Critical Reasoning

kvcpk wrote:In order to reduce the number of items damaged while in transit to customers, packaging consultants recommended that the TrueSave mail-order company increase the amount of packing material so as to fill any empty spaces in its cartons. Accordingly, TrueSave offi cials instructed the company's packers to use more packing material than before, and the packers zealously acted on these instructions and used as much as they could. Nevertheless, customer reports of damaged items rose somewhat.

Argu only abt 'damaged items'

Which of the following, if true, most helps to explain why acting on the consultants' recommendation failed to achieve its goal?

(A) The change in packing policy led to an increase in expenditure on packing material and labor. (expenditure not in scope)

(B) When packing material is compressed too densely, it loses some of its capacity to absorb shock. (possible...using synonym of 'used as much material as they cud')
(C) The amount of packing material used in a carton does not signifi cantly influence the ease with which a customer can unpack the package. (unpacking not in scope. customer's concerned with only damaged items')

(D) Most of the goods that TrueSave ships are electronic products that are highly vulnerable to being damaged in transit. (obvious from agru...no additional info why recommendation failed)

(E) TrueSave has lost some of its regular customers as a result of the high number of damaged items they received. (no info why recommendation failed...or why damaged items rose)

kvcpk wrote:In order to reduce the number of items damaged while in transit to customers, packaging consultants recommended that the TrueSave mail-order company increase the amount of packing material so as to fill any empty spaces in its cartons. Accordingly, TrueSave offi cials instructed the company's packers to use more packing material than before, and the packers zealously acted on these instructions and used as much as they could. Nevertheless, customer reports of damaged items rose somewhat.

Which of the following, if true, most helps to explain why acting on the consultants' recommendation failed to achieve its goal?

(A) The change in packing policy led to an increase in expenditure on packing material and labor.

(B) When packing material is compressed too densely, it loses some of its capacity to absorb shock.

(C) The amount of packing material used in a carton does not significantly influence the ease with which a customer can unpack the package.

(D) Most of the goods that TrueSave ships are electronic products that are highly vulnerable to being damaged in transit.

(E) TrueSave has lost some of its regular customers as a result of the high number of damaged items they received.


[spoiler]There is no mention of "compression of package material" in the Passage. In that case how can we chose B. What is wrong with option C ?[/spoiler]

kvcpk wrote:"customer reports of damaged items rose somewhat." - This is the conclusion.
All we need to do is to find a statement that supports this.

Why I did not choose Option B:

"When packing material is compressed too densely, it loses some of its capacity to absorb shock. " - We have no mentioning of compression of package material.. All we know is "increase the amount of packing material so as to fill any empty spaces in its cartons. "

Why I chose C:

Passage also says ".. to use more packing material than before". and option C says:
"The amount of packing material used in a carton does not signifi cantly influence the ease with which a customer can unpack the package. " Which is relating to the premise in Passage.

Let me know what is wrong in my approach.. Thank you!!

hardik.jadeja wrote:

kvcpk wrote:"customer reports of damaged items rose somewhat." - This is the conclusion.
All we need to do is to find a statement that supports this.

Why I did not choose Option B:

"When packing material is compressed too densely, it loses some of its capacity to absorb shock. " - We have no mentioning of compression of package material.. All we know is "increase the amount of packing material so as to fill any empty spaces in its cartons. "

Why I chose C:

Passage also says ".. to use more packing material than before". and option C says:
"The amount of packing material used in a carton does not signifi cantly influence the ease with which a customer can unpack the package. " Which is relating to the premise in Passage.

Let me know what is wrong in my approach.. Thank you!!

"fill any empty spaces in its cartons" and "the packers zealously acted on these instructions and used as much as they could." imply that packing material is compressed too densely. Sometimes we have to infer certain things that are not mentioned in the passage explicitly.

C is certainly out of scope. We are concerned about products getting damaged while in transit to customers. Unpacking not in scope. Plus, option C doesn't say that customers are damaging the goods while opening it. It just says that it's not easy for them to unpack the product. Whereas B provides reasoning(loss of capacity to absorb shock) why more products could get damaged in transit.

Hope that helps..