Weird CR

[sumithshah]

More sports journals are sold in Hornby than in Milston. Therefore, the residents of Hornby are better informed about major sporting events than are the residents of Milston.

Each of the following, if true, weakens the conclusion above EXCEPT:

A. Hornby has a larger population than Milston.
B. Most residents of Milston work in Hornby and buy their reading material there.
C. The average newsstand price of journals sold in Hornby is lower than the average
price of journals sold in Milston.
D. A monthly journal restricted to the coverage of local events is published in
Hornby.
E. The average resident of Hornby spends less time reading sports journals than does the average resident of Milston


OA C

However, isnt D absolutely un related ( our of scope) - that ways, it would lease weaken the conclusion.

What would we do in such a question if one option strengthens it and one is out of scope?

[codesnooker]

Hey Sumit.

In such questions, we should prefer the option that actually strengthen the conclusion.

For example, in this question itself, both option (A) and (D) are nearly out of scope because they don't provide correlation with the number of readers in the city/town or any other reason by which we can state Hornby people read/buy more sport journals.

Whereas option (C) actually strengthen the conclusion. So prefer (C) over (A) and (D).

Hope it helps...

More sports journals are sold in Hornby than in Milston. Therefore, the residents of Hornby are better informed about major sporting events than are the residents of Milston.

Each of the following, if true, weakens the conclusion above EXCEPT:

A. Hornby has a larger population than Milston.
B. Most residents of Milston work in Hornby and buy their reading material there.
C. The average newsstand price of journals sold in Hornby is lower than the average
price of journals sold in Milston.
D. A monthly journal restricted to the coverage of local events is published in
Hornby.
E. The average resident of Hornby spends less time reading sports journals than does the average resident of Milston


OA C

However, isnt D absolutely un related ( our of scope) - that ways, it would lease weaken the conclusion.

What would we do in such a question if one option strengthens it and one is out of scope?

[rdxb]

How does C strengthen the conclusion? I must be missing missing smthing i guess......

[jeffxujian]

I also chose D. I believe that we agree that D is clearly out of scope. However, I can not agree with the fact that C strengthen the passage.

[Jatinder]

C)
Strengthen the conclusion as if the average newsstand price of journals sold in Hornby is lower, then it might entice people to buy more of journals in Hornby so they may be better informed ....

D)

journal restricted to the coverage of local events, So it may not cover the international sports events.....but the problem is it does not compare this fact with Milston as if restriction is also there, then Hornby's people may not be better informed.

[dumb.doofus]

C)
Strengthen the conclusion as if the average newsstand price of journals sold in Hornby is lower, then it might entice people to buy more of journals in Hornby so they may be better informed ....

D)

journal restricted to the coverage of local events, So it may not cover the international sports events.....but the problem is it does not compare this fact with Milston as if restriction is also there, then Hornby's people may not be better informed.

I think you have explained it clearly.. why D is not the right choice.. good expln.

[peter.p.81]

I'd say C but I'm afraid more because of my intuition than any logic