PrepTest 135, Section 2, Question 4
Panelist: Medical research articles cited in popular newspapers(50 more words not shown)
The panelist's argument is most(8 more words not shown)
- Apresents counterarguments to(11 more words not shown)
- Bfails to consider(19 more words not shown)
- Ctakes for granted(26 more words not shown)
- Dfails to consider(19 more words not shown)
- Edraws a conclusion(7 more words not shown)
Reading the argument
Maybe the newspapers are covering these studies because the studies matter.
A genuinely groundbreaking medical finding could attract both journalists and later researchers. The journalists want to report an important development; the researchers want to build on important prior work. We'd then see exactly the pattern described: articles mentioned in the popular press are more likely to receive later research citations.
The panelist reads that pattern differently. Researchers must be responding strongly to publicity, the panelist thinks, rather than to the work's real importance. But how have we ruled out importance as the reason both groups pay attention? We haven't.
What we’re looking for
The flaw question asks us to identify that overlooked possibility. We don't need to prove that publicity has no influence. The evidence simply doesn't separate the influence of publicity from the possibility that both publicity and later citations track worthwhile research.
Working the answers
- A
We aren't told that the panelist misrepresents any researcher's position. The panelist observes a pattern of citations and offers an explanation of it. The flaw concerns that explanation, not an attack on a view nobody holds.
- BCorrect
If newspapers and magazines are good at selecting the most important research, researchers could cite those same articles because of their importance. The overlap would then make sense without showing that researchers' judgments are disconnected from true importance. That is the alternative the panelist overlooks.
- C
The argument doesn't depend on reporters preferring famous scientists to worthwhile findings. In fact, it gives us no account of how journalists select articles. Assuming a preference for impressive names would be one possible extra story, but it isn't an assumption the panelist needs to make.
- D
How many articles the press can review doesn't settle how it chooses the articles it covers. Even a tiny selection could contain important work, unimportant work, or a mixture. The missing consideration is whether importance explains the overlap—not simply whether reporters have limited capacity.
- E
The conclusion adds an interpretation that isn't contained in the premise. The premise reports that press coverage and later research citations go together; the conclusion says researchers' judgments are strongly shaped by publicity rather than true importance. Repeating a premise as a conclusion would be a different mistake. Here, the problem is the unsupported explanation of the pattern.
More Flaw questions
Learn the LSAT our way
Our platform drills Flaw questions at your level and adjusts as you improve.