Q16 - A survey of address changes

[Laura Damone]

What does the Question Stem tell us?
"most helps strengthen" = Strengthen question. Since this is #16, which is often among the most difficult questions in the section, we should keep in mind that many difficult Strengthen questions have a correct answer that strengthens by ruling out a potential weakener. These are akin to defender assumptions, and as such, they can seem at first glance to be out of scope.

Break down the Stimulus:
The premise tells us that 2x the number of households moved out of the city than into the city. From this, the argument concludes that the census will show a population decline. We are also told that the census counts residents of all ages.

Any prephrase?
The premise deals with "households" whereas the conclusion deals with the number of individual residents. Our correct answer may strengthen by bridging this gap.

Correct answer:
D

Answer choice analysis:
A) So what? The fact that "many people" moved in and out doesn't impact our argument, which is based on a premise about the ratio of mover-inners to mover-outers. "Many" is a redflag word here: it's often just not specific enough to have an impact on an argument.

B) How does this apply to our current situation? We don't know, because we don't know what the census showed last go round. What's more, the past doesn't predict the future, so this is unlikely to be correct even if it did apply.

C) A classic trap- a weakener answer in a Strengthen question! If this is true, than we are less likely to see a drop in population on the census.

D) Correct! This bridges the gap we identified at the outset by showing that the number of residents per household is greater among the mover-outers than mover-inners. This strengthens the claim that the census will reflect a population drop by establishing that the ratio of 2 to 1 households leaving reflects an even greater ratio of individuals leaving.

E) This is an irrelevant comparison because it doesn't address the quantity of folks leaving vs those coming in.

Takeaway/Pattern: Focus on spotting the gap, and keep an eye out for common trap answers such as inappropriate degree, irrelevant comparisons and weakeners.

#officialexplanation

[kmewmewblue]

I don't understand how (D) strengthen the argument.
Is this answer barely strengthening the argument?
Any advice? Thank you.

[yoohoo081]

I'm going to try tto explain in my own words.

Conclusion: population will show decline since last census 10 years ago.
We insoluble that people moving out > people moving in

A: we already know people moved in and out. We even know more people moved out. Doesn't strengthen.
B: first this choice is talking about century. Time is extremely off and may even weaken if the next census falls within the ten years with pop increase
C: failing to notify means there may be more people than recorded which weakens the conclusion
E: knowing people moving out are seeking careers and people in the city had long standing job doesn't affect the conclusion that population will be declined.

D: on the other hand strengthen because most moving out aare family aand remaining or moving in people are singles. For example, if 2 family of 4 moved out, 1 singles would move in. This mean total of 8 moved while only 1 moved in. (This is based on 2:1 ratio of HOUSEHOLD given as our premise. Household is nnot individual members of the family.) so i saw it as it's more detrimental for population if family moves out because they move in groups and singles are only one by one.

[maryadkins]

Great explanation! Let me know if you're still confused.

[chike_eze]

The key phrase here is "census... counts all residents regardless of age". Therefore, adults leaving with kids is a big deal, especially if those remaining or coming in are older adults without kids.

[dcrosspepper]

C: failing to notify means there may be more people than recorded which weakens the conclusion

I see this point, but I saw C as a strengthener.

C: If many people failed to notify they were moving in, then the census numbers could have reported lower than actual numbers, since the census doesn't know that these people exist, which strengthens the argument.

Had answer choice C said "actual numbers" rather than "census", then I would have eliminated C, but it didn't.

[LukeM22]

C: failing to notify means there may be more people than recorded which weakens the conclusion

I see this point, but I saw C as a strengthener.

C: If many people failed to notify they were moving in, then the census numbers could have reported lower than actual numbers, since the census doesn't know that these people exist, which strengthens the argument.

Had answer choice C said "actual numbers" rather than "census", then I would have eliminated C, but it didn't.

I initially thought this, but realized we are assuming that the census is gathering information through the post offices and driver's license bureaus. We don't know that... the only thing we do know is that C being true decreases the likelihood that the survey (NOT the census) was accurate... which means any extrapolation based on that flawed information, in this case census predictions, would also be more likely to be inaccurate.

[snoopy]

C: failing to notify means there may be more people than recorded which weakens the conclusion

I see this point, but I saw C as a strengthener.

C: If many people failed to notify they were moving in, then the census numbers could have reported lower than actual numbers, since the census doesn't know that these people exist, which strengthens the argument.

Had answer choice C said "actual numbers" rather than "census", then I would have eliminated C, but it didn't.

For me, the key word is "many" in the answer choice. Just because many (some) people forgot to tell the post office and license bureaus they moved in doesn't rule out whether or not those who move in is greater than those who move out.