PrepTest 131, Section 3, Question 25
Science writer: All scientists have beliefs and values(56 more words not shown)
Which one of the following(9 more words not shown)
- AThe scientists reviewing(21 more words not shown)
- BIn general, biases(19 more words not shown)
- CBiases that are(26 more words not shown)
- DThe interpretation of(21 more words not shown)
- ESlanted interpretations of(28 more words not shown)
Reading the argument
Scientists are people, so their beliefs and values can affect how they interpret evidence. Having other scientists review a paper sounds like a useful check. But what if they share the author's bias?
The passage says reviewers are likely to notice biases they do not share. That mechanism makes sense: someone with a different outlook may question an interpretation the author took for granted. If all the reviewers make the same assumption, though, bringing in more people may leave that particular distortion untouched.
What we’re looking for
The writer concludes that slanted interpretations will generally be removed before publication. For the argument to depend on this review process, there needs to be enough difference in outlook for the relevant biases to be challenged. I'd look for an assumption ruling out the concern that the biases are shared by everyone.
Working the answers
- A
The argument doesn't require reviewers to be free, even on some occasions, of biases likely to slant their interpretations of the papers. They could all have such biases but have different ones, allowing them to notice one another's distortions. A focuses on whether reviewers have potentially slanting biases; the mechanism depends on whether they share the particular bias they need to catch.
- BCorrect
In general, the biases affecting these interpretations cannot be shared among all scientists. If everyone shared them, the stated safeguard—reviewers noticing biases they don't share—would offer no way to catch them. B rules out that obstacle.
This does not guarantee that every particular review panel contains the right person or that every error is caught. The question asks for a required assumption, not a complete guarantee. The writer's explanation at least needs the relevant biases not to be universal.
- C
A biased paper could retain scientific value, but that would not show that its biases had been removed. The conclusion is about eliminating slanted interpretations before publication, not about whether a paper remains useful despite them. The argument does not require this reassurance about value.
- D
Beliefs could affect other parts of a paper, such as the language used or the methods chosen. That wouldn't by itself undermine the proposed process for removing slanted interpretations of data. The writer does not need interpretation to be the only part susceptible to bias.
- E
The writer proposes review by scientists with differing biases as a way to remove distortions, not the only possible way. Perhaps an author could reconsider an interpretation, or a knowledgeable reader outside the scientific group could identify a problem. Other ways of correcting bias could exist while this review process still worked.
More Necessary Assumption questions
Learn the LSAT our way
Our platform drills Necessary Assumption questions at your level and adjusts as you improve.