CR - The growing popularity of computer-based activities

[tushaw]

Is it true in strengthen/weaken CR questions the choices that start with "many/some" are generally not strong answers?

Read this:

general-question-in-cr-use-of-some-in-correct-answers-t25210.html

It's weird that two different people would ask this question within a couple of days. Did this idea appear somewhere in internet-land recently?

As I wrote on that thread, don't waste your time. If you look for "patterns" like this, you'll get worse at CR, not better.

haha it's just a co-incidence. I was actually going over some of the "thursdays with Ron" recordings and found this question:

Which of the following most logically completes the argument?

The growing popularity of computer-based activities was widely predicted to result in a corresponding decline in television viewing. Recent studies have found that, in the United States, people who own computers watch, on average, significantly less television than people who do not own computers. In itself, however, this finding does very little to show that computer use tends to reduce television viewing time, since_______.

(A) many people who watch little or no television do not own a computer.
(B) even though most computer owners in the United States watch significantly less television than the national average, some computer owners watch far more television than the national average.
(C) computer owners in the United States predominately belong to a demographic group that have long been known to spend less time watching television than the population as a whole does.
(D) many computer owners in the United States have enough leisure time that spending significant amounts of time on the computer still leaves ample time for watching television.
(E) many people use their computers primarily for tasks such as correspondence that can be done more rapidly on the computer, and doing so leaves more leisure time for watching television.


In the recording, the usage of "many" in E is one of the problems you highlighted. Since many is same as some, choice E only picks out a small group of people from the population. I probably just generalized your statement for this question. Clearly it's not a good idea. I will definitely check out the problems that use "some" in the correct answers. Thanks for the link.

[RonPurewal]

The only generalization that's valid for CR is "Generalizations don't work for CR".

[rustom.hakimiyan]

Hi Ron,

Can you explain the difference between A and E. I narrowed it down to these 2 and chose the wrong one-A. Here was my reasoning -- Conclusion States: Evidence is false b/c comp time went up and the television time didn't go down.

A) If I try to go to the two extremes:

Group 1) People watching TV regularly only watched it for a short amount of time, so adding computer time didn't affect their overall reduction of TV time. Therefore, it strengthens the conclusion that the evidence is false.

Group 2) People watching TV regularly watched it a LOT and adding computer time SHOULD reduce the TV time. Therefore the argument is false because this contradicts what the conclusion is saying.


E) If I try to go to the two extremes:

Group 1) People used their computers at work so it didn't affect their free time at home. Conclusion is strengthened that there is an anomaly.

Group 2) People used their computers only at home so it did affect their free time at home. Conclusion is weakened because this result is opposite of what the conclusion is saying.

Can't seem to decipher between the two choices as one is tackling "less tv watching vs. more tv watching" and the other one is tackling "where it's happening"?

Thanks.

[RonPurewal]

A) If I try to go to the two extremes:

On strengthen/weaken/evaluate questions, you should not consider "extremes".
You should always think about the most likely / most reasonable interpretation of every statement in these problems"”whether in the passage itself or in the answer choices.

This is centrally important: you have to ignore/reject farfetched or extreme interpretations. (This is one of the principal reasons why this family of questions is tested more heavily than anything else in CR: "Rules" can't decide whether an interpretation is reasonable.)

Group 1) People watching TV regularly only watched it for a short amount of time, so adding computer time didn't affect their overall reduction of TV time. Therefore, it strengthens the conclusion that the evidence is false.

Group 2) People watching TV regularly watched it a LOT and adding computer time SHOULD reduce the TV time. Therefore the argument is false because this contradicts what the conclusion is saying.

You're analyzing the wrong issue.

Choice A is about the % of survey respondents who watch TV regularly. (Read it again, more carefully.)
This is irrelevant. Regardless of whether people are regular watchers of TV, we can still analyze whether they have reduced the time they spend watching. (Also, even if a relatively small fraction of respondents watch TV regularly, those people's input would still be enough to determine swings in the survey results.)

You're analyzing a different issue altogether. ("For people who DO watch TV regularly, how many hours do they watch?")

[RonPurewal]

E) If I try to go to the two extremes:

Group 1) People used their computers at work so it didn't affect their free time at home. Conclusion is strengthened that there is an anomaly.

Group 2) People used their computers only at home so it did affect their free time at home. Conclusion is weakened because this result is opposite of what the conclusion is saying.

Thanks.

As stated in the point above, the entire point here is to consider the case BETWEEN these "extremes". The extremes, you're supposed to ignore.

With an intermediate case, you'll get the same effect as in #1, albeit to a somewhat lesser degree. But, still, you'll get the same effect as in #1.

[yaoL613]

Which of the following most logically completes the argument?

The growing popularity of computer-based activities was widely predicted to result in a corresponding decline in television viewing. Recent studies have found that, in the United States, people who own computers watch, on average, significantly less television than people who do not own computers. In itself, however, this finding does very little to show that computer use tends to reduce television viewing time, since _______.

