Logical Reasoning

PT15 · S2 · Q3 A certain strain of bacteria

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

A certain strain of bacteria was found in the stomachs of ulcer patients.

Conclusion (therefore)

It is highly likely that the bacteria strain induces ulcers.

Evidence

The strain of bacteria was found in the stomachs of ulcer patients.

A medical researcher with no history of ulcers ingested this bacteria strain and developed an ulcer within weeks.

Evaluate

This argument presents a correlation between the presence of a bacterial strain and the occurrence of ulcers and assumes a causal relationship. We can apply the Explain Curious Fact mindset to this pattern, as the argument presumes the strain causes ulcers.

Curious Fact

Why did the researcher develop an ulcer after ingesting the bacteria strain? Why do these people with ulcers have this bacteria strain in them?

Author's Explanation

The bacteria strain induces ulcers.

To strengthen causal arguments like this, we should look for evidence that increases the plausibility of the author's explanation or rules out alternative explanations.

Goal

Let's find an answer that makes it more plausible that this strain of bacteria is linked to ulcers (a classic No Cause / No Effect answer might say ), or an answer that rules out an alternate explanation for the connections between the bacteria strain and the ulcers (in the patients and the researcher).

3.

Which one of the following, if true, most supports the argument above?

  1. People who have the bacteria

    Irrelevant Comparison

    Whether the bacteria is related to kidney disease has no impact on whether the bacteria causes ulcers. The issue at hand is the causal relationship between the bacteria and ulcers, making kidney disease irrelevant here.

    2% picked this

  2. The researcher did not develop

    No Impact

    This argument doesn't care about other health issues that might result from the bacteria. It's only concerned with whether ulcers are an effect of the bacteria.

    16% picked this

  3. There is no evidence that

    Opposite Impact

    This makes it a lot less plausible that the bacteria causes ulcers, so this would weaken.

    0% picked this

  4. The researcher is a recognized

    No Impact

    The expertise of the researcher in stomach diseases is irrelevant to the argument's causal link between bacteria and ulcers. The focus is on the effect of the bacteria, not the researcher's qualifications.

    4% picked this

  5. Correct

    A study of 2,000 people

    Why this is right

    Wow, it's the classic "No Cause, No Effect" strengthener (the most common way to strengthen an Explain Curious Fact argument). These 2000 people didn't have the bacteria and didn't have ulcers, providing more data points that strengthen the covariation between having/not-having the bacteria and having/not-having ulcers.

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

    78% 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