Magazine article: Sugar consumption may

Answer choices

1. A

   Bad Assumption4% picked this

   The adrenaline level of children who do not have ADD is not increased by

   The argument does not need adrenaline production in non-ADD children to be unaffected by sugar. The conclusion is about how sugar affects children with ADD. Negate this answer (sugar does affect adrenaline in non-ADD children) and the argument still works fine — it would still be the case that sugar drives adrenaline up in ADD children, and that adrenaline could exacerbate ADD. Not necessary.

   4%
2. B

   Too Strong5% picked this

   Overproduction of adrenaline causes ADD in

   The conclusion is that sugar may exacerbate ADD — make existing ADD worse — not that adrenaline causes ADD. These are different claims. The argument does not need adrenaline to be the cause of ADD. Negate this answer (adrenaline does not cause ADD) and the argument can still work: sugar can make existing ADD more severe via adrenaline without causing ADD in the first place.

   5%
3. C

   Bad Assumption1% picked this

   The most effective way to treat ADD in children is to restrict their

   The conclusion is that sugar may exacerbate ADD — not that restricting sugar is the most effective treatment. Treatment effectiveness is a separate question. Negate this answer (restricting sugar is not the most effective treatment) and the argument still holds: sugar could still exacerbate ADD without being the most important treatment factor.

   1%
4. D

   Correct79% picked this

   Increased adrenaline production can make ADD more severe

   Why this is right

   This is the bridge. The evidence connects sugar to adrenaline. The conclusion connects sugar to worsened ADD. The missing link is between adrenaline and ADD severity. This answer fills exactly that gap. Negate it — "increased adrenaline production cannot make ADD more severe" — and the argument falls apart, because the only thing sugar produces according to the evidence is adrenaline, and if adrenaline does not affect ADD, sugar would not affect ADD either. The argument depends on this.

   Skill tested: Necessary Assumption · how this choice captures the argument's function is the move to repeat next time.

   79%
5. E

   Bad Assumption10% picked this

   Sugar consumed with food substances other than candy does not substantially increase the level of adrenaline in the

   The argument needs sugar to affect adrenaline in ADD children, but it does not need to specify that non-candy sugar fails to do this. The stimulus says candy produces especially noticeable adrenaline because other foods do not ameliorate the effect — but the argument does not require sugar with food to be ineffective. Sugar with food could still produce adrenaline (just less) and the argument's chain still works. Negate this and the argument is unaffected.

   10%