Explanation:
if 2 shapes are truly congruent, then after some turning and rotating they can cover each other up completely with no spot being uncovered, nothing "hangs over".
now, if one shape is a larger version of the other, then this is violated, of course. they cannot be congruent.
in our case here the " version is made 4 times as large as the original. so, no congruence, abd the 3rd answer option is already disqualified.
a dilation scale factor 4 means the new parallelogram is the old parallelogram multiplied by 4.
A"B"C"D" is the new one.
let's use point A (3, 3) as example.
since the center of the dilation is the origin, the scaling simply multiplied the coordinates by the scaling factor.
A' = A × 4 = (3×4, 3×4) = (12, 12)
the following reflection across the y-axis keeps the y- values.
so, A" has the same y-value as A' = 12.
therefore, the 1st and the 4th answer options are wrong too.
the remaining (and correct) answer option is the 2nd.
just to check : all coordinates are multiplied by 4 due to the dilation, and the x-values are +/- reversed due to the reflection across the y-axis (and the y- values are kept the same).
(3, 3) -> (12, 12) -> (-12, 12)
(-1, 3) -> (-4, 12) -> (4, 12)
(-4, 1) -> (-16, 4) -> (16, 4)
(0, 1) -> (0, 4) -> (0, 4)
and again, a blown up version of the original shape has still the same proportions (so they are similar) but not the same size (no congruence).