Logical Reasoning

PT148 · S1 · Q1 In a recent study of dust-mite

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

In a recent study of dust-mite allergy sufferers, one group slept on mite-proof bedding, while a control group slept on bedding that was not mite-proof.

Given that ...

Bedding is the main source of exposure to dust mites.

Why is it that ...

The group whose bedding had a 69% reduction in dust-mite allergens didn't have any symptom reduction?

Evaluate / Goal

We just need an answer to give us some way to explain why the group who slept on the special mattresses with less allergen still had allergies just as severe as normal.

Maybe there's a delayed effect, where someone's allergies are based on their exposure to allergen weeks ago. So the week during the study they wouldn't experience relief, but a couple weeks after the study they might?

Or maybe a 69% reduction just isn't enough of a reduction. Maybe 31% of allergens still being there is enough to trigger a reaction.

1.

Which one of the following, if true, most helps to resolve the apparent conflict in the statements above?

  1. Dust-mite allergens in bedding tend

    Irrelevant Distinction

    A comparison between bedding and carpets does nothing for us. We're only concerned with explaining what happened with the less-allergen bedding in this study.

    4% picked this

  2. When people report their own

    Unclear Impact

    This is probably tempting to a lot of us, because it feels like we could say, "The reason no symptom reduction was reported is that people always exaggerate how bad their allergies are. The group that slept on the less-allergen mattress, in reality had fewer symptoms, but since allergy sufferers tend to exaggerate the severity of symptoms, they made themselves sound just as bad as the people who slept on the regular mattress." Here's the problem -- since everyone is exaggerating, that just means that everyone's reported severity of symptoms would be higher than it should be. However that doesn't mean that everyone's reported severity would be the same. Let's pretend that allergy symptoms can be ranked in severity on a 1 to 10 scale. And let's say people tend to always exaggerate the real severity of their symptoms by adding +2. So people whose symptoms really have a level 5 severity will report having level 7 symptoms. If the less-allergen mattress in the study actually helped, then the people on those mattresses would have, in reality, gone from level 5 to level 2 symptoms, though they would exaggerate and report level 4 severity. Meanwhile the people on the regular control mattresses would still be experiencing 5 and reporting 7. If the mite-proof mattress works to reduce symptoms, then that group would be reporting more symptom reduction than would the control group. Even though everyone is exaggerating, the people who are helped by the mattress would be exaggerating from a milder position (level 2 severity), so their reported severity would be lower than when they were exaggerating from their average position (level 5 severity). In short, the fact that everyone in the study (in both groups) is exaggerating doesn't explain why the two groups are reporting the same severity of symptoms (unless we make an unwarranted assumption that "exaggerating" is the same as "saying that my symptoms are at maximum severity").

    4% picked this

  3. The medical community does not

    No Impact

    Their lack of understanding is not going to solve our lack of understanding as to why a 69% reduction in allergens didn't lead to any symptom reduction, for the people who slept on the special mattresses.

    2% picked this

  4. Correct

    For dust-mite allergy sufferers to

    Why this is right

    This explains why a 69% reduction in allergens wasn't good enough to reduce symptoms. According to this answer allergens are reduced → allergy sufferers don't by less than 90% get relief We know in the experiment that the allergens were only reduced 69%, which is less than 90%, so thus those people wouldn't get any relief, and thus neither group reported any reduction in symptoms.

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

    89% picked this

  5. All of the participants in

    No Impact

    This is telling people at the start of an experiment, "One group is the variable group. One is the control group." That's just the basic setup of every experiment. People don't know whether they're in the variable or control group, so that has no effect on anything.

    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.

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