Logical Reasoning

PT129 · S3 · Q18 A study found that patients

A free, expert breakdown of this official LSAT Logical Reasoning question.

  • Save & drill this skill — build targeted practice sets from questions like this one

  • Video walkthroughs — watch every question solved step by step

  • 81 official LSATs — as questions, timed sections & full-length tests

Start practicing free

A study found that patients referred by their doctors to psychotherapists practicing a new experimental form of therapy made more progress with respect to their problems than those referred to psychotherapists practicing traditional forms of therapy.

Evidence

A study found that patients referred by their doctors to psychotherapists practicing a new experimental form of therapy made more progress with respect to their problems than those referred to psychotherapists practicing traditional forms of therapy.

Conclusion

Therapists practicing the new form of therapy, therefore, are more effective than therapists practicing traditional forms.

Evaluate

The argument establishes a correlation between a new form of psychotherapy and better outcomes for the patients. The argument concludes that it is the therapists who practice the new form of therapy who are responsible for the better outcome. But something else could be behind the patients’ improvement.

18.

Which one of the following most accurately describes a flaw in the argument?

  1. It ignores the possibility that

    Opposite Impact

    This strengthens the argument by ruling out something that could possibly explain the difference other than the therapists themselves.

    4% picked this

  2. Correct

    It ignores the possibility that

    Why this is right

    This points to an alternative explanation for why the patients referred by their doctors to a new experimental form of therapy made more progress than those referred to more traditional psychotherapy.

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

    88% picked this

  3. It presumes, without providing justification,

    Too Strong

    The argument does not assume that there is no overlap between the two sets of psychotherapists.

    2% picked this

  4. It ignores the possibility that

    Contradiction

    The argument does not overlook this possibility, but rather asserts it in the conclusion.

    4% picked this

  5. It presumes, without providing justification,

    Opposite Impact

    The argument does not assume that personal rapport has no influence on the effectiveness of the treatment, since the argument concludes that it is something about the therapists that is responsible for the different outcomes. This assumption weakens the argument.

    2% picked this

Continue the review in LSAT Lab

Save this question, watch the video walkthrough, and drill similar questions in your LSAT Lab account.

Save and practice this skill
LSAT Lab

Turn this review into a targeted study plan.

Save this question, drill more like it, watch the video walkthrough, and track your progress in your LSAT Lab account.

Start practicing free