Statement–Argument (Ban Pre-Election Opinion Polls): Statement: Should opinion polls predicting election outcomes be banned in India? Arguments: I) Yes, such polls may influence voters and affect outcomes. II) No, such polls are conducted worldwide. Choose which argument is strong.

Introduction / Context:
The crux is whether polls materially distort voter behaviour (bandwagon/underdog effects) warranting time-bound restrictions. Appeals to common practice elsewhere are not, by themselves, decisive.

Given Data / Assumptions:

• Argument I: Identifies a plausible mechanism—polls can shape perceptions of viability and momentum, influencing strategic voting.
• Argument II: “Done worldwide” is an appeal to prevalence, not a reason that addresses local harms or safeguards.

Concept / Approach:
Strong arguments target outcome effects and regulatory purpose. I does that; II lacks policy reasoning.

Step-by-Step Solution:
Test I: Voter psychology channels exist ⇒ strong (though extent is empirical).Test II: Mere global practice ≠ justification ⇒ weak.

Verification / Alternative check:
Many jurisdictions prefer blackout periods over blanket bans—this nuance still supports I’s core concern.

Why Other Options Are Wrong:
“Either/neither” misclassifies relative strength; “only II” is non-responsive.

Common Pitfalls:
Confusing descriptive prevalence with normative justification.

Final Answer:
if only Argument I is strong.