LSAT 113 – Section 2 – Question 14

LSAT 113 - Section 2 - Question 14

June 2002

You need a full course to see this video. Enroll now and get started in less than a minute.

Request new explanation

Target time: 1:11

This is question data from the 7Sage LSAT Scorer. You can score your LSATs, track your results, and analyze your performance with pretty charts and vital statistics - all with a Free Account ← sign up in less than 10 seconds

Question
QuickView		 Type Tags Answer
Choices		 Curve Question
Difficulty		 Psg/Game/S
Difficulty		 Explanation
PT113 S2 Q14
+LR
Weaken +Weak
Causal Reasoning +CausR
Sampling +Smpl
A
3%
152
B
1%
146
C
2%
152
D
92%
160
E
2%
148
131
138
146
 +Easier 147.106 +SubsectionMedium

In response to office workers’ worries about the health risks associated with using video display terminals (VDTs), researchers asked office workers to estimate both the amount of time they had spent using VDTs and how often they had suffered headaches over the previous year. According to the survey, frequent VDT users suffered from headaches more often than other office workers did, leading researchers to conclude that VDTs cause headaches.

Summarize Argument: Phenomenon-Hypothesis
The researchers hypothesize that video display terminals (VDTs) cause headaches. They base this hypothesis on survey data that showed that office workers who frequently used VDTs experienced headaches more often than other office workers.

Notable Assumptions
The researchers are assuming a causal relationship from the data that shows a correlation between frequent use of VDTs and frequent headaches. This means that they are assuming that the causal relationship is not reversed (in other words, that frequent headaches cause office workers to use VDTs more often). They are also assuming that some outside factor is not causing both the headaches and the frequent VDT use. Additionally, the researchers are assuming that the data from the survey of office workers is accurately reported and representative data.

A
Few of the office workers surveyed participated in regular health programs during the year in question.
(A) does not provide information that weakens the argument. (A) provides information that deals with potential treatment of headaches; the argument concerns the initial cause of headaches.
B
In their study the researchers failed to ask the workers to distinguish between severe migraine headaches and mild headaches.
The severity of headaches does not impact the argument. The conclusion of the argument is that VDTs cause headaches, so it does not matter how severe these headaches are.
C
Previous studies have shown that the glare from VDT screens causes some users to suffer eyestrain.
(C) gives information about another impact of VDTs. It could be the case that VDTs cause eyestrain, which contributes to headaches. But whether or not we assume that eyestrain can lead to headaches, giving information about another result of VDT use does not weaken the argument.
D
Office workers who experienced frequent headaches were more likely than other workers to overestimate how much time they spent using VDTs.
(D) weakens the argument because it provides a reason to doubt the data that the researchers used to form their conclusion. If the survey data is based on overestimation of VDT use, the argument that frequent VDT use causes headaches is weakened.
E
Office workers who regularly used VDTs experienced the same amount of job-related stress as workers who did not use VDTs.
(E) eliminates a potential alternate hypothesis (stress) as a cause for headaches. Controlling for another factor (that could potentially impact headaches) does not weaken the argument that VDTs cause headaches.

Take PrepTest

Review Results

LSAT PrepTest 113 Explanations

Section 1 - Reading Comprehension

Section 2 - Logical Reasoning

Section 3 - Logical Reasoning

Section 4 - Logical Reasoning

Get full LSAT course

Leave a Reply