LSAT Explanation PT 44, S2, Q20: Scientist: My research indicates that children

LSAT Question Stem

Which one of the following, if true, most calls into question the scientist's argument? 

Logical Reasoning Question Type

This is a Weaken question. 

Correct Answer

The correct answer to this question is B. 

LSAT Question Complete Explanation

The question type for this problem is Weaken, which means we are looking for an answer choice that calls into question or undermines the scientist's argument.

Let's first analyze the argument in the passage. The scientist presents the following premise: children who engage in impulsive behavior similar to adult thrill-seeking behavior are twice as likely to have a gene variant that increases sensitivity to dopamine. Based on this premise, the scientist concludes that there is a causal relationship between this gene variant and an inclination toward thrill-seeking behavior.

To better understand this argument, let's use a simple example. Imagine a group of children who love to ride roller coasters (thrill-seeking behavior). The scientist's research suggests that these children are more likely to have a gene variant that makes them more sensitive to dopamine. The scientist then concludes that this gene variant is what causes their love for roller coasters.

An "Evaluate" question for this argument could be: "Is there any other factor that could explain the correlation between impulsive behavior and the gene variant, other than a causal relationship?"

Now, let's discuss each answer choice:

a) Many impulsive adults are not unusually sensitive to dopamine.

This answer choice does not directly address the causal relationship between the gene variant and thrill-seeking behavior in children. It talks about impulsive adults, which is not the focus of the scientist's argument. Therefore, this choice does not weaken the argument.

b) It is not possible to reliably distinguish impulsive behavior from other behavior.

This answer choice suggests that the data used by the scientist might be unreliable, as it is difficult to distinguish impulsive behavior from other types of behavior. If this is true, then the basis for the scientist's conclusion is uncertain, which weakens the argument.

c) Children are often described by adults as engaging in thrill-seeking behavior simply because they act impulsively.

This answer choice does not directly address the causal relationship between the gene variant and thrill-seeking behavior. It only suggests that children might be mislabeled as thrill-seekers due to impulsive behavior. This choice does not weaken the argument.

d) Many people exhibit behavioral tendencies as adults that they did not exhibit as children.

This answer choice does not weaken the argument, as it does not address the causal relationship between the gene variant and thrill-seeking behavior in children. It only states that people's behaviors can change over time.

e) The gene variant studied by the scientist is correlated with other types of behavior in addition to thrill-seeking behavior.

This answer choice does not weaken the argument, as it does not address the causal relationship between the gene variant and thrill-seeking behavior. It only suggests that the gene variant might be correlated with other behaviors as well.

Based on our analysis, the correct answer choice is (B), as it weakens the argument by questioning the reliability of the data used to support the scientist's conclusion.