PrepTest 125, Section 1, Question 21
In principle, a cohesive group—one whose members generally(440 more words not shown)
A group of closely associated(37 more words not shown)
- Aprovides evidence of(11 more words not shown)
- Bindicates that the(13 more words not shown)
- Cprovides no evidence(9 more words not shown)
- Dprovides evidence that(15 more words not shown)
- Eindicates that the(16 more words not shown)
Reading the passage
A disastrous decision doesn't automatically mean groupthink. Look at how this group reached its decision: members disagreed and debated conflicting alternatives. That sounds different from the uncritical agreement and apparent unanimity we just read about.
What we’re looking for
Don't let the diplomatic setting do the work. The researchers studied diplomatic fiascoes, but the setting and bad outcome aren't enough to establish the same cause.
Working the answers
- A
They made a decision. Nothing establishes chronic indecision or a generally weak level of cohesion. Disagreeing about a particular issue doesn't by itself show that the colleagues lack trust in one another.
- B
This assumes the very thing we need evidence for: that groupthink produced the fiasco.
- CCorrect
The scenario gives us no evidence that groupthink played a role. We have a bad result, but the described disagreement doesn't show the failure to examine alternatives that characterizes groupthink. This is a limited conclusion about the evidence, not proof that groupthink was impossible.
- D
To use this as an exception to the usual groupthink pattern, we'd first need evidence that groupthink occurred. The disastrous result doesn't provide that.
- E
Perhaps more study could have helped, but we're not told that the group failed to study the information thoroughly. Debate and a bad outcome don't establish that particular defect.
More Application questions
Learn the LSAT our way
Our platform drills Application questions at your level and adjusts as you improve.