PrepTest 115, Section 4, Question 1
A study comparing infant care revealed that the(64 more words not shown)
Which one of the following(8 more words not shown)
- ABabies' muscular coordination(9 more words not shown)
- BBabies with less(9 more words not shown)
- CStudies showed no(15 more words not shown)
- DThe babies who(11 more words not shown)
- EThe stimulation that(7 more words not shown)
Reading the argument
Two extra hours of sleep sound useful. But do these babies need them?
Suppose, just to illustrate the problem, that one group slept ten hours, the other slept twelve, and eight hours would have been enough. Both groups would be getting plenty. Those aren't claims about how much babies actually need; they show why a difference in sleep doesn't automatically mean that the group sleeping less has a problem.
I'm willing to accept the study's finding: the babies with less stimulation slept more. I'm also willing to accept that sleep matters for development. What hasn't been established is that the more stimulated babies were missing sleep they needed. Something can be important without more of it always being better.
What we’re looking for
The question asks us to weaken the recommendation that parents reduce stimulation. I'd look for evidence that the babies already get enough sleep. That would make the extra two hours a much less convincing reason to change their routines.
Working the answers
- A
This removes one possible effect of stimulation, but it doesn't give us a reason to reject the recommendation. If stimulation has no effect on muscular coordination, parents could reduce it without changing that particular ability. We still don't know whether the extra sleep helps or whether reducing stimulation has another cost.
- B
The extra sleep happens during the day. So what? The argument concerns the total amount of sleep and its role in development. Unless we're given a reason that daytime sleep doesn't provide the relevant benefit, locating the extra hours doesn't undermine the recommendation.
- C
These are older children. The study and recommendation concern babies, including six-month-olds. A relationship could disappear by age three and still matter during infancy. We need evidence about the group the advice is intended for.
- D
Average weight gain doesn't show that the advice is bad. Nor does it compare the two routines' effects on development overall. Babies with less stimulation could gain weight normally while the extra sleep helped in some other way.
- ECorrect
This finds a different problem from the one I predicted: reducing stimulation could take away something else that helps development. The author counts the possible benefit of more sleep without counting that cost.
We don't have to show that sleep is unimportant or that stimulation always matters more. If stimulation itself helps babies develop intellectually, then getting extra sleep by reducing stimulation involves a tradeoff. The sleep study alone doesn't tell parents that making that tradeoff would be wise.
More Weaken questions
Learn the LSAT our way
Our platform drills Weaken questions at your level and adjusts as you improve.