AWA - Analytical Writing Assessment Evaluating Evidence and Assumptions Questions and Answers — Questions and Answers
Question 1: An argument states: 'The recent surge in our city's recycling rates is a direct result of the new awareness campaign launched last quarter.' Which of the following, if true, would most seriously weaken this argument?
- Neighboring cities without an awareness campaign have reported an even greater surge in recycling rates during the same period. (Correct answer)
- The awareness campaign was primarily featured on social media platforms.
- A study published before the campaign showed that most citizens were already aware of the importance of recycling.
- The cost of the awareness campaign was significantly higher than the revenue generated from recycled materials.
Correct answer: Neighboring cities without an awareness campaign have reported an even greater surge in recycling rates during the same period.
This statement provides an alternative cause for the increase in recycling rates. If other cities saw a similar or greater increase without the campaign, it suggests that a broader, external factor (e.g., new national regulations, a popular documentary, changes in waste management) might be the actual cause, thus weakening the conclusion that the local campaign was directly responsible.
Question 2: A business memo concludes, 'To boost our company's profits, we must cut our marketing budget. Our main competitor, a highly profitable company, spends very little on marketing.' What is the primary unstated assumption in this argument?
- Marketing expenditures are the sole determinant of a company's profitability.
- The competitor's low marketing budget is the primary reason for its high profitability.
- The two companies operate in identical market conditions and have similar brand recognition. (Correct answer)
- Cutting the marketing budget will not negatively impact employee morale.
Correct answer: The two companies operate in identical market conditions and have similar brand recognition.
The argument draws a direct comparison to a competitor, assuming that what works for one company will work for another. This is a faulty analogy unless it can be established that the market conditions, customer base, brand strength, product offerings, and other relevant factors are comparable. Without this assumption, the competitor's strategy is irrelevant.
Question 3: Which of the following is a critical component of evaluating the evidence presented in an argument?
- Assessing the personal opinions of the author.
- Determining the length and complexity of the argument.
- Verifying the emotional appeal of the evidence.
- Checking the relevance and sufficiency of the evidence. (Correct answer)
Correct answer: Checking the relevance and sufficiency of the evidence.
A core task in the AWA is to scrutinize the evidence used to support a conclusion. This involves questioning whether the evidence is directly related to the claim (relevance) and whether there is enough of it to justify the conclusion without making broad generalizations (sufficiency).
Question 4: A city council member argues: 'We should not approve the construction of the new stadium. A recent poll of 100 residents showed that 60% are opposed to it.' To properly evaluate this evidence, which of the following questions is most important to ask?
- What was the margin of error for the poll?
- Was the poll sample representative of the city's entire population? (Correct answer)
- Who funded the construction of the stadium?
- How many stadiums does the city currently have?
Correct answer: Was the poll sample representative of the city's entire population?
The validity of a poll depends heavily on whether the sample accurately reflects the demographics (age, income, location, etc.) of the larger population it claims to represent. If the 100 residents polled were all from one neighborhood or a specific interest group, the results cannot be reliably generalized to the entire city, making the evidence weak.
Question 5: An argument that claims 'This new diet is effective because a famous celebrity endorsed it' is committing which logical fallacy?
- Hasty Generalization
- Circular Reasoning
- Appeal to False Authority (Correct answer)
- Ad Hominem
Correct answer: Appeal to False Authority
This is an Appeal to False Authority fallacy. A celebrity's fame does not make them an expert in nutrition or medicine. The argument relies on the endorsement of a non-expert as the primary evidence for the diet's effectiveness, which is a flaw in reasoning.
Question 6: Consider the statement: 'Every time I wear my lucky jersey, my team wins. Therefore, my jersey causes the team to win.' Which of the following best describes the flaw in this reasoning?
- The argument presents a false dilemma.
- The argument is based on a biased sample.
- The argument oversimplifies the definition of 'winning'.
- The argument mistakes correlation for causation. (Correct answer)
Correct answer: The argument mistakes correlation for causation.
This is a classic example of the 'post hoc ergo propter hoc' (after this, therefore because of this) fallacy. The reasoning incorrectly assumes that because one event (wearing the jersey) precedes another (the team winning), the first event must have caused the second. It ignores all other potential factors and confuses a simple correlation with a causal relationship.
AWA - Analytical Writing Assessment Evaluating Evidence and Assumptions Questions and Answers
An argument states: 'The recent surge in our city's recycling rates is a direct result of the new awareness campaign launched last quarter.' Which of the following, if true, would most seriously weaken this argument?