PrepTest 121, Section 4, Question 19
Fifty chronic insomniacs participated in a one-month study(81 more words not shown)
Which one of the following,(12 more words not shown)
- ABecause it is(26 more words not shown)
- BThe psychological comfort(19 more words not shown)
- CThe new drug(22 more words not shown)
- DMost insomniacs sleep(18 more words not shown)
- ESome insomniacs cannot(14 more words not shown)
Reading the argument
Both groups slept better. That makes me hesitate to give the drug the credit.
Everyone's circumstances changed when they began sleeping at the institute. Maybe their homes were noisy. Maybe roommates or pets had been keeping them awake. A different setting, different meals, or the expectation of getting help could matter to people receiving either the drug or the placebo. Those are possible explanations, not facts we've been given.
Then the improvement largely disappears. In the third week, about 90 percent of the people who had reported relief say their insomnia has returned. Why would something help at first and then stop helping? Did something change at the institute, or did an initial benefit wear off?
What we’re looking for
We need an explanation of all the data. That means accounting for both groups and both stages: relief at first, then insomnia returning. An answer explaining only the drug group's experience, or only the early improvement, leaves half the puzzle behind.
Working the answers
- A
Tolerance could explain why people taking the drug improved and then lost the benefit. But half the participants received a placebo. They weren't taking the new drug, so becoming tolerant to it cannot explain their matching pattern. A addresses only one group.
- B
Believing you've taken a sleep-promoting drug could help people in both groups. That makes this a plausible explanation of the initial relief. But why would the benefit disappear during the third week? B gives no reason for the change over time, even though the participants continue taking their nightly doses.
- C
We need to explain what happened in this study. Chemical similarity to another drug, whose large doses performed worse than expected, doesn't explain why these participants improved and then relapsed. It also leaves the placebo group unaddressed. Similar composition alone doesn't supply the missing story.
- DCorrect
The institute is a new sleeping environment for both groups. If insomniacs tend to sleep better in a new setting, that explains the early improvement without crediting the medication.
As the participants get used to the institute, it no longer has the same novelty. That gives us a reason the initial benefit could fade. The additional fact that the drug has no effect explains why the medicated group doesn't retain an advantage. D supplies one account of the shared rise and fall, rather than solving only one piece.
- E
Unreliable reports could make us question how much sleep people actually got. But why would large proportions of both groups report improvement at first and then report its disappearance? Saying some insomniacs misjudge their sleep doesn't explain that particular pattern. We need more than a general reason reports might be inaccurate.
More Paradox questions
Learn the LSAT our way
Our platform drills Paradox questions at your level and adjusts as you improve.