Question

According to the United States Postal Service bureau of information, the rate of complaints concerning late delivery was 30 times higher in 1991 than in \(1964 .\) Because the United States Postal Service changed neighborhood routes from a multiple-truck delivery system to a singletruck delivery system between 1964 and 1991 , the enormous increase in complaints must be a result of this systematic change. Which of the following, if true, weakens the conclusion drawn above? A. In \(1991,\) most late-mail complaints were reported to the appropriate United States Postal Service office, whereas in 1964 most were not. B. Even in a multiple-truck delivery system, certain letters will arrive late. C. According to the United States Postal Service bureau of information, most of the complaints concerning late delivery in 1991 were about registered mail. D. The bulk amount of mail processed by the United States Postal Service was not much larger in 1991 than it was in 1964 , before the systemic change occurred. E. The change in neighborhood routes from a multiple-truck to a single-truck delivery system sometimes causes enormous increase in the price of stamps.

Short answer

The statement that weakens the conclusion drawn is: In 1991, most late-mail complaints were reported to the appropriate United States Postal Service office, whereas in 1964 most were not.

Step-by-step solution

Understanding the Arguments

First, understand the arguments presented. Here, the conclusion has been drawn that a change in delivery system from multiple-truck to single-truck resulted in a higher rate of complaints about late delivery in 1991 as compared to 1964.

Analysing the Options

Next, carefully read each of the options given and analyse how each of them interrelates and will affect the conclusion drawn.

Evaluating Option A

Option A suggests that in 1991 most complaints were reported while in 1964 most weren't. If this is true, it indicates that the increase in complaints could be due more to improved reporting than the change in delivery system. Therefore, Option A weakens the main argument.

Evaluating Other Options

Evaluate remaining options B to E. However, upon careful observation, none would weaken the argument as effectively as Option A. These options, though relevant, do not directly contradict the main argument that the new delivery system led to an increase in complaints.

Key concepts

Critical Thinking

Critical thinking is the vibrant process of suspending judgment, exploring alternatives, evaluating validity, and making reasoned decisions. To critically think about a problem, one must actively question assumptions, seek out evidence, and understand oppositional viewpoints. Let's apply this to our scenario concerning the US Postal Service.
Understanding the underlying assumption behind the argument is crucial. The argument posits that the shift from a multiple-truck to a single-truck delivery system resulted in increased complaints about late deliveries. A critical thinker would ask: Are there other plausible explanations for this increase in complaints? Does the data reflect a reporting bias or other changes in circumstances?

• Identifying assumptions: Consider what the argument assumes about correlation and causation. Just because two events coincide doesn't mean one causes the other.
• Exploring alternatives: What other factors might explain the rise in complaints? Could there be changes in how complaints are recorded?
• Assessing evidence: How credible and reliable is the data from 1964 compared to 1991?
• Considering opposing views: Would other postal services experience the same issues under a similar delivery model change?

Asking these questions and considering various possibilities enhances your ability to think critically and craft sound conclusions based on available evidence.

Argument Evaluation

Evaluating an argument involves examining its structure, evidence, and logic. In the scenario of the US Postal Service, the central claim is that a systemic change led to an increase in complaints. To evaluate this, you need to dissect both the conclusion and its underlying premises.
One key aspect is the potential for alternative explanations. Option A from the exercise suggests an alternative reason for the increased complaints—better reporting mechanisms in 1991 as opposed to those in 1964. This alternative explanation could undermine the original claim, showing that factors other than the delivery system change might be at play.

• Analyzing evidence: Determine whether the evidence presented genuinely supports the conclusion. Does the argument depend on correlation appearing as causation?
• Examining relevancy: Is the evidence directly related to the conclusion? Does it address possible other causes?
• Identifying weaknesses: Assess options that introduce reasonable doubt about the conclusion, like improved reporting in option A.
• Weighing alternative possibilities: Acknowledge other logical conclusions drawn from the same premise.

Evaluating arguments effectively means recognizing whether the evidence logically leads to the conclusion drawn or whether other factors need consideration.

Problem Analysis

Problem analysis involves breaking down a complex issue into its fundamental components and examining each element. In our exercise, the problem is the increase in complaints about late deliveries. To analyze it, we need to consider various angles and investigate thoroughly.
First, let's put the problem in context. Understand the changes that happened between 1964 and 1991, such as changes in technology, population density, and postal policy. Then, identify direct factors—such as the switch to a single-truck system—as well as indirect factors, like changes in complaint recording practices.

• Defining the problem: Clearly state the increase in complaints and what it purportedly links to.
• Identifying root causes: Distinguish between potential direct causes like the system change and indirect influences like enhanced complaint tracking.
• Exploring context: Recognize the broader sociopolitical and economic factors that could influence this situation.
• Generating solutions: Consider various solutions or explanations, weighing their feasibility and evidence.

Effective problem analysis considers not only the immediate surface issues but dives deeper into understanding the core causes and contexts.

GRE Test Prep

Preparing for the GRE involves honing skills that go beyond mere subject knowledge. It requires developing reasoning skills, particularly the ability to analyze arguments and critically assess a range of questions, much like our postal service exercise.
Tackling GRE questions similar to our exercise requires familiarity with argument structures, identifying assumptions, and evaluating evidence—all crucial to success on the test. Practice breaking down arguments into premises and conclusions, and anticipate common traps such as conflating correlation with causation.

• Building comprehension: Understand the relationship between paragraphs and develop an internal logic for the arguments presented.
• Enhancing vocabulary: A good vocabulary assists in interpreting complex arguments and subtleties in questions.
• Practicing argument analysis: Regularly practice with arguments, identifying assumptions, weak points, and evaluating evidence.
• Simulating test conditions: Practice under timed conditions to build confidence and ensure efficient time management during the test.

Ultimately, GRE test prep is about integrating these analytical skills into your study habits for comprehensive preparation.