- Which of the following, if true, most seriously weakens the claim made in the passage that properly validated risk assessment tools are unlikely to exacerbate racial disparities in pretrial detention?
Answer: In a jurisdiction that implemented a validated tool, detention rates for Black defendants increased relative to similarly situated white defendants after adoption, while overall failure-to-appear and rearrest rates remained unchanged.
D presents direct evidence that a validated tool's adoption coincided with worsening relative outcomes for Black defendants without public safety gains, undermining the claim about not exacerbating disparities. A and C are consistent with the claim, B is attitudinal, and E critiques granularity rather than disparate impact.
- Which of the following, if true, most strengthens the claim made in the passage that, in Harborview, green roofs reduce peak summer downtown temperatures more effectively than adding street trees?
Answer: In a randomized pilot, some buildings received green roofs while similar buildings received high-albedo roof coatings; only the green-roof blocks showed significant pedestrian-level cooling, and adjacent blocks with newly planted street trees showed no measurable change over the study period.
The randomized comparison isolates green roofs' effect and shows greater cooling than both reflective coatings and newly planted trees, directly supporting the claim. The other options concern costs, preferences, survival, or confounds without demonstrating superior temperature reduction by green roofs.
- Which of the following, if true, most strengthens the passage's claim that early bilingual exposure causally increases adult earnings?
Answer: A policy change randomly assigned bilingual instruction to half of incoming kindergarten classes in certain districts for a limited period, and follow-up data show earnings gains of similar magnitude for those randomly assigned to bilingual classrooms compared with their peers, even after adjusting for district and cohort effects.
B provides a quasi-experimental assignment that replicates the earnings effect, reducing concerns about parental selection. The other options either introduce confounds, speak to different populations or mechanisms without addressing causality, or suggest alternative explanations.
- Which one of the following, if true, would most weaken the author's argument?
Answer: In several large cities with existing transit systems, congestion pricing led many drivers to reroute around the priced zone, increasing total vehicle miles traveled and leaving overall emissions unchanged.
The environmental economist argues that congestion pricing reduces urban air pollution chiefly by decreasing total vehicle miles traveled, leading to fewer car trips and lower emissions. The economist acknowledges concerns about drivers taking longer routes but dismisses this as limited because the priced zone contains common destinations. Answer choice B directly weakens this reasoning by providing evidence that in several large cities, congestion pricing actually led drivers to reroute around the priced zone, increasing total vehicle miles traveled and leaving overall emissions unchanged. This contradicts the economist's core mechanism—that congestion pricing reduces total miles traveled—and shows that the diversion effect the economist minimized can actually be substantial enough to negate environmental benefits. Answer choice C might seem relevant because it mentions air quality improvements, but it describes an alternative method rather than addressing the effectiveness of congestion pricing itself. Remember that in RC strengthen and weaken questions, the correct answer must directly engage with the author's specific logical chain, not introduce tangentially related information.
- Which one of the following, if true, would most strengthen the author's argument?
Answer: In multiple documented cases, therapies with weak early trial evidence were nevertheless adopted quickly when they aligned with existing clinical routines, whereas therapies with comparable evidence but requiring unfamiliar routines diffused much more slowly.
The historian argues that rapid acceptance of new medical therapies is driven more by compatibility with professional norms and existing clinical routines than by decisive clinical evidence. The historian claims that when therapies fit established frameworks, physicians adopt them even with limited early trials. Answer choice A provides perfect support for this argument by documenting multiple cases where therapies with weak early trial evidence were adopted quickly when they aligned with existing clinical routines, while therapies with comparable evidence but requiring unfamiliar routines diffused slowly. This directly demonstrates that compatibility with professional culture, not evidence strength, determines early adoption patterns. Answer choice B might seem relevant because it mentions therapies being abandoned, but this actually describes what happens after additional trials, not during the early adoption phase that the historian focuses on. In RC strengthen and weaken questions, look for evidence that directly illustrates or contradicts the author's specific causal mechanism—here, that professional culture trumps evidence in early adoption decisions.
