Question 11

Or why is it not E?

@Goisonberry what would be the unrepresentative sample population here? The samples are people without damage to chromosome number six and people with damage to this chromosome. In terms of (E), the argument is actually NOT presuming that correlation implies causation. Notice the recent studies indicate a correlation between damage and adult schizophrenia, but the conclusion here is "so there is no casual connection between damage to human chromosome number six and adult schizophrenia." Hope that helps! Please let us know if you have any other questions.

I still don't understand your explanation for answer choice E.. Could you please elaborate?

I selected answer choice D. incorrectly and I feel like I run into a few questions like this. Can you please elaborate on how to approach this question? Thanks!

@hallerae and @JCarter, Happy to help! In the stimulus, we're told that there's a correlation between damage to human chromosome number 6 and adult schizophrenia. DHC6 - corr - AS Keep in mind with correlations, there are four possible explanations: 1) DHC6 could be causing AS (A causing B) 2) AS could be causing DHC6 (B causing A) 3) X could be causing both DHC6 and AS (X causing A and B) 4) The correlation is purely coincidence The stimulus then tells us that there are people without DHC6 who develop AS and some people with DCH6 don't develop AS /DHC6 and AS DCH6 and /AS The argument then concludes that there is no causal connection between DHC6 and AS not DHC6 - cause - AS The argument is basically concluding that despite the correlation, there is no causation going on. But what if there are different types of damage to HC6? Couldn't that help explain why there's a correlation between DHC6 and AS but then also some instances in which there is DHC6 but /AS? The question asks us to identify the flaw in the argument. It's hard to see the flaw at first, so let's go to the answers to see what they say. Even if the flaw is hard for us to find, we can still work toward eliminating the four wrong answers that are definitely wrong before confirming why the correct answer is correct. Answer A says that the argument ignores the possibility that some but not all types of damage to HC6 lead to AS. This is the correct answer; the argument mistakenly assumes that there is only one type of damage to HC6. If this isn't the case, then it could still be true that there is a correlation between DHC6 and AS, but there are also instances in which DHC6 is observed with /AS. Answer B is incorrect because the argument is NOT presuming this. One of the premises of the argument is that DCH6 and /AS occur together sometimes, meaning that DCH6 certainly can't be the only cause of AS. Answer C is incorrect because there is no unrepresentative population in the stimulus; the argument simply isn't making a generalization based on a poor sample. Answer D is incorrect because in order to mistake cause for effect, the argument would have to be making a causal claim. However, this isn't what the argument is doing; rather, the argument is making a lack of a causal claim in its conclusion. Answer E is incorrect because the argument is not presuming that correlation implies causation, it's doing the opposite. The argument is taking a correlation and concluding that there is a LACK OF causation, so this answer is out. Does this make sense? Let us know if you have any more questions!

Hi, I have further question on why answer choice E is incorrect. @ravi, you mentioned that E is taking a correlation and implying a lack of causation...but am I wrong to think that, since the author attempted to establish that the correlation was weaker than generally thought, this is proof that the cause and effect relationship isn't there? I understand why A is correct, it would just help me figure out why E is evidently incorrect to prevent me from making this mistake moving forward. Thank you!!!