PT57, S3, Q4 - Two randomly selected...

[bradleygirard]

I went back and forth between answer choices (A) and (B) on this one, and maybe someone can help me shed a little light on this. I ultimately chose A, mostly because I found myself arguing against B. The first thought that popped into my head was "what if Jerry Bruckheimer is judging this writing contest? In that case, who cares about stereotypical garbage and lack of creativity?" Without any idea or indication as to what would be used to judge these pieces of writing, I just could not get answer choice (B) to feel comfortable. (A) on the other hand, didn't say anything about what was used to judge, but merely that the incentive offered may have had the opposite of the intended effect on the participants. That to me did, and still does, best resolve the seeming paradox. Can anyone give me a bit of a hand with this?

[ManhattanPrepLSAT1]

There are two groups writing short stories.

One group is told that the best stories will be awarded cash prizes, while the other group is not told of any such prizes.

When the stories are judged, it turns out (against my suspicions) that the ones who were told about the cash prize actually had worse stories. I would have thought that the cash prize would have motivated people to perform their best in order to win. Turns out, those who were told about the prize maybe tried too hard, and produced stories not that great.

The question asks us to find an answer choice that resolves the apparent paradox. Why were the ones who should have been motivated to perform their best writing such inferior stories on average?

(A) says that the cash prize was too small to instill motivation, but if that were all that we knew, why did those that had been told about the prize turn out stories that were WORSE than the people who had not been told about the cash prize. This answer choice does not resolve why the people who had been told about the cash prize performed worse. It merely explains why this group did not perform better.
(B) explains why those who had been told about the cash prize performed worse than those who had not been told about the cash prize. Those who had been told about the cash prize tried too hard and produced stories filled with cliches.
(C) would affect both groups, so could not reconcile the difference.
(D) fails to mention which group had been judged to write stories that were more realistic. This answer choice may be tempting if you hold onto information from answer choice (B) as if it were presented in the stimulus and then assume that realistic is the opposite of stereotypical. But that's a major leap of faith.
(E) would affect both groups, so could not reconcile the difference.

[bradleygirard]

Ah, alright, I see that now. Thanks again for the help.