Cause–Effect Analysis (Effect → Probable Cause):\nEffect — This year, a majority of final-year students at the management institute opted for Finance specialization.\nWhich is the most probable cause?

Introduction / Context:
Students’ specialization choices often respond to perceived placement outcomes. The task is to identify the cause that best explains a shift toward Finance this year.

Given Data / Assumptions:

• Effect: Majority opt for Finance specialization in the current year.
• We compare plausible drivers: placement outcomes, program availability, recency of launch.

Concept / Approach:
Rational choice under career incentives suggests that strong prior-year placement in Finance will attract more students to Finance the following year.

Step-by-Step Solution:
1) Option (c) directly ties last year’s superior Finance placements to this year’s student choices.2) Option (a) contradicts the effect (if HR did better, HR should draw more students).3) Option (b) is incompatible with “majority” phrasing—if only Finance existed, it would be 100%.4) Option (d) (newly added Finance) explains availability, not dominance.

Verification / Alternative check:
Historical placement trends strongly influence specialization selection; thus (c) is the most cogent cause.

Why Other Options Are Wrong:
(a) and (d) do not align with the observed magnitude; (b) misstates the premise; “None” is unnecessary.

Common Pitfalls:
Confusing supply-side program changes with demand-side career incentives.

Final Answer:
Option (c): Prior-year lucrative Finance placements drove the majority choice.