Examkin

Question

Difficulty: HardMethod of Reasoning

Cognitive Scientist: Proponents of the cognitive reserve hypothesis contend that engaging in complex mental activities in late adulthood directly prevents neurodegeneration. To support this, they cite studies showing that elderly individuals who regularly solve complex puzzles or learn foreign languages exhibit significantly lower rates of cortical atrophy. However, this argument overlooks an alternative explanation: individuals with higher innate neural plasticity are both naturally drawn to intellectually demanding tasks and inherently resistant to age-related tissue degradation. Thus, the observed correlation does not establish that the mental activities themselves confer protection against neurodegeneration.

Which of the following most accurately describes the method of reasoning employed by the cognitive scientist?

  1. A
    Denying the validity of the empirical data cited by the proponents regarding the rates of cortical atrophy in elderly populations
  2. B
    Demonstrating that the proponents' causal claim leads to contradictory empirical implications when applied to analogous neurological disorders
  3. Undermining a causal inference by proposing a common underlying factor that accounts for both the purported cause and the observed effectAnswer
  4. D
    Inferring that because innate neural plasticity is necessary for cognitive resilience, participating in mental tasks cannot be sufficient to slow cognitive decline
  5. E
    Concluding that lifestyle factors and intellectual habits never exert any measurable influence on neurological health in aging adults

Answer

The cognitive scientist's argument proceeds by undermining a causal inference by proposing a common underlying factor that accounts for both the purported cause and the observed effect.
The correct answer accurately characterizes the author's logical strategy: the proponents observe a correlation between mental activity (purported cause) and reduced atrophy (observed effect) and conclude that the former causes the latter. The author counters by introducing a third variable—innate neural plasticity—that causes both phenomena, thereby demonstrating that the observed correlation does not prove the proponents' causal claim.

Step-by-Step Solution

1
Analyze the opponent's argument and the author's main conclusion.
Proponents infer a causal link (mental activities prevent neurodegeneration) from an observed correlation (puzzle-solving correlates with lower atrophy). The author concludes that this correlation does not prove the causal link.
Identifying the conclusion and opposing position is the first step in analyzing the method of reasoning.
2
Evaluate the evidence and mechanism introduced by the author.
The author introduces a third factor—innate neural plasticity—which simultaneously explains why certain individuals engage in mental tasks and why those same individuals experience less atrophy.
This establishes the logical function of the author's counter-premise as an alternative causal explanation (common cause / confounder).
3
Match the argument's technique to the abstract structural description.
The technique is a classic refutation of a causal claim by demonstrating that a common underlying cause can account for both the supposed cause and the effect.
The correct description must accurately reflect this causal critique without adding unstated logical fallacies or extreme claims.

Key Concept

Method of Reasoning: Causal Refutation via Common Underlying Cause
Estimated Time:1m 30s
Rate this question

Topics

Method of Reasoning

More questions from this topic