Loading...
In the 1970 elections in the country of Wilsonia, a total of 15 women were elected to the country's national legislative body—Wilsonia's 100-person senate; in 1990 a total of 54 women were elected to this body. Yet the proportion of successful candidates among those women who ran for seats in Wilsonia's senate was no higher in 1990 than it had been in 1970.
The statements above, if true, most strongly support which of the following conclusions?
| Passage Statement | Visualization and Linkage |
|---|---|
| In the 1970 elections in the country of Wilsonia, a total of 15 women were elected to the country's national legislative body—Wilsonia's 100-person senate |
Establishes: Baseline data for 1970
|
| in 1990 a total of 54 women were elected to this body |
Establishes: Comparison data for 1990
|
| Yet the proportion of successful candidates among those women who ran for seats in Wilsonia's senate was no higher in 1990 than it had been in 1970 |
Establishes: Constant success rate across time periods
|
| Overall Implication |
Mathematical Relationship Revealed: If election success rate remained constant but elected women increased \(260\%\), then:
|
Inference: The number of women who ran for senate seats in 1990 was significantly higher than the number who ran in 1970.
Supporting Logic: Since 54 women were elected in 1990 compared to 15 in 1970, and since the proportion of successful female candidates remained the same in both years, the total number of female candidates must have increased proportionally. If the success rate stayed constant while the number of winners increased by \(260\%\), then the candidate pool must have grown by the same percentage.
Clarification Note: This inference is mathematically necessary given the passage facts, but the passage does not explain why more women chose to run for office in 1990 compared to 1970.
This states that more women were elected in 1990 than in any previous year. While we know 54 women were elected in 1990 compared to 15 in 1970, the passage only gives us data for these two specific years. We have no information about the years between 1970 and 1990, so we cannot conclude that 1990 had more elected women than every single previous year. This goes beyond what the passage supports.
This claims that the proportion of successful male candidates was lower in 1990 than in 1970. The passage tells us nothing about male candidates or their success rates in either year. We only have information about women's success rates, which remained constant. This conclusion requires information not provided in the passage.
This suggests fewer total candidates ran in 1990 than in 1970. However, we've established that more women ran in 1990 than in 1970. While we don't know what happened with male candidates, the increase in female candidates alone makes it unlikely that the total number of candidates decreased. This conclusion contradicts what we can infer from the given information.
This states that more women ran for senate seats in 1990 than in 1970. This is mathematically necessary given our facts. Since 54 women were elected in 1990 versus 15 in 1970 (a \(260\%\) increase), and since the success rate for women remained the same in both years, the pool of women candidates must have increased proportionally. If the success rate stayed constant while winners increased dramatically, then the total number of women running must have increased by the same factor. This is the only conclusion that must be true based on the given information.
This discusses women who were elected in the 1970s and 1980s still being in office in 1990. The passage provides no information about term lengths, re-elections, or whether senators from previous decades remained in office. This conclusion requires information completely outside the scope of what's provided.