LSAT 90 - Section 2 - Question 20

This is an RRE Except question.

The stimulus describes a phenomenon and four out of the five answers contribute to an explanation. The stimulus starts by defining two psychological profiles. Repressors are people who repress upsetting thoughts and feelings from conscious awareness. Sensitizers are people who are especially attuned to internal states that freely express distress. Now the stimulus gets to the phenomenon. Repressors tend to be less shy and anxious, can better tolerate frustration, and have superior social skills, better grades, and a greater sense of self-esteem compared to sensitizers.

This stimulus didn't bother to prime our expectations. It didn't tell us anything that might invite us to form expectations that the stimulus upsets. So in that sense, it’s different from many RRE questions that do try to present the phenomenon as surprising. But, in any case, whether or not you find a given phenomenon surprising depends more on what assumption we make. 

Here, we know four out of the five answers will provide or contribute to an explanation. So we should dive right into the answers.

Answer Choice (A) says repressors are better able than sensitizers to focus on their work and to avoid distractions. This contributes to an explanation of the phenomenon. This gives us a causal mechanism that explains why repressors have better grades, can better tolerate frustration, and perhaps why they have a greater sense of self-esteem: because they can better focus on their work and avoid distractions.

Answer Choice (B) says repressors are less apt than sensitizers to alienate people by expressing their emotions. This contributes to an explanation of the phenomenon. This gives us a causal mechanism that explains why repressors have superior social skills: by simply refraining from expressing emotions that alienate people.

Answer Choice (C) says parents and other caregivers tend to reward repressors more than they reward sensitizers for academic performance and social behavior deemed desirable. This contributes to an explanation of the phenomenon. This gives us a causal mechanism as long as we assume that external reward from parents and other caregivers incentivizes academic performance and pro-social behavior.

Answer Choice (E) says sensitizers tend to focus more than repressors do on the difficulties of succeeding in their projects rather than on factors that are likely to contribute to success. This contributes to an explanation of the phenomenon. This states a causal mechanism that explains the differential grades and the differential sense of self-esteem. Repressors are focused on the right factors, factors that are likely to contribute to their success, whereas sensitizers are focused on the wrong factors.

Correct Answer Choice (D) does not contribute to an explanation of the phenomenon. One way (D) stands out is that its content is nested within the phrase “some psychologists have hypothesized that…” That means we don't know if the nested clause is true. We only know that it's true that some psychologists have hypothesized whatever is in the nested clause. That's a huge disadvantage that (D) suffers in relation to the other answers. At minimum, (D) requires an additional assumption that the other answers don't, that these psychologists are correct in their hypothesis.

But this is not the only weakness in (D). Even if we edit this answer choice to strip it of its nesting clause, it still wouldn't provide an explanation. The edited version of (D) would say that the desire to maintain social and academic success and self-esteem strengthens repressors’ tendency to repress upsetting thoughts and feelings. This might serve as an explanation for why repressors repress upsetting thoughts and feelings in the first place: because they want to maintain success and self-esteem. But we weren't asked to explain why repressors repress. We were asked to explain why repressors enjoy certain advantages academically, psychologically, and socially that sensitizers don't enjoy. This edited version of (D) does not contribute to an explanation.