Directions : In each of the following questions a statement is given, followed…

Concept: In statement-conclusion reasoning, a conclusion "follows" only when it can be derived strictly from the words of the statement itself. A conclusion is rejected if it introduces a fact, motive, or judgement (about a person, group, or intention) that the statement never mentions.

Application: The statement says fashion is such intolerable ugliness that it must be changed every six months. The reason given for the frequent change is the public's own intolerance of sameness — people cannot stand one look for long and keep wanting something new. That is exactly the claim that the public is highly susceptible to novelty, so this conclusion is directly supported by the statement's own wording.

Why the other options fail:

• "Fashion designers do not understand the public mind" brings in a judgement about designers' competence — the statement never talks about designers at all, so nothing about their understanding can be concluded.

• An "either–or" reading applies only when two conclusions are complementary opposites of each other, so exactly one of them must be true. Here the two conclusions address different subjects (designer competence vs. public taste), so they are not complementary alternatives, and this framing does not apply.

• A "neither follows" reading would need both conclusions to be undeducible. Since the statement's own reasoning for the frequent change does establish a claim about public taste, at least one conclusion is derivable, so this reading is too strong.

Cross-check: Re-reading the statement confirms it says nothing about designers, only about why change happens so often — which anchors the conclusion about public taste and rules out any conclusion about designer understanding.

Result: Only the conclusion about the public's susceptibility to novelty follows.