> Increase is because major accident focuses media attention on airline industry => So more reports of accidents though there is no increase in the # of accidents. Is this clear ?

We are asked weaken the airline official's claim. That can be done if we get some proof relating to increase in # of accidents.

A - Irrelevant
B - Contender - weakener.
C - Irrelevant
D - Irrelevant
E - Strengthens the arg

IMO B.

We are looking for a cause as to the increase in airline accident coverage, a phenomenon that usually last a few months after an initial crash. According to airline officials the cause is increase media coverage. Our goal is to find a different cause, as we are asked to WEAKEN the claim.

(A) The publicity surrounding airline accidents is largely limited to the country in which the crash occurred.

We are not concerned with international accident coverage. IRRELEVANT

(B) Airline accidents tend to occur far more often during certain peak travel months.

So, more airline accidents are actually happening. It is not, as airline officials assert, a case of the media increasing coverage. So therefore the cause to increased coverage is the fact that there are more accidents. ANSWER

(C) News organizations do not have any guidelines to help them decide how severe or how close an accident must be for it to receive coverage.

Hmm, seems mostly irrelevant, but perhaps provides a reason as to the increase coverage. New organizations are indiscriminate about the accidents they cover (even a one-propellor plane that crashed into a parked car would presumably receive coverage).

(D) Airplane accidents receive coverage by news sources only when the news sources find it advantageous to do so.

Does not give us another reason as to the increased coverage. Indeed, this could account for what the airline officials claim--that news organization are more likely to report accidents. That is the organizations have some reason to do so.

(E) Studies by government regulations show that the number of airplane flight miles remains relatively constant from month to month

This answer choice discounts any alternate explanation that seeks to attribute greater press coverage to greater miles flown. Thus it would strengthen, if anything, airlines officials explanation.

pappueshwar wrote:Whenever a major airplane accident occurs, there is a dramatic increase in the number of airplane mishaps reported, a phenomenon that may last for as long as a few months after the accident. Airline officials assert that the publicity given the gruesomeness of major airplane accidents focuses media attention on the airline industry and the increase in the number of reported accidents is caused by an increase in the number of news sources covering airline accident, Conclusion:not by an increase in the number of accidents.

Which of the following, if true, would seriously weaken the assertions of the airline officials?

(A) The publicity surrounding airline accidents is largely limited to the country in which the crash occurred.
(B) Airline accidents tend to occur far more often during certain peak travel months.
(C) News organizations do not have any guidelines to help them decide how severe or how close an accident must be for it to receive coverage.
(D) Airplane accidents receive coverage by news sources only when the news sources find it advantageous to do so.
(E) Studies by government regulations show that the number of airplane flight miles remains relatively constant from month to month.

OA IS B Could nt understand the question at all

Only B weakens the conclusion.

why would it not be C...The airline official claims that organizations are reporting more incidents....C would weaken right because organizations have no guidelines and unltimately no coverage...so does it not mean that official statement is false

subashunni wrote:why would it not be C...The airline official claims that organizations are reporting more incidents....C would weaken right because organizations have no guidelines and unltimately no coverage...so does it not mean that official statement is false

I interpret C to mean that the news organizations are free to report what they want since there are no official guidelines to determine what they must cover. As a result, we cannot say if this leads to more or less coverage, so it does not particularly affect the airline officials' argument.

pls, help,
The weakener will cast doubt on an assumption.
Why B is an weakener? pls, show me the assumption of B.

I want experts, member, discuss this problem carefull. For the following reason.

Normally, new information which cast doubt on an assumption is a weakener. In this case the problem yield strong prephrasing. This mean if we prethink/prephrasing the possible answer before going to answer choices, the prephrasing will be very effective. Most CR problem in the OG books belong to this type.


Somer persons said, if the new information directly weaken the conclusion, that information is a weakener. I do not understand this type clealy. I do not see any question of this type in the og books.

In this problem, I do not see evidence. The argument can be sumarize as: increase in the reported accidents is caused by increased in new sources of coverage. The argument has only the conclusion.

What type of question is this problem. Pls, show me the evidence, the assumption, the conclusion of the problem and show me how the weakener work by casting doubt on that assumption.

In above question, if I prethinking that there are some other reasons which make the increase in the reported accidents, the match among answer choices would be D.

pls,help. thank you.

We need to understand how the weakener work before we can fint it among the answer choices.

(B) gives an alternative explanation