PrepTest 115
[lcid:3559] Prep Test 115 LSAT — Logical Reasoning — S4
Logical reasoning
Question prompt
A study comparing infant
Remaining source text redacted.
Why the credited answer is right
Credited answer: E
The notes below walk through why it fits the stem and how to eliminate the rest.
Question Type
Weaken Questions
Answer choices
-
ABabies' muscular coordination is Remaining source text redacted.
Why choice A is not credited
Incorrect. This answer brings up a way in which stimulation isn't related to development, so, if anything, it strengthens the argument. -
BBabies with less stimulating Remaining source text redacted.
Why choice B is not credited
Incorrect. This answer aligns with the argument's contention that less stimulation will result in more sleep, so it doesn't undercut the argument. -
CStudies showed no correlation Remaining source text redacted.
Why choice C is not credited
Incorrect. The conclusion's recommendation is limited to what should be done with babies, so this answer about 3+yo is out of scope. -
DThe babies who had Remaining source text redacted.
Why choice D is not credited
Incorrect. This answer establishes that receiving less stimulation won't negatively affect a baby's weight development, thus aligning with the argument. -
EThe stimulation that babies Remaining source text redacted.
Why choice E matches the stem
Correct. Argument or Facts:
Argument
Valid or Flawed:
Flawed
Question Type:
Weaken
Stimulus Summary:
Study - More stimulation results in less sleep for infants
Sleep is important for infant development
Recommendation - Parents should reduce the stimulation they give their babies
Answer Anticipation:
This argument has a conclusion that falls into a common category—a recommendation. When a recommendation is made in a conclusion, the premises need to establish the criteria by which such a recommendation can be made, and information establishing that the recommended course of action will meet that criteria.
Here, the criteria is established—aiding a child's development. And it is established that sleep is an important factor in such development. However, the conclusion doesn't state simply that parents should ensure their children get more sleep. It says they should do so by reducing the amount of stimulation they receive.
Since the recommendation here is to replace one thing with another, it needs to be established that, on balance, that will result in maximizing their development. The argument, however, fails to establish that reducing stimulation won't itself hurt development. Since there's no guarantee that shifting from one activity to another won't overall result in a worse outcome, this argument is flawed.
As such, any answer that suggests stimulation aids in an infant's development will weaken this argument.
Answer Explanation:
This answer establishes stimulation as a factor in a baby's development, so reducing it to increase sleep may end up hurting overall development. By suggesting that the recommended course of action might work against the goal, this answer weakens the argument.
Key Takeaway:
When an argument recommends a course of action, be sure that it establishes a goal/criteria for deciding on an action, and then fully establishes that the recommendation meets that criteria.
What this tests
Discussion
No threads yet—be the first to ask a question or share an approach.