PrepTest 135, Section 4, Question 2

What we’re looking for

Working the answers

• A

  The argument doesn't need the columns to persuade most undecided readers. Those readers are the small group left over after nearly everyone has decided. The columns could influence many, a few, or none of them without resolving our concern about people who already chose a candidate.

• B

  This describes a column backfiring: it tries to get readers to vote one way and instead causes a different vote. That is different from successfully persuading readers to make the intended choice. But the author doesn't need such a backfire to occur, either. The stated explanation for limited success is that voters have already decided. We need the assumption connecting that prior decision to resistance to persuasion.

• C

  Reading columnists you generally agree with might be another reason a column doesn't change your vote. It isn't required by this argument. Even if readers often sought out opposing views, the author's reasoning could still work if people rarely changed their minds after deciding. General agreement and an unchangeable voting decision are different claims.

• D

  This compares frequent readers with occasional readers. The author hasn't based the conclusion on that comparison. Both groups could be equally resistant to changing their votes, and the argument could still work. We need to address what happens after a decision, not rank readers by how often they read.

• E
  Correct

  This is the missing connection. Nearly everyone has already chosen a candidate, and people rarely can be persuaded to change that choice. Together, those ideas support the conclusion that these columns rarely succeed in persuading voters. If voters were easily persuaded to reconsider, the fact that they had already decided would do little to support the author's conclusion.