PrepTest 105, Section 2, Question 9
Someone who gets sick from eating a meal(42 more words not shown)
Which one of the following,(9 more words not shown)
- AChildren are more(14 more words not shown)
- BChildren are less(15 more words not shown)
- CChildren tend to(13 more words not shown)
- DChildren typically recover(10 more words not shown)
- EChildren are more(10 more words not shown)
Reading the argument
Imagine getting sick after a meal with a distinctive orange-chicken dish. You might find that flavor revolting afterward even if another part of the meal caused the sickness. The passage describes that kind of association: the memorable food takes the blame, correctly or not.
But why would this explain a special tendency among children? The first sentence describes something that can happen to people generally. It doesn't yet explain why children would develop more of these aversions than adults.
Maybe children get sick more often. Maybe they notice flavors more sharply. Either could make the described process more prominent for children. On the other hand, a child might simply dislike a flavor without ever having been sick after eating it, so we still need evidence connecting the children's pattern to this explanation.
What we’re looking for
For the strengthener, look for that connection. Show why children are especially exposed or sensitive to the ingredients of the process: illness after eating and a distinctive taste.
Working the answers
- A
This points toward children receiving food without especially distinctive flavors. That doesn't help explain why a mechanism involving a memorable flavor would operate more strongly in children. It points away from the taste-based difference we were looking for, even though it doesn't prove that no food in a child's meal could stand out.
- B
If children are less likely to connect food with health, that doesn't support their being more likely to connect a particular food with illness. Also, the distaste described need not involve a consciously reasoned health judgment. Either way, B supplies no reason that the proposed illness-and-flavor process would be especially strong among children.
- CCorrect
This addresses both predicted differences. Children have sharper taste, which helps explain why a flavor might stand out strongly. They also become sick more often, giving more opportunities for illness to become associated with something they have eaten.
The answer doesn't say every childhood aversion comes from illness, or that every illness follows a meal. It makes the proposed process a more plausible explanation for children's greater tendency to develop strong food aversions. That's the support we're looking for.
- D
Taking longer to recover is different from becoming sick more often or experiencing flavors more sharply. A longer illness might seem more memorable, but we'd need an added link from recovery time to stronger food aversions. D doesn't establish that link. C directly addresses two factors in the process the passage describes.
- E
Refusing an unfamiliar food before trying it doesn't show that illness after eating it produced an aversion. Unfamiliar also isn't the same as distinctive in flavor; familiar food can have a very strong taste. This describes another eating behavior without supporting the particular explanation we're testing.
More Strengthen questions
Learn the LSAT our way
Our platform drills Strengthen questions at your level and adjusts as you improve.