IMO Periodically use the advertised brand of shampoo, even if they don't switch to that brand permanently.

Advt : Using same brand of shampoo will reduce it's effectiveness, since shampoo's have residues.

Q: what is the motivation for above advertisement?

A) Nothing in the passage suggests the development of a new product

B) Creators of the advertisement cannot hope that people will not switch to advertised brand, because the advertisement suggests people of move to a different shampoo.

C) Advertisements are hoping people will come back periodically.

C is my answer

IMO - C

IMO - C

IMO C

I would be glad if u guys present ur explanation along with the answer... OA is C

a)Pressure shampoo companies to develop a product which can remove the residue left by any shampoo. This is completely irrelevant. Ads are made to promote the product and not to negate the values of the brand or to force the company to introduce supplementary product as in this case.
b)Gradually stop using their current brand of shampoo and switch to the advertised brand. People will not switch completely to the advertised brand as there is residue problems involved.
c)Periodically use the advertised brand of shampoo, even if they don't switch to that brand permanently. Bingo! This is definitely what would have been in the mind of the advertiser. When continual use leads to ineffectiveness, periodical use of the product will be the expectation.
d)Never use the same brand of shampoo for more than a week. This is completely irrelevant. If the advertiser thinks this way, then he is no way an advertiser.
e)Use the advertised brand of shampoo because the residue it leaves actually protects hair. This is against the argument. So not the answer.

My Choice C. Hope I made it clear.

Interesting question, and great logic by everyone here!

Just something that I think is worth pointing out - while I don't know that this could be a perfect official question (they'll reiterate that the rule of an Inference question is that the correct answer MUST be true...and here while C is overwhelmingly the most likely I don't think it fits that logical proof), this is a great example of a newish trend in CR which is to use "strategy/plan/policy" themes and not just arguments.

In these cases, the role of "conclusion" is played by the objective - what the organization or decision maker is hoping to accomplish. And the premises are the steps that are being taken to get there.

This ad, then, has to lead to a particular objective. And C is the most likely objective - the ad can't really advocate a wholesale switch to the advertised brand as their exclusive brand. The ad specifically says that "all shampoos..." are vulnerable to the residue problem. So it's most likely goal, then, is to get people to incorporate the new shampoo into their old routine. C is the most likely objective.

Overall, I think the biggest takeaway from this problem is that, when you're presented with a plan or strategy, your focus should be on how well it matches with its objective.

Awesome explanation Brian.
But I have a doubt on this.
As C states, that creators of the advertisements hope that consumer would respond to the advertisment by periodically using the advertised brand.
I doubt how can creators hope that.The advertisement says nothing about the quality or usefulness of the brand it promotes.Hence consumers are equally likely to switch to any brand.
As B states,that creators of the advertisements hope that consumer would respond to the advertisment
by gradually stop using their current brand(since the advertisement says exactly that) and switch to some other brand.And since they got to know this information from the advertised brand, they would switch to the advertised brand.
Kindly help.
Thanks in Advance.