PrepTest 126

Incorrect. This answer is too weak to have an impact on the argument on two fronts. First, it's about only 2 members of each group, and they could be outliers. Second, the support group attendees lived longer" than the non—attendees—that could be minutes longer.

Incorrect. We can infer that it's not for disease T since the sample is of people receiving the standard treatment, but only half ended up in a support group. Therefore, this answer is out of scope.

Correct. Argument or Facts:
Argument

Valid or Flawed:
Flawed

Question Type:
Weaken

Stimulus Summary:
Sample — 86 patients with disease T receiving the standard treatment
Group 1 — Attended weekly support group meetings
Group 2 — Didn't attend such meetings
Results — 10 years later, almost everyone from both groups had died
Conclusion — Support group meetings don't help disease T patients live longer

Answer Anticipation:
This argument starts with a study, so we should start by considering a sampling flaw, and a correlation/causation flaw.

For the sampling flaw, the study was a little small at 86 members, but it's not so small that we should expect the correct answer to highlight that—that's generally reserved for a sample of 10 or fewer. The sample was of people suffering from disease T and receiving the standard treatment—the conclusion is about sufferers of disease T generally, so maybe there's a small issue in jumping from those who receive the standard treatment and the entire group, but it wouldn't be the standard treatment if it weren't common to the group, so there's not much there. Finally, there's no indication that the group wasn't split randomly between those attending the meetings and those not, so it's unlikely that the correct answer will deal with that. There's not much here to anticipate, so let's move on.

What about the correlation/causation flaw? Well, the conclusion is that something didn't have an effect, so it's not causal. Another dead end.

Are there any other elements that suggest specific flaws? There is a timeline—the study looked at patients 10 years later. Does that line up with the conclusion? It does not—the conclusion isn't that the support groups don't help people survive a decade, it's that they don't help people live longer. There's enough range in a 10—year period for one group to have outlived the other while still dying by the time the study measured the mortality rate. Any answer suggesting that group 1 lived longer within that 10—year period than group 2 will, therefore, weaken this argument.

(There is another shift between the premises and conclusion—the study was of weekly support groups, but the conclusion is about all support groups. The answer could address that support groups that meet more/less frequently might have an impact on longevity, but it seems like if support groups were going to have an impact, then weekly ones should have moved the needle somewhat, so this is another answer that's possible but less likely.)

Answer Explanation:
This answer highlights that within the 10—year period, the support group members lived longer than the other group. So while support groups might not extend people's lives past the 10—year mark, it does extend life relative to those who don't attend the meetings. This answer thus weakens the argument by suggesting a causal relationship between the meetings and longevity.

Key Takeaway:
Always pay attention to timelines when presented. They're so frequently associated with the correct answer that it's almost an expectation.

Incorrect. First, this answer represents what only some physicians believe. Second, it doesn't indicate whether they're correct. Third, there's no indication what faith in standard treatment would do to the effectiveness of treatment. Fourth, less faith" is a relative term, and the impact could be minimal. Fifth, if anything, giving people less faith in standard treatment would prevent them from going through it, thus likely resulting in them living shorter lives, which aligns with the argument.

Incorrect. The conclusion isn't about the worthwhileness of support groups, but rather whether they help with longevity. Since there's no connection established between coping with a disease and longevity, this answer is out of scope.