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

Target time: 1:00

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 ← sign up in less than 10 seconds

Question
QuickView
Choices
Curve Question
Difficulty
Psg/Game/S
Difficulty
Explanation
PT11 S4 Q12
+LR
Method of reasoning or descriptive +Method
A
4%
159
B
3%
157
C
4%
156
D
79%
165
E
10%
160
138
149
160
+Medium 149.098 +SubsectionMedium
This page shows a recording of a live class. We're working hard to create our standard, concise explanation videos for the questions in this PrepTest. Thank you for your patience!

We can identify this question as Method of Reasoning because of the question stem: “In countering the original conclusion the reasoning above uses which one of the following techniques?”

When dealing with a Method of Reasoning question, we know we are looking for an answer choice that correctly describes the structure of our entire argument. Our correct answer is going to fit the argument exactly. Our wrong answer choices likely explain argument structures we are familiar with, but that simply don’t apply to the specific question we are looking at. Knowing what the right and wrong answers are going to do, we can jump into the stimulus.

The argument begins by telling us about a correlation; those who play bridge tend to have better short-term memories than those who do not play bridge. We know right away that the presence of two qualities at the same time does not mean they caused each other. The argument proceeds by affirming this exactly. We are told that although this correlation was previously concluded to indicate a causal relationship meaning bridge causes better short-term memory, it is just as likely that having a better short-term memory makes the game of bridge more intriguing to that particular group of people.

Ultimately, our stimulus outlines an incorrect conclusion on the basis of a correlation and then goes on to explain another possible interpretation from the evidence. Knowing this, we can jump into answer choice elimination.

Answer Choice (A) If our stimulus were challenging the representativeness of the study included, we would expect the argument to bring up the number of people involved in these different groups or how well these groups represent the rest of the population. Without this information we can eliminate answer choice A.

Answer Choice (B) This answer accuses our stimulus of drawing a conclusion about what is considered “appropriate therapy.” Without this emphasis in the text we can eliminate B.

Answer Choice (C) Our stimulus does not depend on some sort of misunderstanding of the facts involved in the scenario. Thus, we can nix answer choice C.

Correct Answer Choice (D) This is exactly what we are looking for! This is the only answer choice that identifies the alternative possible explanations for the facts presented in the argument.

Answer Choice (E) This answer choice is tricky. But our stimulus does not go quite far enough to say it is describing a flaw of the previous conclusion. Because our stimulus only points out the existence of another possible conclusion we cannot confirm answer choice E.