PrepTest 154, Section 4, Question 3
Audiologist: What is often considered age-related hearing loss(40 more words not shown)
Which one of the following,(7 more words not shown)
- AAncient medical texts(6 more words not shown)
- BAmong remote populations,(24 more words not shown)
- CThose who live(19 more words not shown)
- DAge-related hearing loss(22 more words not shown)
- EThose who work(22 more words not shown)
Reading the argument
Calling hearing loss age-related tells us when it tends to show up. The audiologist wants to explain why it happens: years of exposure to loud noise gradually damage hearing.
That sounds possible. The evidence is that people in remote populations have little exposure to loud noise and little or no age-related hearing loss. But what else is different about those populations? Maybe their diet protects their hearing. Maybe they experience different kinds of stress. Those are possibilities to investigate, not facts we're adding. They show why the quiet environment isn't automatically the explanation.
What we’re looking for
For a strengthener, I want evidence that helps connect the hearing loss specifically to noise. I don't have a precise answer in mind. The question is whether an answer gives us more reason to think noise explains this pattern, rather than some other difference between the populations.
Working the answers
- A
Hearing loss could have existed in ancient times and still have been caused by loud noise. The existence of treatments doesn't tell us what caused the problem, how much noise the patients encountered, or whether quieter lives protected hearing. This doesn't help establish the audiologist's explanation.
- BCorrect
This gives us a useful comparison within the remote populations. People who spent several years in urban areas have more hearing loss than people who always lived remotely. In the context of the passage's contrast between remote quiet and noise exposure, that pattern supports the proposed explanation.
There is still a small step: the answer says urban areas, not explicitly greater exposure to loud noise. And moving could change diet, stress, or other conditions too. So this isn't conclusive proof, and I'd prefer a comparison that specified the noise exposure. But it is evidence moving in the right direction, while the other choices don't connect people's circumstances with different amounts of hearing loss. Strengthening doesn't require removing every possible alternative.
- C
Becoming unaware of background noise isn't the same as suffering hearing damage. People could tune out a sound while their hearing remained intact. This describes their awareness of low-level noise, not evidence that long-term exposure causes the hearing loss we're explaining.
- D
This concerns an effect of hearing loss: difficulty following group conversations. We need its cause. Whether hearing loss came from noise, diet, or something else, it could still make those conversations difficult. D doesn't help distinguish among the explanations.
- E
This tells us that people may expose their ears to loud noise without protection. But what happens to their hearing afterward? The answer doesn't say. Without that outcome, the fact that workers often skip protection doesn't show that noise explains the age-related hearing loss.
More Strengthen questions
Learn the LSAT our way
Our platform drills Strengthen questions at your level and adjusts as you improve.