Q5 - Gardener: Researchers encourage us to

[kim]

5. (D)
Question Type: Analyze Argument Structure
The argument gives background information in the form of the advice of researchers and then concludes that this advice is premature. Supporting premises for this conclusion follow. Answer (D) restates this conclusion in slightly different words.

(A) is incorrect. The argument (and therefore the conclusion) centers around allowing certain weeds to grow in vegetable gardens. While this issue is mentioned, it is not the central conclusion of the argument discussed.
(B) is true according to the passage, but this statement is part of a supporting premise. It is not the main conclusion.
(C) is also true according to the passage, but this statement is part of the researchers’ advice as background information, not the main conclusion.
(E) is a misinterpretation of the main conclusion. The gardener concludes that we should be skeptical about the weeds’ potential disadvantages, NOT that we should be skeptical about the weeds’ ability to reduce the presence of caterpillars.


#officialexplanation

[pewals13]

This one tripped me up for some reason. I think it was the jump from "...the researchers' advice is premature" to "We should be cautious..."

I think the important takeaway here is to always keep in mind the distinction between evidence and main point. If you are stuck between two answer choices--maybe ask yourself: "Can one answer support the other?"

Context/Opposing Point: Researchers encourage allowing weeds to grow in veggie gardens because they can repel caterpillars

Premise: The weeds in question might deplete the soil of important nutrients that crops rely on and might even attract other kinds of damaging pests.

Conclusion: Advice of the researchers is premature.

(A) The author would probably agree with this--a common trap answer type--but does the author offer evidence in support? No sir!
(B) I selected this answer initially but changed it after a second look because I knew something didn't feel right.
i. The stimulus never discusses a "net increase" in unwanted garden pests-- it only discusses the possibility of other damaging pests being attracted. We know nothing about the comparative quantity of damage or population as it relates to caterpillars or other insects.
ii. This is a premise--it supports the idea that the advice of the researchers is premature. It is not a conclusion.
(C) This is supported by the argument but is not the main point of the author.
(D) This is the author's point--the researchers' advice is premature. Answer choice (B) supports this as well.
(E) This is unsupported.

[ToyeO517]

5. (D)
Question Type: Analyze Argument Structure
The argument gives background information in the form of the advice of researchers and then concludes that this advice is premature. Supporting premises for this conclusion follow. Answer (D) restates this conclusion in slightly different words.

(A) is incorrect. The argument (and therefore the conclusion) centers around allowing certain weeds to grow in vegetable gardens. While this issue is mentioned, it is not the central conclusion of the argument discussed.
(B) is true according to the passage, but this statement is part of a supporting premise. It is not the main conclusion.
(C) is also true according to the passage, but this statement is part of the researchers’ advice as background information, not the main conclusion.
(E) is a misinterpretation of the main conclusion. The gardener concludes that we should be skeptical about the weeds’ potential disadvantages, NOT that we should be skeptical about the weeds’ ability to reduce the presence of caterpillars.


#officialexplanation

Can you please expatiate on why E isn't the correct answer? I thought the conclusion "The researchers' advice is premature", was referring to the "advice" that allowing certain types of weeds to grow is good because they can repel (I read that as reduce the presence of) caterpillars from the garden.

[ohthatpatrick]

You're correct in your thinking.

The conclusion is "The advice [to let certain weeds grow in the garden because those weeds repel caterpillars] is premature".

What does it mean to be "premature advice"?
It seems like the author is saying --- this advice might not be good.
And why?

The author doesn't suggest anything that sounds like (E). He's never saying, "We might not wanna do this, since these weeds don't actually repel caterpillars".

Instead, he's saying, "we might not wanna do this because the benefits [repelling caterpillars] might be outweighed by the detriments [sucking up nutrients and attracting other damaging pests]".

If anything, the author seems to believe that the weeds DO repel caterpillars. That's the reason he acknowledges the merit of that plan:
"it is wise to avoid unnecessary use of insecticides".

He's referring to these weeds as a means of avoiding the use of insecticides, so he thinks that these weeds are an effective way of deterring some insects (caterpillars).

Hope this helps.