Which comparison best explains how the authors develop their claims in "The Automation Paradox" and "Heads Up, Humans"?

Question

• In "The Automation Paradox," Bessen primarily uses anecdotes to show how computers have reduced the workforce. In "Heads Up, Humans", Alarcón primarily uses graphs and charts to show how computers have benefited workers.
In "The Automation Paradox," Bessen primarily uses graphs and charts to show how computers have not changed employment levels. In "Heads Up, Humans, Alarcón primarily uses opinions to show how computers have harmed workers.
In "The Automation Paradox," Bessen primarily uses statistics to show how computers have increased blue-collar jobs. In "Heads Up, Humans,, Alarcón primarily uses anecdotes to show how computers have lowered low-skill employment in many professions.
In "The Automation Paradox"" Bessen primarily uses examples to show how computers have improved the workplace. In "Heads Up, Humans,, Alarcón primarily uses statistics to show how computers have increased unemployment in many professions.

Answer 1

The first comparison best explains how the authors develop their claims in "The Automation Paradox" and "Heads Up, Humans."

In "The Automation Paradox," Bessen uses anecdotes to illustrate how computers have impacted the workforce, specifically noting reductions in employment. In contrast, in "Heads Up, Humans," Alarcón employs graphs and charts to highlight how computers can positively benefit workers. This comparison correctly addresses the different methods and focuses of each author regarding the impact of automation and technology on employment.