Q3 - Taxi driver: My passengers complained when

[ohthatpatrick]

Question Type:
Principle Support

Stimulus Breakdown:
Conclusion: Turning off A/C was the right decision.
Evidence: (even though customers complained) running the A/C would have decreased my fuel economy.

Answer Anticipation:
There are two main styles of correct answer for Principle Support:
1. "If premise, then conclusion" bridge idea.
Here that would sound like "If doing something prevented a big decrease in fuel economy, then it was the right decision".
2. Rule of Thumb that helps you pick between competing interests.
Here that would sound like "Maintaining normal fuel economy is more important than keeping passengers happy".

Correct Answer:
B

Answer Choice Analysis:
(A) This says, "If running A/C would affect speed, shouldn't run A/C." The conclusion half matches but the premise half doesn't. Running the A/C would not have affected speed.

(B) YES! This says, "If running A/C would cause fuel economy to drop below normal, shouldn't run A/C". That matches our premise and our conclusion.

(C) This goes against the paragraph, since the author eschewed passenger comfort in exchange for fuel economy. Balancing the needs would have been more like "lowering the level of A/C" (instead of turning it off completely)

(D) This goes against, since the author did NOT ensure customer satisfaction.

(E) This goes against, because it says "If passengers complain, then turning off the A/C is not acceptable"

Takeaway/Pattern: IF = left side. ONLY IF = right side. We need to notice and understand the difference. Correct answers are often put in contrapositive form, as (B) was.

#officialexplanation

[JinZ551]

Question Type:
Principle Support

Stimulus Breakdown:
Conclusion: Turning off A/C was the right decision.
Evidence: (even though customers complained) running the A/C would have decreased my fuel economy.

Answer Anticipation:
There are two main styles of correct answer for Principle Support:
1. "If premise, then conclusion" bridge idea.
Here that would sound like "If doing something prevented a big decrease in fuel economy, then it was the right decision".
2. Rule of Thumb that helps you pick between competing interests.
Here that would sound like "Maintaining normal fuel economy is more important than keeping passengers happy".

Correct Answer:
B

Answer Choice Analysis:
(A) This says, "If running A/C would affect speed, shouldn't run A/C." The conclusion half matches but the premise half doesn't. Running the A/C would not have affected speed.

(B) YES! This says, "If running A/C would cause fuel economy to drop below normal, shouldn't run A/C". That matches our premise and our conclusion.

(C) This goes against the paragraph, since the author eschewed passenger comfort in exchange for fuel economy. Balancing the needs would have been more like "lowering the level of A/C" (instead of turning it off completely)

(D) This goes against, since the author did NOT ensure customer satisfaction.

(E) This goes against, because it says "If passengers complain, then turning off the A/C is not acceptable"

Takeaway/Pattern: IF = left side. ONLY IF = right side. We need to notice and understand the difference. Correct answers are often put in contrapositive form, as (B) was.

#officialexplanation

I was hesitate to pick B because I thought "drop below normal level" was kind of unsupported.