Logical Reasoning

PT8 · S4 · Q25 Despite a steady decrease in

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

Despite a steady decrease in the average number of hours worked per person per week, the share of the population that reads a daily newspaper has declined greatly in the past 20 years.

Conclusion

Increased television viewing has caused a simultaneous decline in newspaper reading.

Evidence

Despite a steady decrease in the average number of hours worked per person per week, the share of the population that reads a daily newspaper has declined greatly in the past 20 years.

The percentage of the population that watches television daily has shown a similarly dramatic increase over the same period.

Evaluate

This argument falls under the Explain Curious Fact pattern.

Curious Fact: Why has there been a great decline in newspaper reading while TV watching has increased dramatically?

Author's Explanation: The increase in television viewing has caused the decline in newspaper reading.

When we have a correlation (increase in TV watching and decrease in newspaper reading), the author assumes a causal relationship, meaning TV watching directly leads to less newspaper reading.

An alternative explanation could weaken the argument by suggesting that the decline in newspaper reading is due to some other cause or that the correlation is coincidental.

Goal

Let's find an answer that proposes an Alternate Explanation for the decline in newspaper reading or one that questions the causal connection between increased TV viewing and decreased newspaper reading.

25.

Which one of the following, if true, would be most damaging to the explanation given above for the decline in newspaper reading?

There has been a dramatic
No Impact
This answer choice talks about people's acknowledgment of TV as their primary information source. While it highlights a potential shift in preferences, it doesn't directly address the causal claim that increased TV viewing led to less newspaper reading.
5% picked this
Correct
Of those members of the
Why this is right
This answer choice shows that even among those who do not watch TV, newspaper reading has decreased dramatically. This undermines the plausibility of the author's causal explanation, by providing Effect w/o Cause counterexamples. These data points have the Effect (reduced newspaper reading) even though they don't have the cause (they don't watch tv).
Skill tested: Weaken · how this choice captures the argument's function is the move to repeat next time.
76% picked this
The time people spend with
No Impact
This choice states that time spent on reading books and newspapers increased. This doesn't address whether TV viewing caused a decline in newspaper reading, only that the nature of reading time has changed.
16% picked this
People who spend large amounts
No Impact
This answer suggests that watching a lot of TV may impair one's ability to process printed information. That would potentially reinforce the idea that TV might lead to less newspaper reading, but not in a way that contradicts the main argument.
3% picked this
A typical television set is
No Impact
This talks about television sets being on for a slightly shorter period now than five years ago. It does not provide any information about the causal relation between TV viewing and newspaper reading.
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