Question

unit test
unit test complete
1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10
read the two passages.
passage 1
violence in video games is unavoidable. more than half of the top video games contain some element of violence. does this lead to violence in the real world? logical people know the answer, and the facts prove it. between 1994 and 2004, video game sales increased by 204 percent. during that same time period, the arrest rate for juveniles committing violent crimes decreased by 63 percent. these facts make it obvious that video games are not a problem.
passage 2
the majority of video games contain violence. children playing these games leads directly to acts of violence. several studies, including a 2014 study by the journal of the american medical association, have shown a correlation between persistent video game use and aggressive behavior. while my own children play video games, they do not play games labeled “mature.” simply avoiding these games and allowing children to play the thousands of other available games is a logical way to avoid a potential problem.
which passage provides the more effective argument, and why?
○ passage 1 is more effective because passage 2 relies on personal anecdotes as the main evidence.
○ passage 1 is more effective because it uses overstatement for extra emphasis, and passage 2 does not.
○ passage 2 is more effective because it contains logical and anecdotal, while passage 1 contains a bandwagon appeal and a false dilemma.
○ passage 2 is more effective because it presents data as empirical evidence, and passage 1 does not.

Explanation:

To determine the more effective argument, we analyze each option:

• Option A: Passage 2 uses personal anecdotes (own children's gaming) as part of its evidence, but also includes empirical data (2014 study). Passage 1 uses data (sales increase, crime decrease). However, Passage 1 has flaws like overstatement ("logical people know") and possible fallacies, while Passage 2 combines logical (study) and anecdotal (personal experience) evidence more effectively. Wait, no—wait, let's re - examine. Wait, the first option says Passage 1 is more effective because Passage 2 relies on personal anecdotes as main evidence. But Passage 2 has a study (empirical) and a personal anecdote. Passage 1 has data but also uses overstatement. Wait, no, let's check the options again.

Wait, the correct option: Let's analyze each option:

Option A: Passage 1 is more effective because Passage 2 relies on personal anecdotes as the main evidence. But Passage 2 has a study from the Journal of the American Medical Association (empirical data) and a personal anecdote. Passage 1 has data (sales and crime rates) but also uses overstatement ("logical people know the answer") and maybe a false dilemma? Wait, no, let's check the other options.

Option B: Passage 1 is more effective because it uses overstatement for extra emphasis, and Passage 2 does not. Overstatement is a flaw, not a strength, so B is wrong.

Option C: Passage 2 is more effective because it contains logical (study) and anecdotal (own children) evidence, while Passage 1 contains a bandwagon appeal ("logical people know") and a false dilemma? Wait, Passage 1's argument: video game sales up, juvenile violent crime down, so video games not a problem. But that's a correlation - causation fallacy, not a bandwagon. But the option says Passage 2 is more effective because it has logical (study) and anecdotal, while Passage 1 has bandwagon and false dilemma. Wait, maybe the intended correct option is C? Wait, no, let's re - read the passages.

Passage 1: "More than half of the top video games... sales increased by 204 percent... arrest rate... decreased by 63 percent... logical people know... these facts make it obvious..."

Passage 2: "Several studies... 2014 study... correlation... While my own children... they do not play... Simply avoiding... is a logical way..."

Now, let's check the options:

Option A: Passage 1 is more effective because Passage 2 relies on personal anecdotes as the main evidence. But Passage 2's main evidence is the study (empirical), with the anecdote as a secondary point. So A is wrong.

Option B: Overstatement is a weakness, so B is wrong.

Option C: Passage 2 is more effective because it contains logical (study) and anecdotal (personal) evidence, while Passage 1 has a bandwagon appeal (implying only illogical people would disagree) and a false dilemma? Or maybe Passage 1's argument has flaws, and Passage 2's combination of study (logical) and personal experience (anecdotal) makes it more effective. So C is correct.

Option D: Passage 2 presents data as empirical evidence (the 2014 study), and Passage 1 does present data (sales, crime rates). So D is wrong.

Wait, I think I made a mistake earlier. Let's re - evaluate. The correct option is C: Passage 2 is more effective because it contains logical and anecdotal, while passage 1 contains a bandwagon appeal and a false dilemma.

Answer:

C. Passage 2 is more effective because it contains logical and anecdotal, while passage 1 contains a bandwagon appeal and a false dilemma.