LSAT 122 – Section 1 – Question 12

LSAT 122 - Section 1 - Question 12

June 2006

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

Request new explanation

Target time: 1:21

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
PT122 S1 Q12
+LR
+Exp
Strengthen +Streng
Causal Reasoning +CausR
Sampling +Smpl
A
0%
152
B
0%
147
C
14%
158
D
11%
158
E
75%
163
131
146
161
 +Medium 146.495 +SubsectionMedium

Poor nutrition is at the root of the violent behavior of many young offenders. Researchers observed that in a certain institution for young offenders, the violent inmates among them consistently chose, from the food available, those items that were low in nutrients. In a subsequent experiment, some of the violent inmates were placed on a diet high in nutrients. There was a steady improvement in their behavior over the four months of the experiment. These results confirm the link between poor nutrition and violent behavior.

Summarize Argument: Phenomenon-Hypothesis
The author hypothesizes that poor nutrition causes violent behavior in young offenders. This is based on two studies: one showed that violent inmates tend to choose low-nutrient foods, and the second showed that when given a high-nutrient diet, violent inmates’ behavior improved. This informs the author’s sub-conclusion that the studies show a connection between violence and poor nutrition.

Notable Assumptions
The author assumes causation from correlation. Specifically, the author assumes that poor nutrition causes violent behavior, as opposed to some other factor the researchers did not account for.

A
Some of the violent inmates who took part in the experiment had committed a large number of violent crimes.
This does not affect the argument. The amount of violent crime each violent inmate committed does not change anything for the argument—they all had, at some point, committed a violent crime that led to their incarceration.
B
Dietary changes are easier and cheaper to implement than any other type of reform program in institutions for young offenders.
This does not affect the argument, which is not about whether dietary changes should be implemented in these institutions but about how poor nutrition causes violent behavior.
C
Many young offenders have reported that they had consumed a low-nutrient food sometime in the days before they committed a violent crime.
This does not affect the argument, which is not about whether a single low-nutrient food can influence behavior, but about whether a diet lacking nutrition can influence behavior. There is no reason to believe eating a low-nutrient food led the offender to commit the crime.
D
A further study investigated young offenders who chose a high-nutrient diet on their own and found that many of them were nonviolent.
(D) does not tell us enough for it to have an impact. For example, the word “many” tells us little about how many of the inmates were nonviolent. We also don’t know about the sample—maybe only 5 out of hundreds of inmates chose the healthy diet, and 3 of them were nonviolent.
E
The violent inmates in the institution who were not placed on a high-nutrient diet did not show an improvement in behavior.
This strengthens the argument. It supports the author’s assumption that poor nutrition causes violent behavior, as opposed to some other factor the researchers did not account for—it shows that removing the high-nutrient diet also removes the improvement.

Take PrepTest

Review Results

LSAT PrepTest 122 Explanations

Section 1 - Logical Reasoning

Section 2 - Logical Reasoning

Section 3 - Reading Comprehension

Section 4 - Logical Reasoning

Get full LSAT course

Leave a Reply