- UID
- 573630
- 在线时间
- 小时
- 注册时间
- 2010-10-13
- 最后登录
- 1970-1-1
- 主题
- 帖子
- 性别
- 保密
|
An industry analyst asserted in his recent report that the relative scarcity of housing in a particular market leads to larger than normal increases in price. During the late 1990s, according to the analyst's report, occupancy rates-a measure of the percentage of housing occupied at a given time-in crowded urban markets such as New York and San Francisco hovered around 99.5%. During the same period, homing prices increased by as much as 100% per year, compared to more riormal past increases in the range of 5% to 15% per year. Which of the following is an assumption thatsupports the analyst's assertion? (A) In the housing market, there generally must be at least five buyers per seller in order to cause larger than normal increases in price. (B) Increases in demand often reflect an influx of new buyers into the marketplace or an unusual increase in buying power on the part of the customer. (C) The u.s. housing market showed a larger than average increase in the 1990s across the country, not just in crowded urban areas. (D) Price increases do not cause people to withhold their houses from the market in the hopes that prices will increase even further in the future. (E) A significant rise in housing prices in a specific area may cause some potential buyers to relocate to other, less pricey areas.
The correct answer choiceeliminates an ALTERNATE MODEL OF CAUSATION. The analyst claims that, in the housing market, scarcity causes larger than normal price increases. The remaining premises are all facts that do not appear to have any logic gaps or other problems. The premises, however, represent only a correlation, not a cause-effect relationship: during a certain time period, occupancy rates were high and prices increased a great deal. The analyst claims that scarcity causes the price increase, but the reverse could also be true: the price increase could cause the scarcity. Perhaps people wait to sell because they think the market will continue to rise, or perhaps people will not sell their own property because they would then have to pay inflated prices for a new property. In order to conclude that scarcity causes prices to rise, the analyst must assume that the "reverse" causation does not occur. 选E. 今天看到manhattan上这题.分析里说到这句represent only a correlation, not a cause-effect relationship,我就想问如何在做题的时候比较快速清楚地区分是cause-effect,还是correlation?区分它们对判断选项有什么影响? 谢谢! |
|