A. Many people who watch little or no television do not own a computer.
B. Even though most computer owners in the United States watch significantly less television than the national average, some computer owners watch far more television than the national average.
C. Computer owners in the United States predominately belong to a demographic group that have long been known to spend less time watching television than the population as a whole does.
D. Many computer owners in the United States have enough leisure time that spending significant amounts of time on the computer still leaves ample time for watching television.
E. Many people use their computers primarily for tasks such as correspondence that can be done more rapidly on the computer, and doing so leaves more leisure time for watching television.


hello，
ron or other experts：
i have some questions about the CR cited above.
the question is a prep question，and the OA is C. i know why C is correct, but i can't figure out why A is wrong.
Since, if A is true, the causal relationship between TV watching and computer usage would be destroyed.
i mean there would be something else influence the TV watching but not the conputer usage. So the survey is inaccurate, and the conclusion is invalid.

[RonPurewal]

Since, if A is true, the causal relationship between TV watching and computer usage would be destroyed.

nope.

"people who own computers watch, on average, significantly less television than people who do not own computers" is given as a fact.
this is a trend... period. end of story.

choice (a) merely posits the existence of some data that contravene the trend.
but ... so what? some such data can be found for virtually any trend. (for just about any scatterplot, you'll find some "noisy" points that don't follow the line of best fit.)

if the trend is stated as a fact, it's still a fact. i.e., even taking those data into account, the overall trend is still a trend—i.e., the data in choice A are outweighed by the rest of the data.
stated facts are NEVER contradicted in CR problems.

[RonPurewal]

analogy:
most men with big feet are also tall. this is a fact—it's a trend that exists in the data.

choice A is like pointing out that ron purewal is only 5'10" (178cm) tall, but wears a US size 16 (euro size 49) shoe.
while in fact true, this statement obviously does not destroy the correlation between height and foot size; it just means that ron purewal is a freak of nature.

[yaoL613]

analogy:
most men with big feet are also tall. this is a fact—it's a trend that exists in the data.

choice A is like pointing out that ron purewal is only 5'10" (178cm) tall, but wears a US size 16 (euro size 49) shoe.
while in fact true, this statement obviously does not destroy the correlation between height and foot size; it just means that ron purewal is a freak of nature.

thank you very much!
i have been reading your thread in manhattan forum for a year,
and i am really appreciate your explanation!
you are the best! :)

[RonPurewal]

sure. thanks.

[evelynho]

Which of the following most logically completes the argument?

The growing popularity of computer-based activities was widely predicted to result in a corresponding decline in television viewing. Recent studies have found that, in the United States, people who own computers watch, on average, significantly less television than people who do not own computers. In itself, however, this finding does very little to show that computer use tends to reduce television viewing time, since _______.

A. Many people who watch little or no television do not own a computer.
B. Even though most computer owners in the United States watch significantly less television than the national average, some computer owners watch far more television than the national average.
C. Computer owners in the United States predominately belong to a demographic group that have long been known to spend less time watching television than the population as a whole does.
D. Many computer owners in the United States have enough leisure time that spending significant amounts of time on the computer still leaves ample time for watching television.
E. Many people use their computers primarily for tasks such as correspondence that can be done more rapidly on the computer, and doing so leaves more leisure time for watching television.

Hello Instructors,
I also have two questions about the CR above and the OA is C.
I want to know 1/ how could I kick B&E out of right choice, and 2/ what is the logic behind the choice C makes it best fit for the argument. I mean, I will take Choice C as irrelevant every time I encounter this question, because I thought C works in the way like:

Senior citizens belong to the a group of people who do not have a good eyesight and have been known to drive less than the adults.
But when it comes to whether they tend to drive less, it's a issue about their willingness. It could be a totally different thing - senior citizen probably are eager to drive out every day to travel around as long as their eyesight is good.
I do not know what I am trying to convey is clear or not, or the example is proper, but the point is that willingness has nothing to do with the general trend or general fact, the two things should not even be connected together.
Would you please shed light on it?
Thank you in advance.

[RonPurewal]

i'm sorry, but i have no idea what you are trying to do with that example (with senior citizens, driving, etc.)

the argument is basically this:
• if we compare people with computers vs. people without computers, we find that people with computers watch less TV.
• we want to know ... does this mean that the computers MAKE them watch less TV?

once you simplify the argument like that, you can see pretty clearly why C is the correct answer, right?
if you have choice C, then, that group of people was already watching less TV than everyone else to start with! so, the research finding really doesn't show anything, then, in that case.

[Crisc419]

i'm sorry, but i have no idea what you are trying to do with that example (with senior citizens, driving, etc.)

the argument is basically this:
• if we compare people with computers vs. people without computers, we find that people with computers watch less TV.
• we want to know ... does this mean that the computers MAKE them watch less TV?

once you simplify the argument like that, you can see pretty clearly why C is the correct answer, right?
if you have choice C, then, that group of people was already watching less TV than everyone else to start with! so, the research finding really doesn't show anything, then, in that case.

I understand the reasoning behind choice C, but choice D and E still confuse me.

If computer owners still have enough time to watch TV after spending time on computer, at least we can conclude that computer use don't reduce time people can use to watch TV.

I mean choice D and E at least exclude one way in which computer use can reduce the TV time.

could you explain D and E , thanks very much.

Cris

[RonPurewal]

consider an analogy:

let's say i find that people who cook at home a lot ... also eat at restaurants less often than average people. thus, i'd hypothesize that the home cooking is a substitute for eating out.

choices D and E (in the more recently posted problem -- NOT in the problem in post #1 of this thread) are like saying "these people could still afford to eat out a lot, if they wanted to."
you can see why this doesn't affect the argument, right?