Examkin

Question

Difficulty: MediumApplying the Negation Technique

Sociologist: In a recent study of office workers, those who independently opted to take frequent, short breaks throughout the workday reported significantly higher levels of job satisfaction than those who took a single, longer break. Therefore, to improve overall employee morale, corporate management should implement a policy mandating that all employees take frequent short breaks rather than a single long one.

Which one of the following is an assumption required by the sociologist's argument?

  1. The higher job satisfaction reported by employees who take frequent short breaks does not depend primarily on the autonomy they exercise in choosing their own break schedules.Answer
  2. B
    Any corporate policy that increases the frequency of employee breaks will inevitably lead to an increase in overall employee morale.
  3. C
    Employees who currently do not take frequent short breaks cannot possibly experience high levels of job satisfaction.
  4. D
    Employees who currently take a single long break do so because their specific job tasks require prolonged periods of uninterrupted focus.
  5. E
    Implementing a mandate for frequent short breaks will not result in a decline in overall corporate productivity.

Answer

The correct assumption is that the reported job satisfaction does not depend primarily on the autonomy employees have in choosing their break schedules.
The correct answer bridges the critical gap between the premise (employees 'independently opted' for short breaks) and the conclusion (management 'mandating' short breaks). By applying the Negation Technique, we can test this: if the high satisfaction WAS primarily due to the autonomy of choosing the breaks, then forcing employees to take them would eliminate that autonomy, meaning morale would not improve. Because negating this statement destroys the argument, it is a logically required assumption.

Step-by-Step Solution

1
Identify the core components of the argument.
Premise: Workers who voluntarily took frequent short breaks had higher job satisfaction. Conclusion: Mandating frequent short breaks will improve overall morale.
Deconstructing the argument is necessary to spot the logical leap.
2
Locate the logical gap or shift in scope.
The premise involves a behavior that was 'independently opted' for (voluntary), while the conclusion proposes 'mandating' that behavior (involuntary).
LSAT arguments frequently contain subtle shifts in terminology that indicate the underlying assumption.
3
Formulate a necessary assumption to bridge this gap.
The argument assumes that the positive effects of the breaks will survive the transition from voluntary to mandatory.
If the benefit is tied to the choice rather than the breaks themselves, the mandate will fail.
4
Apply the Negation Technique to the correct option to verify.
Negating the correct option yields: 'Satisfaction DOES depend primarily on autonomy.' If true, a mandate (which removes autonomy) would not improve morale, destroying the conclusion.
The Negation Technique is the definitive test for a Necessary Assumption.

Key Concept

Applying the Negation Technique to test Necessary Assumptions involving a shift from voluntary action to forced policy.
Rate this question

Topics

Applying the Negation Technique

More questions from this topic