Critical Reasoning

Source: Friend

A recent study has concluded that, contrary to the claim of those trying to ban cigarette advertisements altogether, cigarette ads placed on bill boards and in magazines have little to no effect on the smoking habits of the smokers who views the ads. The study, which surveyed more than 20,000 smokers and solicited their reasons for continuing to smoke, found that practically no one in the survey felt that these advertisements influenced their decision to smoke.

The study's conclusion is based upon which of the following assumptions?

a) people do not switch cigarette brands based on their exposure to cigarette ads on bill boards and in magazines.

b) Cigarette ads on bill boards and in magazines do not encourage non smokers to take up the habit.

c) Banning cigarette ads altogether will encourage people to give up smoking

d) people are consciously aware of all reasons they choose to smoke

e) People who decide to smoke do so for rational reasons.

OA is D....

My doubt: In assumption question we can go for external details, in this argument study was based on the smokers reaction with cigarette ads placed on billboards and magazines. This argument failed to include non smokers reaction to the ads.

So as in option B we may assume that these ads do not encourage non smokers to take up the habit.( Assumption Q)

But in option D, it can be inferred that smokers are aware of the reasons of their smoking.( inference Q)

So, why option D but not B is correct.

first of all, is it an official question...why m asking this is because of SC section now i have this habit to raise question if i find something awful in structure. So far i have seen that official question, even of CR are well written. Sorry, before doing CR drill m doing an SC drill here, please suggest me if m missing something. In the given argument, the part in RED COLOR is referring to what??? if its a verb, what is it subject and if its a modifier, to what it is modifying????

A recent study has concluded that, contrary to the claim of those trying to ban cigarette advertisements altogether, cigarette ads placed on bill boards and in magazines have little to no effect on the smoking habits of the smokers and solicited their reasons for continuing to smoke, found that practically no one in the survey felt that these advertisements influenced their decision to smoke.

I believe, after SMOKE (green color) a full stop must be there. As thats where the conclusion ends. After that the sentence should start again, with researchers found or studies found etc...

I'm sorry, when i was reading this argument structure i feel something incomplete, if m missing something please clear...

And by the way OA should be Op D only..will explain this later if needed but first m looking for the answer of my question.

Thanks

Thanks to respond. You are absolutely correct, it was my mistake( typing error). I modified the stimulus. But still wondering for the answer.

joinashish wrote:Thanks to respond. You are absolutely correct, it was my mistake( typing error). I modified the stimulus. But still wondering for the answer.

Op B is Out of scope (a common term in CR)

In assumption question you can include extra piece of info, but u include that info to support the conclusion / supporting premise but not to change the scope of the argument. The scope of the argument is restricted to SMOKERS only, that means the scope is restricted and set, and in any case u can not go beyond this scope. This applies for all the types of questions in CR section (as per my knowledge).

Why Op D is correct..??

See the author's conclusion is based on the supporting premise:

more than 20,000 smokers and solicited their reasons for continuing to smoke, found that practically no one in the survey felt that these advertisements influenced their decision to smoke.

Observe the part in bold, this suggests that people have this sense or they know which particular thing influence their decision to smoke...right..

Imagine if people doesn't have this sense and then if they say, we don't fell advertisement facilitates us to smoke...isn't that gonna be meaningless...without such sense how can they can say this, and in that case this whole supporting premise will fall and thus as the supporting premise fall, so does the conclusion.

So, we can say that, the assumption made in Op D is necessary for the validity of conclusion.

thanks to explain...i will keep it in mind while practicing other questions and will keep posting if any doubt will incur...

thanks again

joinashish wrote:thanks to explain...i will keep it in mind while practicing other questions and will keep posting if any doubt will incur...

thanks again

I'm glad my post helped....keep posting

ok, that original post was all over the place, but i assume you are asking why (d) is correct, and why (b) is incorrect?

(b) is incorrect because the study cited is about the smoking habits of smokers. thus, the smoking habits (or non-smoking habits) of non-smokers is obviously not an assumption the study was based upon. we're not concerned with non-smokers in a study about smokers.

(d) is correct because the study asked smokers if they *felt* like they were influenced by ads. to draw a conclusion from this type of study, you must assume that the smokers know what they are talking about, i.e., they know for sure that they are not influenced by ads.

most self-reported studies' conclusions are called into question for this very reason--you have to assume the people self reporting know what they're talking about and are telling the truth.