Q4 - Dog owner: In general, large dogs

[Laura Damone]

Stimulus Breakdown:
Conclusion: For any apartment dweller who has limited time to give a dog exercise but who wants to have a dog, a large dog is less likely to be troublesome than a small one.
Evidence: Large dogs generally need less intensive exercise to stay fit, and a dog that isn't exercised at the level of intensity it needs is more apt to be troublesome.

Answer Anticipation:
The conclusion is about the amount of time dedicated to exercise, but the premise is about intensity of exercise. Anticipate a bridge assumption to bridge that gap.

Correct answer:
B

Answer choice analysis:
(A) Nope - this argument is about apartment dwellers that both want a dog and have limited time to exercise the dog. We definitely don't need to assume that these folks are few and far between.

(B) Bingo. This needs to be true for the argument to work and we can prove it by negating it. What if intensive exercise didn't take more time? Well then limited time shouldn't limit intensity, meaning a small dog might be just as trouble-free as a big dog for the apartment dwellers in question. That destroys the argument, so it must be the right answer.

(C) Wow, judge much? This argument isn't about who should or shouldn't own a dog, so we don’t need to assume this kind of judgment.

(D) Irrelevant comparison! Watch out for these - they're common wrong answers for Necessary Assumption questions. Comparing large apartments to small apartments is not something we need to do to make our argument work.

(E) Does this need to be true for our argument to work? Nope. If it isn't true - if exercising more often doesn't increase the likelihood of fitness, so what? The argument doesn't have any information about the frequency of exercise. It only deals with time and intensity.

Takeaway/Pattern:
For Necessary Assumption questions with a term shift, predict a bridge assumption that connects the term from the premise to the term in the conclusion.

#officialexplanation