1.Statement: “The school should extend the lunch break for students because studies show that longer breaks improve student concentration and academic performance.”
Which of the following, if true, most strengthens the argument?

1. Students who participate in sports during lunch breaks show improved academic results.
2. The school’s current lunch break is shorter than that of most other schools.
3. Studies have shown that students who concentrate better are less likely to misbehave.
4. Teachers have reported that students are often distracted during afternoon classes.
5. Most students prefer a longer lunch break.

Answer: 4. Teachers have reported that students are often distracted during afternoon classes.

Explanation:

The argument states that a longer lunch break improves student concentration and academic performance. If teachers observe that students are often distracted in afternoon classes, it supports the claim that the current break might be insufficient and that a longer break could help improve concentration. This directly aligns with the argument’s reasoning.

Why not the other options?

• 1 “Students who participate in sports during lunch breaks show improved academic results.”
  • While this suggests a benefit of activities during breaks, it does not directly support the need for longer lunch breaks for all students.
• 2 “The school’s current lunch break is shorter than that of most other schools.”
  • This is a comparison but does not necessarily prove that a longer break improves concentration or academic performance.
• 3 “Studies have shown that students who concentrate better are less likely to misbehave.”
  • This establishes a correlation between concentration and behavior but does not link it to lunch break duration.
• 5 “Most students prefer a longer lunch break.”
  • Student preference does not necessarily mean that it improves concentration or academic performance.

---

2. Statement: “Our company should provide free snacks in the office to improve employee productivity because studies indicate that employees with access to snacks are more focused and efficient.”
Which of the following, if true, most strengthens the argument?

1. Employees working in offices with snack facilities report higher job satisfaction.
2. The company’s budget is not affected by small perks like free snacks.
3. Employees who eat snacks during the workday are less likely to leave the office for breaks.
4. The company is planning to cut down on employee bonuses to save costs.
5. Productivity is generally higher during the morning hours than in the afternoon.

Answer: 3. Employees who eat snacks during the workday are less likely to leave the office for breaks.

Explanation:

The argument is based on the idea that providing snacks improves productivity by keeping employees focused and efficient. If employees are less likely to leave the office for breaks when snacks are available, it suggests that the snacks help maintain concentration and reduce downtime, which directly supports the claim of improved productivity.

Why not the other options?

• 1 “Employees working in offices with snack facilities report higher job satisfaction.”
  • While this shows satisfaction, it does not directly tie job satisfaction to productivity. The argument is about productivity, not just happiness.
• 2 “The company’s budget is not affected by small perks like free snacks.”
  • This speaks to the financial feasibility of providing snacks, but it doesn’t address the connection between snacks and improved productivity.
• 4 “The company is planning to cut down on employee bonuses to save costs.”
  • This suggests a cost-cutting measure but does not relate to the link between snacks and productivity.
• 5 “Productivity is generally higher during the morning hours than in the afternoon.”
  • This may be true but doesn’t address the core argument about how snacks specifically improve productivity.

---

3. Statement: “The government should reduce taxes on renewable energy sources because this will promote the adoption of cleaner energy alternatives.”
Which of the following, if true, most strengthens the argument?

1. Many businesses are willing to switch to renewable energy if the financial incentive is high enough.
2. Renewable energy sources are expensive to implement and often not cost-effective.
3. The current tax structure discourages investment in renewable energy.
4. The government has already invested heavily in renewable energy infrastructure.
5. A tax reduction will cause a rise in energy consumption across the country.

Answer: 3.The current tax structure discourages investment in renewable energy.

Explanation:

The argument is that reducing taxes on renewable energy will promote the adoption of cleaner energy alternatives. If the current tax structure discourages investment in renewable energy, it provides a clear reason for why a tax reduction would help increase investment and adoption, directly supporting the idea of making renewable energy more accessible and attractive.

Why not the other options?

