Mystery stories often feature a brilliant

Answer choices

1. A

   Too Strong: most7% picked this

   Most mystery stories feature a brilliant detective who solves the mystery presented

   The first sentence only says these stories often feature a brilliant detective. Most means more than 50% of the time. Often doesn't have a precise minimum, but it can be lower than 1/2. You can say "I often go to church on Sunday", even if you'd be lying to say "I go to church on most Sundays".

   7%
2. B

   Too Strong: readers often solve9% picked this

   Mystery readers often solve the mystery in a story simply by spotting the mistakes in the reasoning of the detective’s

   The information never said that any readers ever solve the mystery, only that they "have a chance to solve" it. Enough information is provided. In addition, to "often solve", it's being suggested by the paragraph that a reader would solve the mystery by just interpreting the clues more like the brilliant detective does (i.e. accurately). There's nothing suggesting that they solve the mystery simply by spotting mistakes.

   9%
3. C

   Correct64% picked this

   Some mystery stories give readers enough clues to infer the correct solution

   Why this is right

   This reconciles the 2nd and 3rd sentences, whose relationship is indicated by "Thus". 2nd: Clues are presented in the story and Thus, 3rd: the author's strategy gives readers a chance to solve the mystery The last sentence made it sound like with some of these detective stories, "the clues are there, reader. You have a chance to solve the mystery. Can you be as clever as the detective, or will we distract you with the dull companion's bad leads?" This answer basically says, "at least one mystery novel is solvable for the reader".

   Skill tested: Most Supported · how this choice captures the argument's function is the move to repeat next time.

   64%
4. D

   Too Strong4% picked this

   The actions of the brilliant detective in a mystery story rarely divert readers from the actions of

   Too Strong: rarely Out of Scope: detective diverts We don't know anything about how frequently the actions of the detective do or don't divert readers from the actions of the companion. We only heard that the poor-guessing of the dull companion often diverts readers from the correct solution to the mystery.

   4%
5. E

   Out of Scope16% picked this

   The detective’s dull companion in a mystery story generally uncovers the misleading clues that divert readers from

   Out of Scope: uncovers misleading clues Too Strong: generally We aren't given any information about who uncovers clues. We only hear that "clues are presented in the story". The author may choose to present clues a multitude of ways and possibly none of them involve the detective or the companion uncovering them. Furthermore, it was never suggested that any of these clues were inherently "misleading clues". It was just said that the companion's inaccurate guesses as to the significance of these clues diverted readers from the correct solution. The clues can't be misleading if they are also allowing the detective and reader to arrive at the correct solution.

   16%