Examkin

Question

Difficulty: MediumStrengthen

A recent study of a popular mobile game showed that players who purchased the game's premium subscription played for an average of fifteen hours per week. In contrast, players who did not purchase the subscription played for an average of only four hours per week. Based on these findings, the game's developers concluded that the premium subscription directly causes players to engage more deeply with the game.

Which of the following, if true, most strongly supports the developers' conclusion?

  1. Before purchasing the premium subscription, the users in the premium group played the game for an average of exactly four hours per week.Answer
  2. B
    The premium subscription is exclusively offered to users who have already logged into the game for multiple hours each day over a consecutive two-week period.
  3. C
    The percentage of non-subscribing players who play more than fifteen hours a week is significantly larger than the total absolute number of players who purchased the premium subscription.
  4. D
    Most mobile games with premium subscriptions report that their highest-spending players are generally also their most active players.
  5. E
    Players who purchase the premium subscription report feeling more emotionally invested in the game's community than those who do not.

Answer

The option stating that before purchasing the premium subscription, users in the premium group played for an average of exactly four hours per week.
The developers' argument assumes a causal relationship based strictly on a correlation. A common flaw in this type of reasoning is the possibility of reverse causation—the idea that players who already engaged deeply with the game were naturally the ones who decided to purchase the subscription. The correct answer successfully eliminates this alternative explanation by demonstrating that the premium players actually had low engagement levels prior to their purchase. By ruling out the possibility that the heavy playtime preceded the subscription, the option heavily strengthens the claim that the subscription itself caused the increase in playtime.

Step-by-Step Solution

1
Identify the argument's premises and main conclusion.
Premise: Premium subscribers play 15 hours/week, non-subscribers play 4 hours/week. Conclusion: The subscription causes deeper engagement.
Deconstructing the argument is necessary to spot the logical gap.
2
Identify the logical flaw or gap in the reasoning.
The developers assume causation from a simple correlation. They ignore the possibility of reverse causation (i.e., that people who already play a lot are simply the ones most likely to buy a subscription).
Strengthen questions often require identifying a vulnerability and finding an answer choice that patches it.
3
Evaluate the options to find one that defends against this vulnerability.
The correct option demonstrates that premium subscribers were not already playing 15 hours a week before they bought the subscription.
Eliminating an alternative explanation (reverse causation) is one of the most robust ways to strengthen a causal conclusion on the LSAT.

Key Concept

Strengthening Causal Arguments by Ruling Out Alternate Causes (Reverse Causation)
Estimated Time:1m 30s
Rate this question

Topics

Strengthen

More questions from this topic