PT139.S1.Q24

SECTION 1 · lr

Question 1 Question 2 Question 3 Question 4 Question 5 Question 6 Question 7 Question 8 Question 9 Question 10 Question 11 Question 12 Question 13 Question 14 Question 15 Question 16 Question 17 Question 18 Question 19 Question 20 Question 21 Question 22 Question 23 Question 24 Question 25

SECTION 2 · rc

PASSAGE 1
Question 1 Question 2 Question 3 Question 4 Question 5 Question 6 Question 7

PASSAGE 2
Question 8 Question 9 Question 10 Question 11 Question 12

PASSAGE 3
Question 13 Question 14 Question 15 Question 16 Question 17 Question 18 Question 19 Question 20

PASSAGE 4
Question 21 Question 22 Question 23 Question 24 Question 25 Question 26 Question 27

SECTION 3 · rc

PASSAGE 1
Question 1 Question 2 Question 3 Question 4 Question 5 Question 6 Question 7

PASSAGE 2
Question 8 Question 9 Question 10 Question 11 Question 12 Question 13 Question 14

PASSAGE 3
Question 15 Question 16 Question 17 Question 18 Question 19 Question 20 Question 21

PASSAGE 4
Question 22 Question 23 Question 24 Question 25 Question 26 Question 27

SECTION 4 · lr

Question 1 Question 2 Question 3 Question 4 Question 5 Question 6 Question 7 Question 8 Question 9 Question 10 Question 11 Question 12 Question 13 Question 14 Question 15 Question 16 Question 17 Question 18 Question 19 Question 20 Question 21 Question 22 Question 23 Question 24 Question 25

PrepTest 139 - Section 1 - Question 24

Question

Explanation

Analytics

Show analysis

In an effort to reduce underage drinking, the Department of Health has been encouraging adolescents to take a pledge not to drink alcohol until they reach the legal age. ████ █████ ██ ██ ███████████ █ ██████ ██ ███████████████████ ███ █████ ████ ████ ███ ██ ███ █████ ██████ ██████ █████ █ ██████ ██ ███████ ████ █████████ ███████ ██████ ███ ███ █████ ██████ ██████ █████ █████ ████ █ ███████

Summarize Argument

The author argues that there’s reason to believe that the government’s plan to reduce underage drinking by having adolescents take a pledge has been successful. This is because a survey of teenagers found that a number of non-drinkers took the pledge, whereas most drinkers didn’t.

Identify and Describe Flaw

This is a correlation-causation fallacy. The argument takes a weak correlation (the fact that some non-drinkers have taken the pledge) and attempts to use it as evidence that the pledge causes people to not drink. This is particularly weak because it’s likely tainted by selection bias, since people who already abstain from drinking would probably be more likely to take the pledge. Moreover, we don’t even know how strong the correlation is because “many who do not drink” is too vague to determine the pledge’s success rate.

Analysis by KevinLin

Show answer

24.

The reasoning in the argument ██ ████ ██████████ ██ █████████ ███████ ███ ████████

bases a conclusion █████ ███ ████████ ██ █ ██████ ██ ██████ ████████ ████████ ██████ ██ █ █████████ ████████ █████ ███ ████████ ██ ████████ ████████

This would describe a premise like “drinking is wrong”, but the argument uses a correlation as support instead. The problem is assuming that this correlation establishes a causal link.

fails to consider ████ ██ ███████████ ██████ ██ ████████ ████████ ████████ █████ ██ ████ █████████

This is irrelevant because the conclusion is simply that this effort seems to be successful. It doesn’t matter if another method could be more successful.

infers from an ███████████ ███████ ████████ ███ ██ █████ ███ ██████████ ████ ████████ ████ ███ ████████ ███ ███ █████ ██ ██████████ ████ ████████

This describes the causation-correlation fallacy found in the argument. The premise only establishes a weak correlation between those who take the pledge and those who abstain from drinking, but assumes that this means the pledge is what’s causing people not to drink.

treats a condition ████ ██ ██████████ ██ ███████ ██ ███████ ██ ██████ ██ ████ █████████ ███ ███ ███████ ██ █████

The argument doesn’t employ conditional reasoning to reach its conclusion. There is no condition that is sufficient to produce an outcome. The conclusion identifies a supposed causal relationship, but is flawed because it only cites a weak correlation as support.

confuses the claim ████ ████ ███████████ ███ ██ ███ █████ ██████ ██████ █████ ███ ██████ ████ ███ █████ ████ ████ ███ ██████ ██████ █████ ███ ██████ ██ ███ █████

These two claims are logically equivalent, so this doesn’t speak to the argument’s flaw. The argument’s problem is citing a weak correlation as evidence for a causal relationship.

Difficulty

Question

83% of people who answer get this correct

This is a moderately difficult question.

CURVE

Score of students with a 50% chance of getting this right

25% 136

147

75% 159

Analysis

Question Stem Tags

Flaw or descriptive weakening

Stimulus Tags

Causal reasoning

Sampling

Answer Popularity

Popularity Avg. score

155

153

83%

165

157

10%

163

Question history

You don't have any history with this question.. yet!