Logical Reasoning

PT21 · S3 · Q12 In a study of the relationship

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

In a study of the relationship between aggression and television viewing in nursery school children, many interesting interactions among family styles, aggression, and television viewing were found.

Statements

Math-y (correlations)

There isn't really a correlation between high aggression and amount of TV-viewing: high aggression occurred in both high-viewing and low-viewing children.

There is a correlation between high aggression and having high-achieving, competitive, middle-class parents + less TV. There is a correlation between less aggression and having parents who planned their lives in an organized, child-centered way + more TV.

Causal Difference-maker (this seemed to be related to)

Parental lifestyle seemed to cause the occurrence of high aggression in both high-TV and low-TV children.

Evaluate

This is a bit of a mess. If we focus on the distinction in the last sentence, which is supposedly caused by parenting style, we have this:

high-achieving organized competitive vs. child-centered middle-class

less tv more tv

more aggression less aggression

It seems like by the logic of "parental lifestyle" comparison, we're supposed to understand that "organized, child-centered parents" are different from "high-achieving, competitive middle-class parents".

So could we say the former camp isn't high-achieving or competitive or middle class? Could we say the latter camp isn't organized or child-centered?

It also doesn't make sense how in the last sentence, more aggression is correlated with less TV, not high TV.

Yes in the second sentence, it says that high aggression occurred in both low TV and high TV children.

Can we assume that when it comes to high TV children, the ones that were high aggression had the competitive middle-class parents whereas the ones that weren't high aggression had the child-centered parents?

Goal

Avoid strong language, out of scope ideas, and unknown comparisons. Look for something that reinforces the causal connection between parenting style and aggression, or something that clarifies one of the implied distinctions.

12.

Which one of the following conclusions is best supported by the passage?

  1. Low levels of television viewing

    Out of Scope: TV causes aggression

    The second sentence tries to make it seem like aggression does not correlate well with amount of TV viewing, but instead correlates well with parenting lifestyle. So this answer is pinning aggression on something different from the causal difference-maker the passage identified (TV viewing vs. parenting lifestyle).

    6% picked this

  2. Correct

    The level of aggression of

    Why this is right

    This reinforces the causal difference-maker by saying, "since we know that parenting lifestyle seems to be predictive of aggression, level of aggression cannot be predicted by simply looking at [something else]." If we knew that someone's LSAT score was related to their chance of being admitted to Harvard, then we could say that "the chance that someone will be admitted to Harvard cannot be predicted from looking at their GPA alone".

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

    82% picked this

  3. If high-achieving, competitive, parents were

    Unsupported Causality

    This isn't too bad; it's just less provable than (B). It feels like it's acknowledging the causal difference-maker by saying, "If they did less of the thing that causes more aggression and more of the thing that causes less aggression, their kids would be less aggressive." The problem is that it borrows a subset of characteristics correlated with more aggression (it leaves out middle-class) and prescribes a subset of characteristics correlated with less aggression (it leaves out organized). Since we don't have any clear idea which part of high-achieving / competitive / middle-class is causally responsible for more aggression (if any) and since we don't know which part of organized / child-centered is causally responsible for less aggression (if any), it's pretty speculative for us to say what effect specific changes would have. Maybe as long as the parents are still competitive, their kids will be aggressive, whether the parents get more child-centered or not. Maybe as long as the parents are still disorganized, their kids will be aggressive, whether the parents get more child-centered or not.

    8% picked this

  4. High levels of television viewing

    Too Strong: only when

    This messy data won't allow for us to conclude tightly drawn takeaways, like Parents child-centered → high TV can't explain high aggression It's definitely possible that some child-centered parents could end up with high aggression kids because of the kids' high levels of TV viewing.

    3% picked this

  5. Parental lifestyle is less important

    Contradicted

    The 2nd sentence seems to be establishing the opposite of this answer. High aggression is found in both high and low TV viewing (suggesting there's not a strong causal influence there), whereas aggression seemed to be related to parental lifestyle.

    1% 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