QUESTION TYPE: Identify the Conclusion
CONCLUSION: We should use double-blind techniques in experiments as much as we can.
REASONING: Double-blind techniques prevent misinterpretations. Misinterpretations are bad.
ANALYSIS: If an argument says “should”, then that sentence is usually the conclusion. The second sentence is evidence: it provides reasons why we should use double blind techniques.
- This is a fact supporting the idea that we should use double-blind techniques. Double blind techniques help prevent such bias.
- CORRECT. This is the first sentence. You can tell it’s the conclusion because it says “should”, and because the second sentence provides support by showing why double-blind experiments are good.
- The argument didn’t actually say this, so this can’t be the conclusion.. (Considering bias isn’t the same as a double blind experiment. You might consider the risk of bias and yet still fall prey to bias.)
- This is evidence supporting the conclusion that scientists should use double-blind techniques. Double-blind techniques help avoid this sort of misinterpretation.
- The argument didn’t actually say double-blind techniques can ensure objectivity. The author merely said they help. In any case, the real conclusion is that scientists should use such techniques.
Want advanced LR strategies? → Try the LR Mastery Seminar
Graeme shows how 170+ scorers do LR in real time. Satisfaction guaranteed!