By referring to the Universal Declaration of Human Rights as "purely programmatic" (line 49) in nature, the author mo...

Skylar on January 26, 2020

@Masada, happy to help.

Essentially, (C) provides the best evidence because it assures us that the survey was representative.

We are told that a medical journal used a survey of current readers to determine whether a change in its format would increase readership. This means that the journal surveyed current readers to make a conclusion about potential readers. How do we know that these two groups are comparable or that the results of the survey would accurately represent the feelings of potential readers? By claiming that the percentage of these two groups who feel similarly is "almost the same," (C) allows us to view these groups as consistent. Therefore, the journal's decision to act based on the survey results should increase readership because we know the survey was representative.

Does that make sense? Please let us know if you have any other questions!

Masada on January 27, 2020

Perfect, thank you!

hochakin on February 9, 2020

are we assuming the "entire potential readership who would like the format change" is larger than the current readership who like the change?

The "entire potential readership who would like the format change" sounds like an unknown number.

alyj628 on December 2, 2022

Why are we assuming those surveyed in the premise are current readers only? It never says that in the premises.

Emil-Kunkin on December 8, 2022

Hi, we don't actually have to assume this. This is a potential flaw, that the sample was not representative of the entire possible pool of readers. The right answer corrects this line of attack be proving that the sample was in fact representative.