Question 11·Medium·Inferences
City planners often assume that adding a large, state-of-the-art recreation center will significantly increase residents’ physical activity. A three-year assessment across 18 towns tested two approaches: in 9 towns, officials built a new recreation center but made no changes to sidewalks; in the other 9, officials added short, well-lit walking loops within a 10-minute walk of most homes but built no new centers. At the end of the study, average weekly walking time increased in the towns with new walking loops but showed no measurable change in the towns with new recreation centers. These findings suggest that ______
Which choice most logically completes the text?
For inference/completion questions about findings, restate the comparison and outcome in plain terms, then choose the option that stays within the scope of what was actually measured. Eliminate choices that introduce new topics (preferences, motives, validity critiques) or make broader claims than the evidence warrants.
Hints
Locate the key contrast
Focus on what was added in each set of towns (recreation center vs. walking loops) and what happened to walking time in each group.
Stick to what was measured
The outcome reported is average weekly walking time. Be cautious of choices that make claims about preferences, overall exercise, or the study’s credibility.
Prefer cautious, evidence-matching wording
The best inference will sound like a careful conclusion from these results (often using language like “may”), not a broad generalization.
Ask: does this option go beyond the passage?
If an option claims something the passage never tested (like what residents prefer or whether the study is invalid), it’s not the logical completion.
Step-by-step Explanation
Restate what the study compared
First, summarize the setup in your own words:
- There were 18 towns total.
- In 9 towns, they built a new recreation center and did nothing to sidewalks.
- In the other 9 towns, they added short, well-lit walking loops near most homes and did not build new centers.
So the two approaches being compared are: one large, centralized facility vs. many small walking routes near where people live.
Identify the outcome in each group
Now focus on the outcome:
- In the walking-loop towns, average weekly walking time increased.
- In the recreation-center towns, there was no measurable change in average weekly walking time.
So, in this study, adding nearby walking infrastructure corresponded with more walking, while building a recreation center alone did not change walking time.
Choose the conclusion that matches the evidence (and doesn’t add new claims)
The correct completion should (1) compare the two approaches tested and (2) stay within what was measured (walking time), without introducing new ideas like people’s preferences, broad claims about all physical activity, or attacks on the study’s credibility.
Eliminate unsupported inferences and select the best match
- The choice stating that modest walking routes near where people live may raise weekly walking more than a single new recreation center directly reflects the reported results.
- The other options add unsupported claims (that recreation centers reduce activity, that the study proves a general preference for outdoor exercise, or that the study is too limited to suggest anything).
Therefore, the best completion is:
modest walking routes placed near where people live may raise weekly walking more than a single new recreation center does.