Loading...
Investors should not rely on the predictions of stockbrokers who publicly predict trends in the stock market. If these stockbrokers were really able to predict these trends accurately and wished to profit as much as possible from their own predictions, they would keep this information to themselves.
Which of the following, if true, most strongly supports the argument above?
| Text from Passage | Analysis |
|---|---|
| Investors should not rely on the predictions of stockbrokers who publicly predict trends in the stock market. |
|
| If these stockbrokers were really able to predict these trends accurately and wished to profit as much as possible from their own predictions, they would keep this information to themselves. |
|
The author starts with their main conclusion that investors shouldn't trust public stock predictions, then provides a logical reason based on self-interest - if stockbrokers could really predict accurately and wanted maximum profit, they'd keep that valuable information to themselves rather than share it publicly.
Investors should not rely on the predictions of stockbrokers who publicly predict trends in the stock market.
The argument uses logical reasoning about human behavior and self-interest. The premise creates a logical test: if stockbrokers were truly accurate predictors AND wanted maximum profit, they would act differently (keep info secret). Since they're sharing publicly instead, this suggests either they can't predict accurately or they're not motivated by maximum profit - either way, their public predictions aren't reliable.
Strengthen - We need to find information that makes the conclusion stronger and more believable
The argument makes a specific claim about stockbrokers who 'publicly predict trends' and assumes they want to 'profit as much as possible from their own predictions'
We need to find evidence that supports the core logic: if stockbrokers had truly valuable predictions, they would keep them secret to maximize profit. We should look for scenarios that show public sharing reduces profit potential or that accurate predictors do indeed keep information private for financial gain
This tells us that accurate past predictions make investors more likely to believe future predictions. However, this doesn't strengthen the argument about why stockbrokers would keep valuable information private. If anything, this suggests stockbrokers might benefit from sharing accurate predictions publicly to build credibility, which could weaken rather than strengthen the argument.
This discusses some investors who pay for confidential information but still follow their own predictions instead. This is about investor behavior after getting information, not about whether stockbrokers would keep valuable information private in the first place. This doesn't address the core logic of the argument.
This suggests most stockbrokers don't care about getting rich from stock trends because they already have comfortable salaries. This actually weakens the argument because the argument assumes stockbrokers want to 'profit as much as possible.' If they don't care about maximizing profit, then the premise falls apart.
This directly supports the argument's core reasoning. It explains WHY stockbrokers would keep accurate predictions private - because exclusivity increases profit potential. If fewer people have access to accurate predictions, those who do have access can make more money. This creates a clear economic incentive for truly accurate predictors to keep information secret rather than share it publicly, which strengthens the conclusion that public predictions shouldn't be trusted.
This tells us that unfamiliar investors have difficulty predicting trends due to market instability. This doesn't address whether professional stockbrokers would keep valuable predictions private or public. The difficulty that amateur investors face doesn't strengthen the argument about professional stockbroker behavior and their incentives regarding information sharing.