Although the audience for part one

Answer choices

1. A

   Correct96% picked this

   Most of the viewers who tuned in to the program the second night had also watched

   Why this is right

   As written, we could say that this answer is necessary in order for the author's causal explanation to be plausible. The reason the 2nd night's audience was almost as big as the 1st could only be due to "most of the 1st night's audience liking what they saw" if most of them continued to watch during the 2nd night". Alternatively, we could see if the negation weakens. If we negate this and say, "Most of the people who watched it on the second night did not watch it the first night", then it sounds like Friday was mostly a new set of viewers. This suggests that there must be an Alternate Explanation for the Thu / Fri audience numbers, since the two audiences are mainly different people. (note: it is mathematically relevant that we know the 2nd night had a slightly smaller audience than the 1st night had. If more than 50% of Thursday night's audience had carried over to Friday, then those Thursday-watchers would be more than 50% of Friday's audience too, since Friday's audience was a slightly smaller total.) (other note: the word "most" is wrong on Necessary Assumption, 99% of the time we see it, but it's a totally acceptable word if the conclusion is talking about Most A's).

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

   96%
2. B

   Out of Scope: 2nd night enjoyment2% picked this

   Most of the viewers who tuned in to the program the second

   This argument is only committing to the idea that most viewers liked the program enough on the 1st night. Even if all the viewers hated it the 2nd night, it wouldn't affect the author's argument at all.

   2%
3. C

   Irrelevant Comparison0% picked this

   Most of the viewers who watched the program both nights enjoyed the first night more

   As discussed with (B), the argument only needs to assume that most people liked the first night enough to watch it one more time. It doesn't need to assume any comparison about which night these two-nighters preferred. It wouldn't make any difference whether they liked them the same, preferred night 1, or preferred night 2.

   0%
4. D

   Out of Scope: unable to watch1% picked this

   Many of the viewers who tuned in to the program the first night but not the second night were unable to watch

   This is getting at the idea of "How come some people who tuned in for night 1 didn't tune in for night 2?" The author doesn't need to assume any causal backstory for why some people might have only seen night 1. It doesn't matter whether they were unable or whether they just didn't want to. Their reasons for not watching on night 2 have nothing to do with judging the conclusion.

   1%
5. E

   Out of Scope: like documentaries1% picked this

   Many of the viewers who watched the program the first night were people who generally like

   The author doesn't need to assume that any of the first night's viewers generally like TV documentaries. Whether they generally do or generally don't, they could still like this one, and that's all the author is talking about.

   1%