Loading...
A company that makes electric razors recently introduced a new model that offered various features that ensured a degree of precision not possible with older models. After a year on the market, the new model proved to sell poorly compared to its older counterparts, leading the company to conclude that precision was not an important concern for consumers. However, this view was seriously challenged by a later finding that __________.
Which of the following best completes the passage?
| Text from Passage | Analysis |
| A company that makes electric razors recently introduced a new model that offered various features that ensured a degree of precision not possible with older models. |
|
| After a year on the market, the new model proved to sell poorly compared to its older counterparts, leading the company to conclude that precision was not an important concern for consumers. |
|
| However, this view was seriously challenged by a later finding that ______. |
|
We start with a company introducing a more precise razor that unexpectedly sells poorly. The company jumps to the conclusion that customers don't value precision. But then we're told this conclusion gets challenged by some later discovery that we need to figure out.
The company's conclusion that precision doesn't matter to consumers was wrong (as evidenced by the later finding).
This is a classic 'flawed reasoning' setup where we have poor sales leading to a hasty conclusion, but the passage hints that there's another explanation for the poor sales that doesn't involve customers not caring about precision. The later finding will show why the company's logic was wrong.
Logically Completes - We need to find information that would challenge the company's conclusion that precision isn't important to consumers
The company's conclusion is qualitative (precision is not important) based on quantitative evidence (poor sales). We need to find alternative explanations for the poor sales that don't involve lack of consumer interest in precision
Since this is a logically completes question, we need to find scenarios that would seriously challenge the company's reasoning. The company made a causal claim: poor sales happened because consumers don't care about precision. To challenge this, we need alternative explanations for why a precision-focused product sold poorly - things that would show consumers DO care about precision, but other factors caused the poor sales
This choice actually supports the company's conclusion rather than challenges it. If consumer guides reported that precision features were causing problems (shoddy haircuts and shaves), this would reinforce the idea that consumers might avoid precision features. This doesn't challenge the company's view that precision isn't important to consumers - it actually gives them more reason to believe consumers would avoid precision-focused products.
This directly challenges the company's conclusion by providing an alternative explanation for the poor sales. The company assumed poor sales meant customers don't value precision, but this finding shows customers prefer older razors because of familiarity, not because they don't want precision. This reveals the flaw in the company's reasoning - they jumped to the wrong conclusion about consumer preferences when the real issue was user comfort with familiar products.
This information about the company's business model doesn't challenge their conclusion about consumer preferences for precision. Whether they sell to salons or directly to consumers doesn't address why the precision-focused razor sold poorly or whether consumers actually value precision features.
The fact that price didn't increase actually makes the poor sales more puzzling, but it doesn't challenge the company's conclusion about precision. If anything, this might suggest that even without a price barrier, consumers still didn't want the precision features, which could support the company's view rather than challenge it.
This finding would strongly suggest that consumers DO value precision (since similar products sold well for competitors), but this choice has a logical issue. The passage states the company concluded precision wasn't important after seeing their own product's poor performance. However, choice E suggests other companies' precision products sold well, which would more likely prompt the company to investigate why their specific product failed rather than conclude precision doesn't matter.