PrepTest 140, Section 2, Question 2
Depression is a serious problem for residents of(33 more words not shown)
Which one of the following(9 more words not shown)
- ANursing-home residents are(8 more words not shown)
- BThe best method(15 more words not shown)
- CHigh rates of(15 more words not shown)
- DAnimal companionship is(4 more words not shown)
- EAllowing free access(11 more words not shown)
Reading the argument
Maybe having a pet helps. A resident who has an animal to spend time with might feel less alone, and that could make a difference to their depression.
But let's leave room for another explanation. What if residents who are already feeling better are more likely to bond with pets? Then the lower depression rate wouldn't by itself show that the pets produced the improvement. We also haven't learned that every kind of pet helps equally. Bonding with a dog and having a goldfish nearby could be quite different experiences.
What we’re looking for
The question asks what the study most strongly supports. I'd look for a cautious suggestion that companionship may help explain some of the difference. We can support that possibility without announcing that pets cure depression or that everyone needs one.
Working the answers
- A
Serious doesn't mean more serious than it is for every other group. The passage discusses depression among nursing-home residents without comparing them with people outside nursing homes. Some other group could have an even higher rate, and everything in the study would still be true.
- B
Best compared with what? The study doesn't compare bonding with pets against counseling, medication, family visits, or any other approach. It also doesn't establish that simply providing access produces a bond. A possible benefit is far short of showing that this is the best way to help a particular resident.
- CCorrect
A personal bond with a pet is a form of companionship, and the residents with those bonds had lower rates of depression. That makes lack of companionship a plausible contributor to the higher rates among other residents. Notice how limited the claim is: it may explain at least part of the problem. We aren't claiming that the study settled the cause or that loneliness explains every case.
- D
Essential would mean a person cannot have psychological well-being without animal companionship. Nothing here establishes that. Someone could be doing well through friendships with people, and even the residents without pet bonds weren't all said to be depressed. The comparison doesn't make animals a requirement.
- E
Lower rates aren't elimination. A resident might enjoy a cat's company and still be depressed because their family never visits, for example. And access to an animal doesn't ensure a personal bond. The study gives us no basis for promising that free access would remove every depression-related problem.
More Must Be True questions
Learn the LSAT our way
Our platform drills Must Be True questions at your level and adjusts as you improve.