Logical reasoning PrepTest 112 · Section 4 · Question 17

Question prompt

Researchers have found that Remaining source text redacted.
Why the credited answer is right

Credited answer: C

The notes below walk through why it fits the stem and how to eliminate the rest.

Argument or Facts

Argument

Valid or Flawed

Flawed

Question Type

Cause & Effect / Weaken Questions

Stimulus Summary

Research - Those who drink 5+ cups of coffee/day have 2.5x risk of heart disease (age and smoking controlled)
Precaution - Limit coffee to 2 cups/day

Answer Anticipation

When you see a study or research, you should always start by seeing if it brings up a correlation, as most results of studies will show that two things are associated with each other. Here, that’s the case - the research has shown that drinking 5+ cups of coffee/day is associated with a 2.5x increase in risk of heart disease.
When the premises of an argument present a correlation, we should check to see if the argument has a Correlation/Causation flaw. Here, the conclusion is a precaution taken by the researchers - they’re limiting their coffee consumption to 2 cups/day. Why are they doing this? Presumably, to decrease their heart disease risk, which means they’re assuming that the coffee consumption was the cause of the increased risk.
As such, this argument does feature a Correlation/Causation flaw. Since we’re trying to find an answer suggesting that the precaution won’t work, we’re looking to weaken that relationship, so we can look for a common answer in this question type with that flaw:
Identify an alternative cause (though remember that the argument already accounted for age and smoking, so those alternative causes will be wrong if they show up) Counterexamples (cause without effect, or vice versa; though this is unlikely in this question because it’s about risk of heart disease, implying not everyone with the cause will see the effect) Reversed causality (though it doesn’t make all that much sense that people who have heart disease would start drinking a ton of coffee)

Answer choices

  1. A
    The study found that Remaining source text redacted.
    Why choice A is not credited
    This answer suggests that the danger starts to ramp up at 3 cups, so stopping at 2 sounds like a good move.
  2. B
    Per capita coffee consumption Remaining source text redacted.
    Why choice B is not credited
    How many people will be at risk for heart disease because of their coffee consumption doesn’t affect the level at which it starts to become dangerous, making this answer out of scope.
  3. C
    The study did not Remaining source text redacted.
    Why choice C matches the stem
    This answer brings up an alternative cause, thus weakening the assumed causal connection between coffee consumption and heart disease. If stress is a cause of both coffee consumption and heart disease, then it’s not the coffee that’s causing the increased risk, but rather the stress. As such, drinking less coffee wouldn’t affect heart disease risk, and the precaution wouldn’t have the desired effect.
  4. D
    Subsequent studies have consistently Remaining source text redacted.
    Why choice D is not credited
    The research already accounted for smoking (“after corrections are made for...smoking habits), so this answer choice suggesting smoking as an alternative cause doesn’t affect the argument.
  5. E
    Subsequent studies have shown Remaining source text redacted.
    Why choice E is not credited
    If anything, by explaining how the causality works, this answer strengthens the argument.

What this tests

Question analytics

Based on historical answer selection rates for this question.

Answer choice distribution

  1. A 9%
  2. B 5%
  3. C Credited 78%
  4. D 6%
  5. E 3%

Deeper help

Ask follow-ups on any step

Optional AI tutor mode will let you interrogate assumptions, compare answers, and drill weak patterns without leaving the page.

Human-written explanations stay primary; AI is an add-on when you want it.

Discussion

  • Explanation 4 replies

    Started by avif

View all discussions Start a discussion