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

In Statement-and-Conclusion reasoning, a conclusion follows only if it can be deduced from the statement alone, without importing any outside assumption. A conclusion that attributes a motive, an understanding, or a fact that the statement never mentions does not follow, no matter how plausible it sounds.

The statement says fashion is so intolerably unpleasant that it has to be altered every six months. This directly shows that people cannot tolerate any single look for long and keep demanding something new -- exactly the idea that the public is highly susceptible to novelty. The statement, however, says nothing about whether fashion designers understand or misjudge public taste; the frequent change could just as easily come from business strategy, seasonal cycles, or market demand, so blaming it on designers' poor understanding goes beyond what the statement actually supports.

• "Fashion designers do not understand the public mind very well" assumes a cause -- designer misunderstanding -- that the statement never states, so it does not follow.

• "The public by and large is highly susceptible to novelty" is a direct restatement of the constant demand for a new look that the statement describes, so it follows.

• Because exactly one of the two conclusions is supported and the other is not, the "either" and "neither" combinations are both ruled out.

So only the conclusion about the public's appetite for novelty follows from the statement.