The stimulus presents you with Dr. Ruiz's argument, which concludes with "Dr. Smith . . . clearly cannot be included on a panel that examines the danger of secondhand cigarette smoke." Why? Because Dr. Smith "has expressed outspoken antismoking views in public," and because Dr. Ruiz, "as an organizer of the panel," wants "to ensure that the panel examines the issue in an unbiased manner before coming to a conclusion."
The trouble with Dr. Ruiz's position is that just because Dr. Smith has strong and outspoken views does not mean she cannot contribute to an unbiased examination of the issue at hand. (A) describes this exactly: "a panel composed of qualified people with strong but conflicting views on a particular topic is more likely to reach an unbiased conclusion than a panel composed of people who have kept their views, if any, private."
Answer choice (B) does not counter Dr. Ruiz's argument - if anything, it may bolster Dr. Ruiz's conclusion not to include Dr. Smith, as it says that "people who hold strong views on a particular topic [e.g., Dr. Smith] tend to accept new evidence only if it supports their views." If this is true, this would support Dr. Ruiz's decision not to include Dr. Smith for fear that Dr. Smith cannot examine the issue in an unbiased manner before coming to a conclusion.
Hope this helps! Please let us know if you have any additional questions.
Isaac-JuarezOctober 31, 2019
I selected answer choice C because it "one qualified person" where answer choice A states qualified people and we do not know the views of the other people on the panel.
