PrepTest 122, Section 1, Question 4
Industry experts expect improvements in job safety training(41 more words not shown)
Which one of the following,(13 more words not shown)
- AA similar survey(19 more words not shown)
- BManufacturers tend to(15 more words not shown)
- CManufacturers tend to(17 more words not shown)
- DIt is likely(19 more words not shown)
- ESignificant safety measures,(19 more words not shown)
Reading the argument
More accidents after safety training? That is surprising, but it doesn't show that the training made people less safe.
What else changed? Maybe workers now recognize and report incidents they previously ignored. Or perhaps the company introduced unfamiliar equipment and trained people because of that change. The equipment could create new risks even if the training helps workers handle it. Another possibility is that the company just hired people who are still learning the job.
Those are possible explanations, not facts we've established. They show why we should look beyond the sequence “training happened, then accidents rose.” Training might reduce one source of risk while something else pushes the accident total up.
What we’re looking for
The question asks us to resolve that apparent conflict. We need to explain why the number of accidents could rise despite improved training. Repeating that accidents rose, or describing a different industry where they didn't, won't do that.
Working the answers
- A
Accidents staying constant in transportation is a different outcome in a different setting. It gives us another result we might want to investigate, but it doesn't explain why manufacturers had more accidents after improving their training.
- BCorrect
The workforce is growing at the same time that training improves. There are now more people working, so there are more opportunities for accidents. The newcomers may also have less experience with the job, which fits the possibility we considered while reading.
We don't even need to establish that each newcomer is especially accident-prone. Suppose 100 workers previously had 10 accidents, while 200 workers now have 15. The total rises even though accidents per worker fall. These numbers are just an illustration, but they show how better safety and a higher accident count can coexist when the workforce expands.
- C
This tells us why a manufacturer might decide to improve training: accidents had already increased. Our puzzle concerns the increase after the training changes. A rise before training doesn't explain why the number continues to rise afterward rather than falling as the experts expect.
- D
Knowing that the increase probably wasn't random doesn't tell us what produced it. We still need a change that explains the higher count. D makes the pattern sound more in need of an explanation without providing one.
- E
Existing protective equipment and inspections tell us that training wasn't the only safety measure. But those measures were already in place. Why would accidents increase just after training improved? E identifies no relevant change that explains that timing.
More Paradox questions
Learn the LSAT our way
Our platform drills Paradox questions at your level and adjusts as you improve.