标题: a Princeton Review CR [打印本页] 作者: dc 时间: 2003-10-17 17:11 标题: a Princeton Review CR Company spokesperson: The pan to include fewer varieties of meat in Brand X dog food is doomed to failure. It will certainly cause fewer consumers to buy Brand X dog fod. Sales analyst: Actually, marketing studies show that there is no correlation between the number of varieties of meat in a dog food and sales of that dog food. Which of the following is the most serious criticism of the sales analyst's argument ? (A) The sales analyst does not refer to any specific statistics. (B) The sales analyst does not specifically refer to Brand X dog food. (C) The sales analyst's argument is based on outmoded ideas of causality. (D) The sales analyst refers to how many varieties of meat are in a dog food rather than to the decrease in the number of varieties of meat in the dog food. (E) The sales analyst presents her evidence in a manner designed to disprove any relationship between ingredients and dog food sales.
What is your choice and why. I will post the princeton anwser tomorrow.作者: cognito 时间: 2003-10-18 10:34
B作者: nickynicky 时间: 2003-10-18 17:27
d作者: mjiehu 时间: 2003-10-19 01:56
d作者: dc 时间: 2003-10-19 05:03
The anwser is D.
If the number of varieties has no correlation with sales, that means decrease or increase the number of varieties should have no impact of sales. For those think anwser is D, please explain why.