PrepTest 155, Section 1, Question 19
Productivity growth in industrialized nations has dropped substantially(47 more words not shown)
Which one of the following,(6 more words not shown)
- AThe industries that(18 more words not shown)
- BProductivity growth in(13 more words not shown)
- CProductivity growth in(16 more words not shown)
- DWithin any given(20 more words not shown)
- EWithin the next(24 more words not shown)
Reading the argument
Why should an industry-wide trend tell us what happened to an individual business?
Notice how the argument changes its subject. First we hear about productivity growth across industrialized nations. Then we hear about industries that rely heavily on computers. But the conclusion is about what happened to a particular business's productivity growth when it increased its reliance on computers. Those broad figures may hide important differences among businesses within an industry.
There's another question we might ask about the timing. Perhaps computers produced a large initial jump and growth then slowed. A slower rate of growth doesn't mean productivity itself fell, and an early gain doesn't disappear just because later gains are smaller. That possibility makes the broad trend less straightforward than it first sounds.
What we’re looking for
For a weakener, though, I'd focus on the shift from nations and industries to businesses. Give us a reason that looking within an industry changes the picture. An individual business might be affected by different forces from those behind the broad decline. Let's see whether an answer develops that objection.
Working the answers
- A
Inefficiencies could matter, but where did they come from? If they arose independently of computer use, they might offer another explanation for slow growth. If they were problems created by the computer systems, they might fit the author's concern. A doesn't tell us which. It also stays at the industry level without resolving the comparison among individual businesses.
- B
Less industrialized nations also experienced slower productivity growth. But we aren't told how much they relied on computers or how their individual businesses performed. Without those connections, this broad additional trend doesn't directly undermine the conclusion about businesses increasing computer use.
- C
Producing computer technology is different from relying on it. An industry selling computers might grow because demand for its products increased. That doesn't tell us whether an ordinary business improves its own productivity growth by buying and using computer technology. The answer changes the relationship we need to examine.
- DCorrect
Within each industry, the businesses investing most heavily in computers have had the greatest productivity growth. That's exactly the level of comparison missing from the premises. An industry can have weak growth overall while its more computerized businesses outperform its less computerized businesses.
D doesn't prove that computers caused the better growth; other differences could matter. But it seriously challenges the move from an industry-wide slowdown to the conclusion that a business probably gained nothing in productivity growth from greater computer reliance.
- E
The next few years could differ from the period already described. New technological advances might make future investments highly productive without showing what earlier investments accomplished. The argument's conclusion concerns businesses that have already increased their reliance on computers, so a forecast about future improvements doesn't answer it.
More Weaken questions
Learn the LSAT our way
Our platform drills Weaken questions at your level and adjusts as you improve.