Examkin

Soru

Zorluk: ZorCorrelation vs. Causation

A five-year study of thousands of elderly residents in Maplewood County revealed a strong statistical link between frequent participation in mentally demanding volunteer work and a significantly lower incidence of severe cognitive decline. Based on these findings, public health officials have concluded that engaging in mentally demanding volunteer work helps protect elderly individuals against cognitive deterioration.

The reasoning in the public health officials' argument is most vulnerable to criticism on the grounds that it

  1. overlooks the possibility that elderly individuals who are already experiencing early stages of cognitive deterioration are consequently less likely to participate in mentally demanding volunteer work.Cevap
  2. B
    takes for granted that volunteer work that is not mentally demanding offers absolutely no protection against cognitive deterioration.
  3. C
    treats a condition that is sufficient to reduce the incidence of cognitive deterioration as if it were a necessary condition for preventing cognitive deterioration.
  4. D
    presumes, without providing justification, that mentally demanding volunteer work is the only intellectually stimulating activity available to the elderly residents of Maplewood County.
  5. E
    draws a conclusion about the absolute number of elderly residents experiencing cognitive decline based on evidence concerning the proportion of residents who volunteer.

Cevap

The argument overlooks the possibility that elderly individuals who are already experiencing early stages of cognitive deterioration are consequently less likely to participate in mentally demanding volunteer work.
The argument observes a correlation between a behavior (mentally demanding volunteer work) and a health outcome (lower incidence of cognitive decline) and immediately assumes that the behavior causes the outcome. It fails to consider that the causal relationship might be reversed: people who are already suffering from cognitive decline are likely less capable of, or willing to engage in, mentally demanding work.

Adım Adım Çözüm

1
Analyze the premises and conclusion of the argument.
Premise: There is a statistical link (correlation) between volunteering and lower cognitive decline. Conclusion: Volunteering helps protect against (causes a reduction in) cognitive decline.
Identifying the structural gap between the evidence provided and the claim made is the first step in finding a logical flaw.
2
Identify the primary flaw based on the leap from premise to conclusion.
The argument leaps from a correlation between two phenomena to a definitive causal claim.
Whenever an LSAT argument infers causation solely from correlation, it is vulnerable to alternative explanations for that correlation.
3
Determine the specific type of causal flaw or alternative explanation.
The argument fails to consider reverse causation: rather than A causing B, B might cause A. In this context, cognitive decline (or lack thereof) might cause the volunteering behavior.
To weaken a causal conclusion drawn from a correlation, one effective method is to show that the causal relationship might run in the opposite direction.

Anahtar Kavram

Correlation vs. Causation (Reverse Causality)
Tahmini Süre:2m 0s
Bu soruyu puanla

Konular

Correlation vs. Causation

Bu konudan daha fazla soru