Executive: We recently ran a set of advertisements in the print version of a travel magazine and on that magazine's ...

Mehran on September 28, 2017

Hi @JayDee8732, thanks for your post.

This is an Errors in Reasoning question. The stimulus presents an argument. The Executive's conclusion is "consumer response to our print ads was probably below par." What evidence or support is offered for this conclusion? The premise is that "consumer response to the web ads was much more limited than typical."

The Executive is comparing apples to oranges. Data about web ads has no bearing on data about print ads. He is committing an error in logical reasoning.

Answer choice (D) expresses this flaw: The Executive uses a case in which direct evidence is available (i.e., data about the web ad's effectiveness) to draw a conclusion about an analogous case (the print ad) in which direct evidence is unavailable ("we were unable to get any direct information about consumer response to the print ads").

Hope this helps! Please let us know if you have any additional questions.