PrepTest 131, Section 2, Question 13
Bethany: Psychologists have discovered a technique for replacing(56 more words not shown)
Which one of the following(13 more words not shown)
- APsychologists should make(17 more words not shown)
- BAny psychological technique(16 more words not shown)
- CPsychologists should do(13 more words not shown)
- DIdentifying nightmare-prone children(15 more words not shown)
- EPsychologists should not(20 more words not shown)
Reading the argument
Replacing nightmares with pleasant dreams sounds promising. Perhaps the technique involves positive thoughts or reading something pleasant before bed; we aren't told. What we do know is that adults with chronic nightmares have learned it successfully.
Can children learn it too? The studies say nightmare-prone children are especially likely to have nightmares as adults, but successful teaching to adults doesn't establish that children can understand or use the same technique. That makes me hesitate when Bethany recommends finding these children and teaching them.
There could also be another approach. Imagine a medication that prevented nightmares without requiring someone to learn the technique. That would give us something else to consider before deciding where psychologists should direct their efforts.
What we’re looking for
The question asks for a principle that helps justify Bethany's recommendation. I'd like support for taking this action, including my concern about whether children can learn it. Since the task is to strengthen the argument, the answer may help one part of the reasoning without resolving every concern.
Working the answers
- A
Finding out why some children have nightmares is different from identifying which children should learn the technique. For example, investigating whether anxiety contributes to nightmares would concern their cause. Bethany recommends finding children so they can receive the technique, and A doesn't establish why psychologists should pursue that recommendation.
- B
This connects learning in the wrong direction. We know adults can learn the technique and wonder whether children can too. B says that what a child can learn, an adult can learn. It leaves open the possibility that adults can learn techniques children cannot, including this one.
- CCorrect
This supplies a reason for psychologists to act: they should do everything they can to reduce chronic nightmares in adults. Nightmare-prone children are especially likely to become affected adults, so trying to intervene with those children fits that goal. The principle doesn't prove that children can learn the technique or that it will prevent adult nightmares. Those concerns remain, but C gives the recommendation a supporting duty that the other choices don't provide.
- D
Making identification harder doesn't give psychologists a reason to prioritize it. This could instead make directly teaching affected adults seem a more practical use of effort. The difficulty comparison doesn't support Bethany's recommendation.
- E
This tells psychologists not to teach children who are unlikely to suffer nightmares as adults. Bethany is concerned with children especially likely to suffer them. A restriction on teaching the first group doesn't establish an obligation to identify and teach the second.
More Strengthen questions
Learn the LSAT our way
Our platform drills Strengthen questions at your level and adjusts as you improve.