• 1. “Many businesses are willing to switch to renewable energy if the financial incentive is high enough.”
  • This is a good supporting point but does not directly address the current barriers created by taxes, which is the main point of the argument.
• 2. “Renewable energy sources are expensive to implement and often not cost-effective.”
  • This contradicts the argument since it suggests that renewable energy is not viable, which weakens the case for promoting it through tax reductions.
• 4. “The government has already invested heavily in renewable energy infrastructure.”
  • This does not directly strengthen the argument about the impact of tax reductions. It’s relevant, but it doesn’t address how tax changes would specifically promote adoption.
• 5. “A tax reduction will cause a rise in energy consumption across the country.”
  • This is unrelated to the argument about promoting cleaner energy alternatives. A rise in overall energy consumption doesn’t directly support the idea of promoting renewable energy.

---

4. Statement: “Reading books for at least 30 minutes every day is essential for enhancing cognitive abilities, as research has shown that people who read regularly perform better on memory tests.”
Which of the following, if true, most strengthens the argument?

1. Memory tests often include questions related to general knowledge, which can be improved by reading.
2. People who engage in physical activities regularly also score higher on memory tests.
3. A study has found that reading for 30 minutes every day helps improve concentration and focus.
4. The number of people reading books has been declining over the past decade.
5. Memory tests focus more on mathematical reasoning than on verbal reasoning.

Answer: 3. A study has found that reading for 30 minutes every day helps improve concentration and focus.

Explanation:

The argument states that reading books for at least 30 minutes daily enhances cognitive abilities, supported by research showing that regular readers perform better on memory tests. To strengthen this argument, we need evidence that directly links reading to cognitive improvement.

• The selected option strengthens the argument because it provides additional scientific support, indicating that daily reading enhances concentration and focus, which are key cognitive abilities.

Why not the other options?

• 1. “Memory tests often include questions related to general knowledge, which can be improved by reading.”
  • This option suggests that reading may help with general knowledge, but it does not directly support the claim that reading enhances cognitive abilities or memory performance.
• 2. “People who engage in physical activities regularly also score higher on memory tests.”
  • This introduces an alternative factor (physical activity) but does not strengthen the direct relationship between reading and cognitive abilities.
• 4. “The number of people reading books has been declining over the past decade.”
  • This is an unrelated statistic and does not provide evidence about the cognitive benefits of reading.
• 5. “Memory tests focus more on mathematical reasoning than on verbal reasoning.”
  • This weakens the argument if anything, as it implies that reading (which is more related to verbal reasoning) may not significantly impact memory test performance.

---

5. Statement: “We should allow employees to work from home because a flexible working arrangement leads to increased job satisfaction and greater work-life balance.”
Which of the following, if true, most strengthens the argument?

1. Employees who work from home report less stress, but their overall productivity remains unchanged.
2. Employees working remotely tend to take more breaks during the workday.
3. Studies have shown that employees who have a better work-life balance are more likely to stay with their current employer.
4. Many employees find it challenging to separate their work and personal lives when working remotely.
5. Working from home has been proven to reduce overall company overhead costs.

Answer: 3  Studies have shown that employees who have a better work-life balance are more likely to stay with their current employer.

Explanation:

The argument is that allowing employees to work from home improves job satisfaction and work-life balance. If studies show that a better work-life balance leads to greater employee retention, this directly supports the claim that allowing remote work can benefit both employees and the company, thus reinforcing the argument for a flexible working arrangement.

Why not the other options?

• 1. “Employees who work from home report less stress, but their overall productivity remains unchanged.”
  • while it acknowledges reduced stress, it also states that overall productivity remains unchanged. The argument is about increased job satisfaction and work-life balance leading to better outcomes, but if productivity does not improve, the benefit of allowing work from home becomes less convincing.
• 2. “Employees working remotely tend to take more breaks during the workday.”
  • This is not necessarily a positive outcome and could potentially weaken the argument, as more breaks might lead to decreased productivity.
• 4. “Many employees find it challenging to separate their work and personal lives when working remotely.”
  • This weakens the argument by suggesting that remote work might blur the lines between work and personal life, which could negatively affect work-life balance.
• 5. “Working from home has been proven to reduce overall company overhead costs.”
  • This is a financial benefit for the company but doesn’t directly strengthen the argument about job satisfaction and work-life balance for employees.