Much research has been devoted to investigating what motivates consumers to try new products. Previous consumer research suggests that both the price of a new product and the way it is advertised affect consumers' perceptions of the product's performance risk (the possibility that the product will not function as consumers expect and/or will not provide the desired benefits). Some of this research has concluded that a relatively high price will reduce a consumer's perception of the performance risk associated with purchasing a particular product, while other studies have reported that price has little or no effect on perceived performance risk. These conflicting findings may simply be due to the nature of product advertisements: a recent study indicates that the presentation of an advertised message has a marked effect on the relationship between price and perceived performance risk.
Researchers have identified consumers' perception of the credibility of the source of an advertised message-i.e., the manufacturer—as another factor affecting perceived performance risk: one study found that the greater the source credibility, the lower the consumer's perception of the risk of purchasing an advertised new product. However, past research suggests that the relationship between source credibility and perceived performance risk may be more complex: source credibility may interact with price in a subtle way to affect consumers' judgments of the performance risk associated with an advertised product.
Which of the following, if true, would most tend to weaken the conclusions drawn from "some of this research" (the highlighted text)?
In a subsequent study, consumers who were asked to evaluate new products with relatively low prices had the same perception of the products' performance risk as did consumers who were shown the same products priced more expensively.
In a subsequent study, the quality of the advertising for the products that consumers perceived as having a lower performance risk was relatively high, while the quality of the advertising for the products that consumers perceived as having a higher performance risk was relatively poor.
In a subsequent study, the products that consumers perceived as having a lower performance risk were priced higher than the highest priced products in the previous research.
None of the consumers involved in this research had ever before bought products from the manufacturers involved in the research.
Researchers found that the higher the source credibility for a product, the more consumers were willing to pay for it.
题目分析:
文章推断题:以下哪个能削弱高亮的“some of this research”的结论?
原文:这些研究认为高价格会降低ppr(价格和ppr负相关)。
选项分析:
A选项:正确。在之后的研究里,面对相对便宜的产品,消费者表达了和之前面对高价产品相同的态度:无论价格高低,ppr相同,切断了价格和ppr的关系,达到了削弱的效果。
B选项:在之后的研究里,有低ppr的产品的广告的质量相对较高,而有高ppr的产品的广告的质量相对较低:提到广告质量和ppr的关系,与此研究无关。
C选项:在之后的研究里,有低ppr的产品被定价更高,高于之前研究里的最贵产品:无关,无法切断价格和ppr的联系。
D选项:研究涉及到的消费者从来没有在研究涉及到的制造商那里买过东西:和制造商无关。
E选项:研究人员发现信息来源的可信度越高,消费者越愿意买:原文的论证和信息来源可信度无关。
逻辑题,A是对的。C没读清楚,把意思方向看反了,C其实是在重复原文。
这个研究说的是价格越高人们对于这个药品的感知越低,要weaken这个。也就是说价格高低和感知无关
错选C C怎么错了
Some of this research has concluded that a relatively high price will reduce a consumer's perception of the performance risk associated with purchasing a particular product,这里意思是说价格越高,人们对产品可能的风险的感知就越低。要削弱这个conclusion就需要切断价格和感知之间的相关因果关系。
C选项:In a subsequent study, the products that consumers perceived as having a lower performance risk were priced higher than the highest priced products in the previous research. 其实就是在重复之前的结论,感知风险低的产品价格更高,没有对因果的相关性提出质疑。
登录 或 注册 后可以参加讨论
从research的角度出发A答案更加严谨,控制l了product本身这个变量。
错选了C。
A的意思可以weaken,而C是opposite。我的理解。
所以,还是要把题面理解透,特别是有两个相近的答案时。
每段句首提纲挈领的话一定要精读,并在脑海中形成框架。
high price will reduce a consumer's perception of the performance risk
如果低价的商品一样能reduce a consumer's perception of the performance risk,自然起到削弱作用
C:在随后的一项研究中,消费者认为性能风险较低的产品的定价高于先前研究中价格最高的产品。
同想问C为什么不对?
A举了反例,低价格产品也表现出跟高价格产品的一样的顾客购买意愿
a,low price的也和high price的有相同的感觉
昂,看错了,c是风险低价格高,strengthen的
c怎么不对啊
求解:这个削弱的前提是什么是什么类型的推理
那个,着实没看懂问题。什么是前提是什么类型的推理?
就是这道题不是逻辑题中的类似削弱的题么,所以我没找到这道逻辑题的前提和这道题所属类型
登录 或 注册 后可以参加讨论