PrepTest 144, Section 3, Question 16
Evidently, watching too much television can lead people(43 more words not shown)
Which one of the following,(7 more words not shown)
- AMany people overestimate(16 more words not shown)
- BA person is(32 more words not shown)
- CPeople who watch(24 more words not shown)
- DPeople who are(23 more words not shown)
- EA person is(33 more words not shown)
Reading the argument
Maybe the people who watch more television really are in more danger.
The proposed explanation initially sounds plausible. Watching repeated coverage of disasters could make the world seem more dangerous. But what did the study establish? Heavier television viewers are more likely to think they will become victims of a natural disaster.
That doesn't yet show an overestimate. Perhaps those viewers have an accurate picture of their risk, while other people underestimate theirs. Or perhaps the groups face different risks. Thinking danger is greater can be entirely reasonable when danger actually is greater.
What we’re looking for
The question asks us to weaken the argument. I'd look for a reason the television viewers' expectations might be justified. We need to question the jump from greater concern to television causing an exaggerated fear.
Working the answers
- A
Television doesn't have to be the only way to overestimate danger for it to be one way. Many people could exaggerate risks for other reasons, and watching too much television could still make some people's estimates worse. This broad observation doesn't explain away the study's particular pattern.
- B
This goes in the wrong direction. It says heavier television viewers are less likely to live in disaster-prone areas. If they face less danger yet are more worried, that makes their higher worry look less justified. We wanted evidence that their concern might reflect real danger, not that they tend to live somewhere safer.
- C
Accurate estimates among lighter viewers don't show that heavier viewers are accurate too. This could fit the author's story that heavier viewing is associated with a less accurate view of risk. It doesn't establish that television causes the difference, but it gives us no reason to reject that explanation.
- D
We learn how well-informed people tend to get their information, not whether the television viewers in this study overestimate their danger. People could get good information from other sources while television either improves or worsens viewers' estimates. D doesn't settle the relationship we need to examine.
- ECorrect
People in disaster-prone areas are more likely to be heavy television viewers. That connects the viewing pattern with actual exposure to danger. Someone living in the path of serious storms could watch more television and reasonably think a disaster might affect them.
Now the pattern needn't result from television creating an exaggerated fear. Living somewhere dangerous could help explain both the viewing and the concern. E doesn't prove every viewer's estimate is accurate; it gives us a concrete reason not to treat the greater concern as evidence of overestimation.
More Weaken questions
Learn the LSAT our way
Our platform drills Weaken questions at your level and adjusts as you improve.