Passage: 'The crime rate fell by 12% the year after the new law was passed. Hence the new law caused the fall.' Which of the following, if true, MOST weakens this argument?
AThe fall began three weeks before the law took effect
BBoth (B) and (C) are jointly true
CThe new law applies only to non-violent offences
DSeveral other factors — including a major economic recovery and increased policing — coincided with the law's passage
Answer & Solution
Correct answer: B. Both (B) and (C) are jointly true
Both confounding factors AND a fall that pre-dates the law independently weaken the causal claim. Either alone is significant; together they substantially undermine the inference. The COMBINED option is therefore best.
Related questions
Odd man out: APPLE, MANGO, BANANA, POTATOIn a series 2, 3, 5, 7, 11, 13, ?, the next prime isIf A=1, B=2, C=3, ..., the value of PEN isOdd man out: 9, 16, 24, 36, 49, 64Find next: 1, 3, 6, 10, 15, ?Find next term: 8, 27, 64, 125, ?If the code for TEACHER is VGCEJGT, the code for STUDENT will beFind the missing term: 5, 9, 17, 33, 65, ?