Hello,

Sign up to join our community!

Welcome Back,

Please sign in to your account!

Forgot Password,

Lost your password? Please enter your email address. You will receive a link and will create a new password via email.

You must login to ask a question.

Please briefly explain why you feel this question should be reported.

Please briefly explain why you feel this answer should be reported.

Please briefly explain why you feel this user should be reported.

Verbal Club Latest Questions

  • 0
  • 0
Aakash Gutam

Sample

Related Questions

You must login to add an answer.

1 Answer

  1. 🔍 Question Type

    Inference / Interpretation of Response
    We are asked to determine what Ms. Siuzdak’s reply shows she understood Mr. Janeck’s remark to imply.

    đź§© Breakdown of Stimulus

    • Mr. Janeck’s Claim: Stevenson is unlikely to win because voters hesitate to elect a businessman without political experience.
    • Ms. Siuzdak’s Reply: Running a corporation equips a person with skills relevant to governing a state.

    Notice: Mr. Janeck makes a prediction about voter behavior. Ms. Siuzdak responds as if he made a judgment on Stevenson’s suitability. The gap between prediction and evaluation is the crux of the question.

    đź§  Reasoning Approach

    1. Identify the focus of each speaker:
      • Janeck → Voter tendencies (external).
      • Siuzdak → Candidate qualifications (internal).
    2. Recognize the misinterpretation: Siuzdak takes Janeck’s remark as though he doubts Stevenson’s qualifications.
    3. Evaluate answer choices to see which captures this misinterpretation.

    📊 Answer Choice Analysis

    • (A) Mr. Janeck considers Stevenson unqualified for the office of governor.
      ✅ Correct. This matches Siuzdak’s response: she argues business experience makes Stevenson qualified, which only makes sense if she interpreted Janeck’s remark as saying Stevenson is unqualified.
    • (B) No candidate without political experience has ever been elected governor of a state.
      ❌ Too extreme. Janeck said few voters are willing, not that no one has ever been elected. Siuzdak’s reply does not assume such an absolute historical claim.
    • (C) Mr. Janeck believes that political leadership and business leadership are closely analogous.
      ❌ Opposite direction. Siuzdak argues that business prepares one for politics. Janeck never made any claim about analogies between leadership domains.
    • (D) A career spent in the pursuit of profit can be an impediment to one’s ability to run a state government fairly.
      ❌ Out of scope. Neither speaker mentions morality, fairness, or profit motives. The issue is purely experience versus qualification.
    • (E) Voters generally overestimate the value of political experience when selecting a candidate.
      ❌ Misaligned. Janeck says voters hesitate to elect a candidate without political experience. That does not imply voters overestimate it — he simply reports their likely behavior. Siuzdak’s reply also does not address this.

    âś… Correct Answer

    (A) Mr. Janeck considers Stevenson unqualified for the office of governor.

    ✨ Key Insights

    • Misinterpretation questions often involve one person’s prediction being taken as a value judgment by the other.
    • Eliminating wrong answers requires checking for:
      • Exaggeration (B)
      • Scope shifts (D, E)
      • Irrelevant analogies (C)
    • The best answer is the one that aligns with how the second speaker framed their response.

    📝 Replicable Template

    1. Question Type – Clarify what kind of CR question it is.
    2. Breakdown of Stimulus – Summarize key claims by each party.
    3. Reasoning Approach – Outline logical steps to reach the answer.
    4. Option-by-Option Analysis – Justify correct choice and systematically rule out others.
    5. Final Answer – Clearly state the correct option.
    6. Key Insights – Highlight transferable reasoning strategies.

    Â