Cause & Effect — Identify the Relationship: I. The police set up several road check-posts and enhanced night patrolling. II. The police arrested and convicted several burglars during the last month. Which option best captures the causal link between I and II?

Introduction / Context:We compare police preventive measures with crime control outcomes. The question is whether proactive policing led to arrests/convictions.

Given Data / Assumptions:

• I: More checkpoints and night patrols were instituted.
• II: Several burglars were arrested and convicted in the last month.
• Assume operational effectiveness: visibility checks deter/interrupt crimes and aid apprehension.

Concept / Approach:Enhanced enforcement commonly leads to higher detection and arrests, which in turn enable prosecutions and convictions. Thus I→II is the natural causal chain.

Step-by-Step Solution:

Verification / Alternative check:Could II→I? Sometimes, a spike in crimes prompts measures; however, the stem explicitly couples measures with recent arrests/convictions, and the cleaner reading is measures aiding outcomes.

Why Other Options Are Wrong:Independence (c/d) ignores the policing → results pipeline; unrelated (e) is implausible.

Common Pitfalls:Confusing “trigger for measures” with “effect of measures.” Even if crimes triggered I, the arrests are still an effect of I.

Final Answer:Option A: Statement I is the cause and statement II is its effect.