- Which one of the following, if true, would most strengthen the author's argument?
Answer: In multiple agreements, communities with contractual authority to set access rules successfully required museums to remove certain images from public websites and to adopt community-preferred descriptions.
This question asks what would strengthen the author's argument that digital repatriation is ethically defensible when governance arrangements transfer meaningful control to communities. The author emphasizes that the defensibility depends on whether agreements recognize community authority over access, use, and interpretation. Choice B provides concrete evidence supporting this conditional argument by showing that communities with contractual authority successfully exercised control over access rules, requiring museums to remove images and adopt community-preferred descriptions. This demonstrates that when proper governance structures are in place, communities can indeed exercise meaningful control, validating the author's framework. Choice C, while relevant to broader repatriation debates, doesn't address the effectiveness of the governance arrangements that the author sees as crucial for ethical digital repatriation.
- Which one of the following, if true, would most strengthen the author's argument?
Answer: In numerous documented cases, artists have given contradictory accounts of their own intentions for the same work at different times, and critics who treated those intentions as decisive produced radically unstable interpretations.
For this strengthen question, the author reasons intentions shouldn't be decisive in art interpretation, as that would make meaning depend on private states, undermining public criticism's stability. Choice B strengthens by showing artists' contradictory intentions lead to unstable interpretations when decisive, supporting the claim of instability. This reinforces the core logic against decisiveness. Avoid A, which notes artists' preferences for artwork focus, tempting but irrelevant to decisiveness' consequences. E shows slight changes from intentions, but it's minor and doesn't emphasize instability. Key takeaway: in RC strengthen/weaken, enhance the author's reasoning about implications—here, decisiveness harming shareability—without confusing with audience or artist views alone.
- Which of the following, if true, most weakens the passage's conclusion that community-scale batteries would be more cost-effective and enhance reliability compared with expanding diesel backup?
Answer: A national subsidy recently enacted will cut the island's diesel fuel cost roughly in half for at least the next decade, while industry forecasts project flat battery prices over the same period.
A undercuts the cost-effectiveness rationale by making diesel far cheaper relative to batteries for the planning horizon. B strengthens the conclusion, while C, D, and E do not directly overturn the combined cost and reliability comparison at the system level.
- Which one of the following, if true, would most strengthen the author's argument?
Answer: In controlled comparisons, audited algorithmic hiring systems that used improved training data produced smaller disparate impacts than unaudited systems and than human-only screening, while maintaining similar job-performance prediction.
The philosopher argues that algorithmic hiring systems can be made fairer than human screening through improved data quality, bias mitigation techniques, and regular auditing, provided employers commit to transparency and third-party audits. Answer choice B powerfully strengthens this argument by providing controlled comparison evidence showing that audited algorithmic systems using improved training data produced smaller disparate impacts than both unaudited systems and human-only screening, while maintaining similar job-performance prediction. This empirical evidence directly supports the philosopher's central claims that algorithms can be tested and improved in ways human judgment cannot, and that properly implemented algorithmic systems can enhance fairness. Answer choice D might seem concerning because it mentions algorithmic biases, but these are cases without the safeguards the philosopher advocates, making them irrelevant to the argument about properly audited systems. Remember that in RC strengthen and weaken questions, the strongest evidence directly demonstrates that the author's proposed solution achieves its intended outcomes when implemented as recommended.
- Which of the following, if true, most weakens the claim made in the passage that a pay-what-you-wish policy would increase the Harbor Gallery's total admissions revenue?
Answer: An internal audit shows that 70% of the Gallery's admissions revenue comes from prebooked tour groups that currently pay the full fixed price and would demand to renegotiate to lower amounts under any PWYW option, while individual attendance has historically changed little with price.
