LSAT 146 – Section 2 – Question 13

LSAT 146 - Section 2 - Question 13

June 2016

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

Ask a tutor

Target time: 1:15

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
PT146 S2 Q13
+LR
+Exp
Strengthen +Streng
Causal Reasoning +CausR
A
81%
163
B
3%
160
C
10%
156
D
2%
150
E
3%
156
138
148
157
 +Medium 148.55 +SubsectionMedium

A six-month public health campaign sought to limit the spread of influenza by encouraging people to take precautions such as washing their hands frequently and avoiding public places when they experience influenza symptoms. Since the incidence of influenza was much lower during those months than experts had predicted, the public evidently heeded the campaign.

Summarize Argument: Phenomenon-Hypothesis
The author hypothesizes that a public health campaign against influenza was heeded by the public. This is based on an observation that the duration of the public health campaign correlated with a much lower rate of influenza than had been predicted.

Notable Assumptions
The author assumes that there is no alternative explanation for the lower influenza rates that simply coincided with the public health campaign.
The author also assumes that the measures encouraged by the campaign are effective against the spread of influenza, so that the public’s following of those measures could cause the lower rates.

A
The incidence of food-borne illnesses, which can be effectively controlled by frequent hand washing, was markedly lower than usual during the six-month period.
This strengthens by providing further evidence that hand-washing rates were higher during the six-month period. This makes it more likely that during this time period, the public was actually heeding the campaign, which encouraged hand-washing.
B
During the six-month period, the incidence of the common cold, which has many of the same symptoms as influenza, was about the same as usual.
This might actually weaken, since the spread of the common cold would probably also be limited by the measures encouraged by the public health campaign. So if common cold rates were not lower, the campaign may not have caused the lower influenza rates.
C
There were fewer large public gatherings than usual during the six-month period.
It’s not clear without more information whether this is connected to the public health campaign, so it doesn’t help us. This might be due to the campaign’s advice to avoid gatherings when ill, but it could also be unrelated—we can’t jump to either assumption.
D
Independently of the public health campaign, the news media spread the message that one’s risk of contracting influenza can be lessened by frequent hand washing.
This weakens by providing an alternative explanation for the reduction of influenza rates: instead of heeding the public health campaign itself, the public may have just been listening to the news media’s reports.
E
In a survey completed before the campaign began, many people admitted that they should do more to limit the spread of influenza.
This is irrelevant, since the public’s desire to limit the spread of influenza does not provide evidence that they followed the instructions of the public health campaign later on.

Take PrepTest

Review Results

LSAT PrepTest 146 Explanations

Section 1 - Logical Reasoning

Section 2 - Logical Reasoning

Section 3 - Logical Reasoning

Section 4 - Reading Comprehension

Get full LSAT course

Leave a Reply