Logical reasoning PrepTest 124 · Section 3 · Question 5

Incorrect. The argument doesn't reach a determination as to how likely it is that this technology will lead to conclusions, just what's required for that to happen.

Incorrect. The argument isn't pessimistic about these reports—it simply concludes that them being reliably accurate is a requirement for them being useful.

Incorrect. Close, but not quite! The argument concludes that something is required for data collected by brain scans to be useful to scientists, not that it should be viewed with skepticism. While the argument may provide information that makes you think that the conclusions should be viewed with skepticism, the argument itself doesn't reach that conclusion.

Incorrect. There's no indication the brain scans themselves can let researchers know if the reports are accurate, just that the reports being accurate is necessary for the brain scans to be helpful in reaching conclusions.

Correct. Argument or Facts:
Argument

Valid or Flawed:
Flawed

Question Type:
Main Point

Stimulus Summary:
Brain scans show how the brain works, but researchers need to trust self-reported thoughts for it to help them figure out how we think, because otherwise the thoughts and the data won't necessarily match.

Answer Anticipation:
This argument starts with a piece of background information, establishing what brain-scanning technology does. From there, it pivots to what must be true in order for that information to allow conclusion to be drawn about how we think.

Pivot statements are usually conclusions, but they're also frequently premises, so we need to dig in deeper to determine the role here. And there's no clear indication in this statement itself as to its role. It could be that the argument will go on to support why relying on the accuracy here is important in drawing conclusions, but the argument could also go on to use this requirement to reach a conclusion about what must be done during these studies to ensure the requirement is met. So we have to keep reading!

The next statement, however, explains why this information must be reliably accurate. "Otherwise" can be translated as "if that doesn't happen. . ." So to support the necessity of having reliable reports, the author here explores the problems that develop when that information isn't reliable. Since it answers the question as to why that requirement is a requirement, it's a premise.

The main point, therefore, is that for brain scan information to help scientists reach conclusions about how we think, the reports of thoughts must be reliably accurate.

Answer Explanation:
This answer paraphrases the main point we identified during the anticipation. Setting up something as a requirement is the same as setting it up as necessary—so the "only if" language here matches.

Key Takeaway:
Be careful of answers that align with what you, as the reader of the argument, might conclude based on the information in the stimulus! They can be tempting answer choices, but stick to what the author actually concludes.