LSAT 142 | Section 2 | Logical Reasoning: Q22

LR Question 22 Explanation

QUESTION TEXT: Psychiatrist: In treating first-year students at this…

QUESTION TYPE: Strengthen – Exception

CONCLUSION: First year students could spend less on recreation without increasing depression.

REASONING: The highest and lowest spenders on recreation had similar levels of depression and anxiety.

ANALYSIS: This is a lousy argument. It makes a common LSAT flaw: assuming that a useful factor must lead to better than average final outcomes. (e.g. do antibiotics make you healthier than normal? No, they just restore you to health.)

It’s possible that high spenders on recreation spend a lot of money because they’re prone to depression. They’d normally have high levels of depression, except that their recreation spending brings their depression levels down to average. Whereas people without depression feel no need to spend.

But, we’re trying to strengthen the argument. We can strengthen it by showing situations where the hypothesis is true, or by showing evidence at other universities, etc.

___________

1. This strengthens the argument by showing that the research results hold true at more than one university. (The conclusion was about students at all universities, so additional studies help.)
2. This information suggests that a moderate level of spending on recreation is optimal for reducing anxiety. So those with the highest levels of anxiety presumably could become less anxious by reducing their spending to moderate levels.
3. CORRECT. This weakens the argument. It suggests that increasing spending actually does reduce depression. You might argue that this answer is talking about 40-60 year olds, not college students. But at best that shows this answer has no impact. Whereas all of the wrong answers strengthen the argument.
4. This shows that the data is accurate. That strengthens the argument.
5. This supports the argument. A few students have tried a version of the psychiatrist’s plan, and it seems to have worked.