E indicates that the Gallery's core revenue base would likely pay less without a compensating increase in volume, directly undermining the claim about increasing admissions revenue. A shifts scope to retail, B and C support or are neutral regarding PWYW, and D concerns a dissimilar institution with different visitation patterns.
- Which of the following, if true, most seriously weakens the author's claim that guarantees inflate hammer prices relative to comparable non-guaranteed lots?
Answer: A matched-pairs study that controlled for artist, medium, size, period, condition, and provenance found no statistically significant difference in hammer-to-estimate ratios between guaranteed and non-guaranteed lots.
Choice E directly addresses causation by holding key attributes constant and finding no price effect from guarantees. The other options either suggest possible confounds, offer analogies, or raise ancillary concerns without showing that guarantees do not raise prices when like is compared with like.
- Which one of the following, if true, would most weaken the author's argument?
Answer: In multiple regulated settings, providing tailored user-facing explanations alongside outcome-based audits did not increase successful error correction or appeals compared with audits alone.
This question asks what would weaken the author's argument that explainable AI requirements are most defensible as part of a broader governance regime combining intelligible reasons with measurable accountability. The author argues that explanations should be tailored to audience needs and paired with outcome-based oversight, functioning as a complementary tool rather than a substitute for auditing. Choice A directly undermines this framework by showing that even when tailored user-facing explanations were provided alongside outcome-based audits—precisely the combination the author recommends—this didn't increase successful error correction or appeals compared with audits alone. This evidence suggests that explanations may not add meaningful value even when properly integrated with other accountability measures. Choice C, advocating for complete bans, represents an extreme position rather than challenging the author's nuanced governance approach.
- Which one of the following, if true, would most weaken the author's argument?
Answer: A long‑term study found that even with legally binding revenue dedication and expanded low-income transit subsidies, congestion pricing produced no sustained reduction in overall traffic or emissions.
This question asks what would weaken the author's argument that congestion pricing is most effective when paired with credible revenue dedication and expanded alternatives. The author argues that under these conditions, the policy's efficiency rationale maintains practical legitimacy and durability. Choice B directly undermines this conditional defense by showing that even with the author's recommended safeguards—legally binding revenue dedication and expanded low-income transit subsidies—congestion pricing failed to achieve its primary goals of reducing traffic and emissions. This evidence suggests that the author's proposed conditions may not be sufficient to make congestion pricing effective, calling into question the entire framework. Choice A, while showing public opposition, doesn't challenge the effectiveness of the policy under the author's recommended conditions, making it less damaging to the core argument.
- Which one of the following, if true, would most strengthen the author's argument?
Answer: In reader studies of highly formal poems, translations that preserved meter and rhyme were more consistently rated as conveying the original poem's tone and emotional impact than semantically literal but formally free translations.
The literary critic argues that translating poetry should prioritize preserving formal constraints like meter and rhyme over literal semantic content, because formal patterning generates effects that cannot be replicated through paraphrase and provides the experiential core of poetry. Answer choice A strongly supports this argument by providing empirical evidence from reader studies showing that translations preserving meter and rhyme were more consistently rated as conveying the original poem's tone and emotional impact than semantically literal but formally free translations. This directly validates the critic's claim that form is the primary vehicle for recreating the original poem's experience. Answer choice C might seem like a weakness because it mentions problems with rhymed translation, but it only addresses occasional implementation issues rather than challenging the fundamental principle. When evaluating RC strengthen and weaken questions, look for evidence that directly tests the author's core theoretical claim—here, that formal preservation better captures what matters most in poetry translation.
- Which of the following, if true, most strengthens the claim made in the passage that a patchwork rewilding program will improve pollinator diversity across the city?
Answer: In a pilot across three districts, blocks randomly assigned to convert ten small patches to native plantings saw a 35% increase in the number of native bee species within one season compared with matched control blocks, after controlling for pesticide use and weather.
B provides randomized, controlled local evidence that small patches increase native bee species richness, directly supporting the claim about diversity gains from a patchwork. A, C, and D are tangential or address different outcomes, and E concerns highly mobile species rather than the broader pollinator community targeted.
