Smithtown University's fund-raisers succeeded in getting donations from 80 percent of the potential donors they contacted. This success rate, exceptionally high for university fund-raisers, does not indicate that they were doing a good job. On the contrary, since the people most likely to donate are those who have donated in the past, good fund-raisers constantly try less-likely prospects in an effort to expand the donor base. The high success rate shows insufficient canvassing effort.
Which of the following, if true, provides more support for the argument?
Smithtown University's fund-raisers were successful in their contacts with potential donors who had never given before about as frequently as were fund-raisers for other universities in their contacts with such people.
This year the average size of the donations to Smithtown University from new donors when the university's fund-raisers had contacted was larger than the average size of donations from donors who had given to the university before.
This year most of the donations that came to Smithtown University from people who had previously donated to it were made without the university's fund-raisers having made any contact with the donors.
The majority of the donations that fund-raisers succeeded in getting for Smithtown University this year were from donors who had never given to the university before.
More than half of the money raised by Smithtown University's fund-raisers came from donors who had never previously donated to the university.
Canvass V. 游说 【不是画布的意思,谢谢】
相关因果
因:游说成功率(100个人里有80个捐了款)异常的高
果:游说非常努力
题目说需要削弱
A:Smithtown的募捐者联系这些潜在捐款人的频率和其他学校的没什么区别【已知历史上的对捐款人募捐通常不需要什么努力;同时发现面对新的潜在捐款人,不同学校间大家付出努力又差不多。所以确实在游说方面,其实没有什么“特别努力”的地方。削弱了结论,CQ1,原因推不出结果】
B:今年,那些被联系过的捐款人的平均捐款额 比 那些历史捐款人的平均捐款额 要高。【加强了结论,不选】
C:今年,大部分捐款来自于历史上的捐款人(而这些捐款人没有被募捐人联系过)【这是原文信息又写了一遍,文中已经说过了历史捐款人的再次募捐不需要学校的募捐人付出什么努力。不选】
D:今年,大部分捐款来自那些历史上从没捐款过的人【加强了结论,不选】
E:超过半数的捐款额,来自那些历史上从没捐款过的人【加强了结论,不选】
登录 或 注册 后可以参加讨论