PrepTest 148 - Section 2 - Passage 4 - Question 27

Hide analysis

There are some basic conceptual problems hovering about the widespread use of brain scans as pictures of mental activity. ██ ███████ ██ ███████ █████████ ████ ████████ ██ ██████████ █ █████ ███████ █ █████ ████ ██ ███████ ██ █████████ ██ ██ ██████ ██ ██ █ ███ ██ ██████ ██████ ███ █████ ███ █████ ██ ███████████████ ███ ████████████ ████████ ███ ███ ██ ████████████ ██ ██████████ ██ █ █████████████ █████████ ████ ██ ███████████ ███

Intro topic · Conceptual problems with brain scans in psychology

Contrast with use of brain scans in medical diagnosis; that's straightforward.

Premise of using brain scans in psychology · Modular theory of mind

Belief that the mind can be analyzed as separate modules that are localized to different brain regions.

Uttal's critique · Mental processes result from mental activity occuring throughout the brain

This goes against the modular theory of mind. The author endorses Uttal's critique.

Example supporting Uttal's critique · Anger

Anger and the reason for that anger can't be separated. So, mental processes thought to be associated with the amygdala (emotion) and with the prefrontal cortex (reason) can't be cleanly separated.

Question raised by Uttal's critique · Why do distinct parts of brain "light up" in brain scans if modular theory of mind is wrong?

██ ███ ████ ██ ██████████ ████████ █████████ ███████ ███████ ████ ███ ███ ██████ ████ ███ ████ ██ █ █████ ████ ██ ████████ ███ ██████ ██ █ ████████████ ███ ████ ██ ███████ ███████████ ██ █ ███ ██ ███ ████ ██ ██████ ███ ██ █████████ █████ ██ ███ ██████ █████ ██████ ██ █ ███████ ██ █████████ █████████ ███ ████ ██ ████████ ███████ ██ ███ ████████████ ████ ██ ██████ ████ ███ █████ █████ █ ████████ ███████████ ██ ███ ███████ ██████████ ████ █ ██████ ███████████ █████ ███ ███████ ██ ██████████ ████ █████████ █████ ███ ████████ ███████████ ██ ████ ██████████ ████ ███ ███████ ████████████ ███ ██████████ █████████ ██████████ ██ ████ ████████ ███████ █████ ███ ███████████ ██████████ ███ █████████ ████████ ██████████ ██████ ████ ███ █████████ ████ ██ █████████

Answer to question · Brain scans are result of subtraction

With fMRIs (type of brain scan), what lights up is a signal of differential rate of oxygen use. There's a baseline measurement of oxygen used by brain. Then, a measurement when the person is doing a task. The difference in oxygen use is interpreted (incorrectly) as activity associated solely with the task.

Develop answer · Entire brain is active

The entire brain is active in the baseline measurement and in the measurement while doing a task. So, appearance of distinct areas that "light up" gives false impression of localized brain activity.

Passage Style

Critique or debate

27.

Which one of the following ██ ████ █████████ ██ ███ ██████ ██ █████ ████ █████ ██ █████ ████████ ███ █████████ ████████████ ██ █████████ ██ ███ ████ ███ ███████████

Question Type

Analogy (RC)

fMRI scans are typically interpreted as indicating that the parts of the brain that light up during a cognitive task are associated “solely” with that cognitive task. This interpretation can be misleading, because brain scans subtract out the baseline metabolic activity of the brain. There might be other parts of the brain that are active during a cognitive task, but if there’s no change in oxygen use in those parts during the cognitive task, it will appear as if those parts of the brain have nothing to do with the cognitive task.

Let’s look for an answer in which we measure a change in something (oxygen use) during a particular circumstance (during a cognitive task) through a subtractive method, and because only a part of a whole changes (part of a brain has more oxygen use than the rest), we interpret that part as solely associated with that circumstance.

One particular district ██ ███ ████ █████ ███ ███ ███ █████ ██ ██ █████████ █████ ███████ ██ ███ █████ █████ ███ ████ ███ ███████ ████ █████████

It’s not clear how (A) involves subtracting out a baseline measurement in order to measure the level of change in something. Perhaps we could subtract the typical margin of voting from the unusually large margin observed in this case? But even if we interpret (A) in this way, the difference between the typical margin of voting and unusually large margin isn’t being associated with some circumstance — the author doesn’t try to attribute the difference in margin to some activity or other thing that might produce a greater margin of votes in that district.

17%

A store launched █ ████████ ███████████ ████████ ███ ███ ██ ████████ ██ ████████ ████ ██████ ███ ███████ ██ ███ ██████████████ ████████ ████ ███ ██████ █████████

This is the most analogous. There was an increase only during the summer — in other words, if you subtract the baseline level of sales throughout the year before the campaign from the level of sales throughout the year after the campaign, we see additional sales over the previous year only during the summer (just as we see increased oxygen use only in certain parts of the brain during a cognitive task). We interpret this as showing that the campaign affected only the summer shoppers (just as we interpret fMRIs as showing that mental activity is associated only with the parts of the brain showing an increase in oxygen use).

49%

Much more of ███ █████ ██████ ██ ████ ██ ████████████ █████████ ████ ██ ███████████ ██████████ ██ ██ ██ ███ ████████████ ██████ ████ ██ ████████ ████ ████████ ████ ████████ ██████

It’s not clear how (C) involves measurement of a change in something through the subtractive method. We’re not subtracting some baseline level of water use from the water use of agricultural customers. Rather, (C) involves a comparison of water use between agricultural customers and residential customers. In addition, the (C) doesn’t involve an interpretation of the difference in water use as being associated with something else. For example, (C) doesn’t say that the excess water use of agricultural customers must be due to something that affects only agricultural customers.

17%

Internet traffic is ███████ ██████ ███ ███████ ██████ ██ ████ ████████ ███████ ██████ █████ ████ █████ ██████████ ██ █████ ██████ ████ ██ ██████ ██████████

It’s not clear how (D) involves measurement of a change in something through the subtractive method. We’re not subtracting some baseline level of internet traffic from the amount of traffic in the evening. In addition, (D) doesn’t involve an interpretation of the difference in internet traffic as being associated with some specific circumstance. Rather, (D) makes a conclusion about “most” internet traffic during the evening; this isn’t a conclusion about the difference between evening internet traffic and baseline internet traffic.

15%

The cheetah is ███ ███████ ███████ ████ ██████ ████ ███ █████ ██████████ ██ ████ ████████ ██████ ██████ ███████ ████ ██████ ████ ████ ██████████

It’s not clear how (E) involves measurement of a change in something through the subtractive method. We’re not subtracting the cheetah’s baseline level of speed from its top speed, for example.

PrepTest 148 - Section 2 - Passage 4 - Question 27

Difficulty

Analysis

Answer Popularity

Question history

Answer five questions and we'll estimate your score.

Confirm action