- Which one of the following, if true, would most strengthen the author's argument?
Answer: In several jurisdictions, agencies that adopted enforceable data-quality standards and funded intermediary data labs experienced a measurable increase in substantiated misconduct findings initiated by outside actors using published datasets.
This question asks what would strengthen the author's argument that open data policies enhance accountability when paired with enforceable quality standards and intermediary institutions. The author argues that without these supports, open data functions more as symbolic transparency. Choice A directly supports this conditional claim by showing that jurisdictions with both enforceable standards and funded intermediary data labs saw measurable increases in substantiated misconduct findings from outside actors using the datasets. This demonstrates the author's key point that the combination of quality standards and intermediaries creates an ecosystem that converts data into usable knowledge for accountability purposes. Choice C, while mentioning alternative oversight mechanisms, doesn't address the effectiveness of the author's proposed conditions, making it less relevant to strengthening the specific argument about when open data works best.
- Which one of the following, if true, would most strengthen the author's argument?
Answer: Empirical studies of cumulative-innovation industries show that broad patents are associated with increased project abandonment due to failed licensing negotiations, even when R&D budgets are stable.
In this strengthen question, the author's reasoning centers on how broad patents in cumulative-innovation industries create licensing bottlenecks that reduce innovation by causing project delays or abandonments, outweighing incentive benefits. Choice B strengthens this by offering empirical evidence of increased abandonments from failed negotiations, directly bolstering the claim that complexity hinders progress. This ties into the author's distinction from non-cumulative industries, affirming the core assumption. A common trap is A, which notes higher profits for patent-heavy firms, but it introduces irrelevant aggregate profits without addressing innovation reduction in cumulative contexts. E seems related with longer negotiations, but its 'small number' and 'weeks longer' are too minor to strongly support widespread impact. Key takeaway: for RC strengthen/weaken, evaluate how the choice affects the author's conditional logic—here, licensing costs outweighing benefits—rather than bringing in new, unrelated economic data.
- Which one of the following, if true, would most weaken the author's argument?
Answer: In cities with reliable transit and connected cycling networks, long‑term traffic congestion nevertheless increased after car-lane reductions because most drivers did not switch modes.
For this weaken question, the author argues that complete streets policies reduce long-term congestion by encouraging mode shifts when alternatives are viable, offsetting reduced car capacity. Choice C undermines this by showing that even with reliable transit and networks, congestion increased because drivers didn't switch modes, attacking the conditional mode-shift assumption. This directly weakens the reasoning by evidencing failure in ideal conditions. Be cautious with B, which reports safety benefits like fewer injuries; it's tempting but irrelevant to congestion, affecting only a side benefit, not the core logic. A might distract by mentioning transit increases, but it supports rather than weakens, as it could enable mode shifts. Remember, RC strengthen/weaken questions target the author's logical structure—here, the if-then of alternatives leading to reduced congestion—so prioritize choices that break that chain over those adding extraneous positives or negatives.
- Which of the following, if true, would most strongly weaken the author's claim that adult second-language acquisition associated with a seventeenth-century migration caused the phonological changes in the island dialects?
Answer: The earliest securely dated inscriptions showing vowel reduction and cluster simplification predate the seventeenth-century migration by at least seventy years.
If the changes are attested decades before the posited migration, the migration cannot be their cause. The other options either align with the contact hypothesis, are too general, or note differences that do not address the timing needed for causation.
- Which of the following, if true, most weakens the claim made in the passage that the platform on Island X was built under centralized authority?
Answer: Optically stimulated luminescence dating of mortar between courses indicates that the three main terraces were constructed over at least seventy years, with multi-year intervals separating each episode of building.
If the terraces were built over many decades with long pauses between episodes, the need for a single, continuous centralized authority to coordinate a compressed project is undermined. The other options either support centralized coordination or do not directly address the timeline and organization of construction.
