Statements: The staff of Airport Authorities called off the strike they were…

Concept: In a cause-and-effect item built from two statements, the test is whether one statement's reported action is the stated trigger for the other's, whether both statements are explained by a single, textually shared cause (one identified trigger named in common), or whether each is explained by its own separately stated reason with neither statement driving the other and no single cause named in common between them.

Application:

1. Statement I reports one happening: a strike - which had been held over opposition to privatization - being called off.

2. Statement II reports a separate happening: staff walking out on strike, with its trigger stated directly in the sentence - anticipating a threat to their jobs.

3. Checking direct links: an anticipated job threat would drive staff to start a strike, not end one, so Statement II cannot be read as the stated reason behind Statement I's action; and calling off a strike gives staff no new reason to anticipate a job threat, so Statement I cannot be read as the stated reason behind Statement II's action either.

4. Checking for one shared cause: the passage never names a single identified trigger common to both statements - Statement I's own stated background is opposition to privatization, while Statement II's stated trigger is an anticipated job threat. Even though the two concerns can plausibly be connected in the real world, the passage keeps them as two separately stated reasons rather than pointing both statements back to one named shared cause, so both stand as effects of independent causes rather than of one common cause.

Cross-check / contrast:

• Statement I is the cause of Statement II - rejected, because calling off a strike cannot create a new anticipated threat to jobs.

• Statement II is the cause of Statement I - rejected, because an anticipated job threat explains staff going on strike, not staff ending a strike.

• Both are independent causes - rejected: for 'cause' to fit, the passage would need to go on to describe some further, separately reported development that these two events led to, but the passage ends with the strike being called off and the strike being started; no additional development is described anywhere in the text for either one to have produced.

Result: Both the statements I and II are effects of independent causes.