LSAT Explanation PT 33, S3, Q4: Limited research indicates that therapeutic intervention

LSAT Question Stem

Which one of the following, if true, most strengthens the argument? 

Logical Reasoning Question Type

This is a Strengthen question. 

Correct Answer

The correct answer to this question is C. 

LSAT Question Complete Explanation

First, let's summarize and analyze the argument in the passage. The argument states that limited research shows therapeutic intervention before the onset of mental disorders can mitigate major contributing factors. However, more comprehensive research is needed to verify these results and design specific health care measures. Therefore, the author concludes that increasing funding for intervention research could potentially provide a cost-effective way to help people prone to mental disorders. The structure of the argument is as follows:

Premise 1: Limited research indicates that early therapeutic intervention can mitigate factors contributing to mental disorders.

Premise 2: More comprehensive research is needed to verify these results and design specific health care measures.

Conclusion: We should increase funding for intervention research to explore a potential cost-effective means of helping people prone to mental disorders.

To make this more understandable, let's use a simple example. Imagine there's a type of plant that often gets infected with a specific fungus. Limited research shows that applying a certain treatment before the plant is infected can prevent the fungus from taking hold. However, more research is needed to confirm these results and develop specific prevention methods. Therefore, we should increase funding for research on this treatment to potentially find a cost-effective way to protect these plants from the fungus.

An "Evaluate" question for this argument could be: "Is the cost of early therapeutic intervention less than the cost of long-term treatment for mental disorders?"

Now, let's discuss the answer choices for the Strengthen question, which asks us to find the statement that, if true, most strengthens the argument.

a) Most minor mental disorders are more expensive to treat than other minor health problems.

This answer choice doesn't directly address the cost of early intervention compared to long-term treatment, so it doesn't strengthen the argument.

b) Prevention research can be coordinated by drawing together geneticists, neurologists, and behavioral scientists.

This answer choice focuses on the feasibility of prevention research, but it doesn't provide information about the relative cost of prevention versus treatment, so it doesn't strengthen the argument.

c) Reducing known risk factors for mental disorders is relatively inexpensive compared to the long-term treatment required.

This is the correct answer choice because it directly addresses the "Evaluate" question we identified earlier. If reducing risk factors through early intervention is cheaper than long-term treatment, then increasing funding for intervention research could indeed provide a cost-effective way to help people prone to mental disorders.

d) Current funding for intervention research is now higher than it has ever been before.

This answer choice doesn't provide information about the relative cost of prevention versus treatment and doesn't necessarily support the conclusion that funding should be increased further.

e) Once a mental disorder disappears, there is a fair chance that it will recur, given that complete cures are rare.

This answer choice highlights the potential high cost of long-term treatment, but it doesn't provide information about the relative cost of prevention versus treatment, so it doesn't strengthen the argument.