In the question, a statement is given followed by four inferences. You must consider the statement to be true even if it seems to be at variance from commonly known facts and then decide which inference(s) can be drawn from the given statement.
Statement: All research papers published by University X faculty must undergo peer review, unless they are commissioned works.
Inference:
I. If a research paper from University X faculty did not undergo peer review, it must be a commissioned work.
II. Commissioned works from University X faculty are never peer-reviewed.
III. Some peer-reviewed research papers are not from University X faculty.
IV. No non-commissioned research paper published by University X faculty can avoid peer review.
Show answer & explanation
Correct answer: B
Explanation
Based on the statement, for any research paper published by University X faculty:
• If a paper is non-commissioned, it must undergo peer review.
Let us analyze each inference:
• Inference I: By contrapositive logic, if a paper published by University X did not undergo peer review, it must be an exception (i.e., a commissioned work). Hence, Inference I follows.
• Inference II: The statement only exempts commissioned works from mandatory peer review; it does not forbid them from being peer-reviewed. Hence, Inference II does not follow.
• Inference III: The statement provides no information about papers published outside University X. Hence, Inference III does not follow.
• Inference IV: Since all non-commissioned papers must undergo peer review, none of them can avoid it. Hence, Inference IV follows.
Thus, only I and IV follow.