A large group of hyperactive children whose regular diets included food containing large amounts of additives was obs...
Julie-VJuly 16, 2019
Answer A
Hi LSAT Max!
I was wondering if someone could break down answer A and explain why it's incorrect. I took a cause/effect approach for this question because I thought that the observed cause was that "additives can contribute to behavior problems in hyperactive children" from the effect of comparing the group before and after the change in the diet, and that option A was stating that the cause/effect relationship isn't strong enough to prove that.
After reading over the explanation for answer B, I now understand why it's the right choice. If someone could help point out where I went wrong in my thought process to avoid future mistakes, I would greatly appreciate it. Thank you in advance!
Reply
Create a free account to read and
take part in forum discussions.
The passage tells us that researchers observed a group of hyperactive children whose diets included large amounts of additives, and when their diets were changed the percentage of children with behavior problems dropped from 60% to 30%. The additives thus must contribute to behavior problems n hyperactive children.
What is the flaw in this argument?
(A) tells us that there is no evidence that the reduction in behavior issues was proportionate, but the conclusion never attempts to say that these two variables are directly correlated. The author is merely saying that food additives can contribute to behavior problems, but he never attempts to quantify the impact. Since the conclusion is general enough, the lack of proportionality evidence is irrelevant.
Does this make sense? Let me know if you have any other questions.
